1 - 8
Yes actually I do. Point number one. If "medical marijuana" actually had therapeutic effects, pharmaceutical companies would be all over that to make a profit via synthesizing THC. The fact that they have not shows THAT claim is bogus.Regarding the "recreational use of marijuana, who is going to cover the cost of the lost productivity that chronic use produces, the medical costs of lung cancer, emphysema, and COPD developing from its use. Who is going to alleviate the social cost in degraded / destroyed family structure resulting from the psychological addiction to it (used as a crutch, an escape from real world problems) that has been documented in studies? Thirty years ago in college a number of my friends basically removed themselves from society, dropping out of school, withdrawing from friends etc., after taking up a lifestyle of daily ingestion of marijuana. Their lives revolved around the next joint, and acquiring the means to afford the next bag.
In response to:

Does Bond Have Civil Rights Amnesia?

bwilson635 Wrote: Sep 08, 2013 9:37 PM
I have a question,Darwinian evolution theory says that any significant, sustaining genetic mutation must be a mutation that benefits the species. If alcoholism, susceptibility to drug addiction, violent criminal behavior, sex addiction, and......homosexuality...... are genetically based, then what is the Darwinian purpose of these genetic modifications?
Terms like "meta-data" and "data-mining" tend to gloss over what is really happening here. Let me offer an alternative analogy for you: If the NSA were forced to manually collect the origin and destination phone numbers of every single call of every last citizen in the United States they would be forced to assign to every family, if not every family member in the United States, a government agent 24 hours a day to monitor their activities and write down the origin and destination phone numbers of every one of their phone calls. My question to all of you is: "Would you sit still for this?" and ......"What do you think of any government agency head who authorizes this level of surveilance, and.... what do you think of any politician who knew about this and was ok with it?"
Regarding the NSA's activities, it tends to get sanitized with the techno-talk. Terms such as "meta-data" and "data mining" tend to do nothing more for most of us than put makeup on the pig. Let me offer an alternative analogy: If the data collected by the NSA was gathered manually, it would require the assignment of a government agent to every man, woman, and child in the USA who owned a hard line or a cell phone, to manually record the numbers of their phone calls. It this doesn't bring home how heinous the activity of the NSA is, nothing will.
In response to:

Say NO to GMOs in Your Food

bwilson635 Wrote: Jun 04, 2013 9:41 AM
I normally agree with Chuck's opinions but on this one I have to dissent. Chuck, if you look out your back window right now your backyard is in the process of undergoing genetic modification via cross-pollinization. Via cross pollinization some plants will, according to the process of genetics, aquire some characterisitics that make them more resistant to disease, pests, and competition via the enhanced expression of some gene. Genetic modification in the laboratory is simply the sped up, targeted version of natural genetic modification. There are no Frankenplants. Regarding organics, I have recently read two studies showing no measurable health benefits from foods produced organically. If you are familiar with chemistry, this is no surprise. The fertilizer compound ammonium nitrate for instance, is the same molecule whether produced naturally in the gut of a cow, or synthetically in a chemical plant. The protein cytosine, a building block of DNA, is the same whether produced in laboratory or via the digestive process. A vitamin ( from "vital mineral") has the same molecular configuration whether ingested naturally or in the form of a pill. The hype surrounding organics is just that - hype, assuming that non-organic plant food sources are farmed and raised according to established guidelines regarding the application of pesticides and disease control agents. GMOs and careful cross-pollinization has increased food production by a magnitude since the Benedictine monk Gregor Mendel introduced us to the science of genetics in the 1800s. Its time to get over our fear of science in plant food production.
In response to:

Guns and the President

bwilson635 Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 9:28 PM
Off all the rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights, there is only one right that carries the additional constraint on Congress: "shall not be infringed". Let's take the Liberal view of the Constitution and threaten the mass media with constraints on freedom of the press, let's take the Liberal view of the Constitution and demand the Fairness Doctrine - but also apply it to college teaching positions and tenure of professors, Lets take the Liberal view of the Constitution and put very strict constaints on abortion. After all - none of these rights carry the additional protection of the words "shall not be infringed". Since liberals obviously think the Second Amendment CAN be infringed by Congress, how could they possibly protest? LOL
We have a model - its called the Reagan years. In 1982 Reagan reluctantly agreed with a split Congress to the largest tax increase in American History. The next four years the tax revenues fell - until he got a majority in both houses and cut tax rates. Tax revenues rose dramatically over the next six years. Easily verifiable facts. We have a model: Japan. Japan for a decade tried to stimulate the economy via government spending exactly like the Democrats have tried for the past four years. Today the Japanese call that decade "The Lost Decade". We have a model: California: Since the increase in tax rates in California, California has seen a dramatic DECREASE in tax revenues. Moreover, California is seeing an exodus of citizens &jobs
Is it fair for you to empower the government to steal from me by force to pay for your healthcare? You talk about fair opportunities but you really mean equal outcomes as a reward for unequal discipline, work level, and decision making. If "fair" means everyone enjoyes the same outcome, why should I, at 55 years old with a bum knee continue to work if all I have to do is be declared disabled (easy under Obama) and have all of you young liberals support me in style for the rest of my life? Isn't my empowering of the government to steal from you to enable the government to support me while saddling your generation with the taxes necessary to do so just as fair according to your yardstick? I will soon retire, collect Social Security, all on u
1 - 8