Re: =>Albert Hofmann, Inventor of LSD, Embarks on Final Trip <=

M_P <m_p@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>> >Correct: the ban had nothing to do with protecting users (nor
>> >protecting the public from users), but was simply coercive conformism.
>>
>> Yeah, man, they were so terrified of the imminent and overwhelming
>> massive overthrow of the government (because there were so many more
>> millions of young hippies than conservative rednecks and rich people)
>
>Straw man;


You *are* a straw man.  I don't need to create a straw-man argument.


> I didn't say anything about government being "terrified,"
>nor does government need to be terrified in order to pass laws that
>exceed its proper authority.


Lol, well, now that you mention it, there actually was a very good
reason for it being banned, but I wouldn't expect you to have a clue
about it, so never mind.


>> that they merely forced people to buy LSD illegally even though they
>> could easily do so.
>
>Who could easily do what? If you mean that people could easily buy LSD
>illegally,


What are you, illiterate?  Yes, that's exactly what I meant because
it's exactly what I said.  Grow a freakin' dick.


> that just sup****ts my statement that the laws had nothing
>to do with protecting users (nor protecting the public from users).


No, it doesn't, because that part of your statement had no real
relevance to anything.  I suppose I'd "concede" it, except that it
wasn't the meat of your statement in the first place.


>> Oh, wait, you're just some moronic nerd who's done too many
>> psychedelics to even think like a normal person.  Congrats, paranoid
>> dweeb.
>
>No, but you're just some Internet dork who substitutes ignorant
>personal attacks for reasoned arguments.


Hahaha, it may be a personal attack, but it ain't ign'ant.  And it
didn't substitute.  You blew off my response as a "straw man", but it
wasn't.  It was sarcasm exposing how meaningless your statement was.
You claim that there was some "coercive conformism" at work, well,
what the **** would be the point of that, other than to prevent
dissent?  Maybe it's exaggerated to talk about the overthrow of the
government, but you should be adult enough to get the point.

But of course, you vainly view me as a kid, because I make personal
attacks.  I couldn't take such laughable piss-ant nerdy sheltered
private-school whining b.s. personally if I tried, because I'm too
secure in my own ability to make and withstand personal attacks.

-- 
Joel Crump