oFFbEAT
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2,861
- Reaction score
- -33
- Country
- Location
The argument is not flawed because, in reality, nobody forces them.....You can not compare Cigarettes, Pepsi or fast food with drugs. Cigarettes for instance "may cause" cancer, whereas Heroine "will" alter your mental thinking abilities - forcing you to do things without you having any sense of reality (not to mention what kind of harm it does to the physical health)
Have you seen someone driving under the influence of drugs?
Have you seen drug addicts in general? The things they do to get to drugs when they need it, but can't get it?
There is a reason why drugs are banned
This argument of "no body forces them..." is absolutely flawed.
Does that mean, people should be allowed to manufacture drugs, bombs, dangerous chemicals at home, because they are harmless as long as no one uses them?
It's actually your argument which is flawed because, on one hand you're saying not to compare drugs with anything else(like, cigarettes etc.) and on the other hand you're comparing 'drugs' with 'bombs' and 'dangerous chemicals' i.e you're yourself comparing while suggesting others not to compare......
Secondly, your comparison of 'drugs' with 'bombs' and 'chemicals' is fundamentally flawed because you cannot voluntarily reject the harmful effect of a bomb/harmful chemical when someone throws them at you....drugs kill too, but you'll not get killed if someone just throws it at you, you have to voluntarily consume it to get affected...i.e in this case, the choice is in your hands, unlike the other case.....that's the fundamental difference.
Last edited: