As long as people admit they like doing drugs because it makes them feel nice and not because it unlocks some kind of deep reservoir of knowledge that's being trapped within the deepest darkest recesses of their mind by capitalist patriarchy or something, I don't really care.
How do you figure marijuana can be classified with all the other hard core drugs such as cocaine and
methamphetamine? You can't become physically dependent on it, you really can't become mentally dependent on it (no matter what the "gobmint" says. I quit smoking for a week last month when I went camping. I could have easily brought a sack of weed along with me if I "needed it" mentally or physically). Nobody that wasn't working for a cartel or dangerous street gang (that probably sold more than marijuana) ever killed another person because of it. Nobody ever smoked a joint and stabbed their kids, or anybody for that matter. So I'm just very curious on how you classify marijuana as a "drug" - assuming you mean "drugs" as in cocaine, meth, heroin, etc. and not "drugs" as in tylenol, asprin, etc.
Not to mention marijuana's numerous proven medical uses that only to big to fail corporations, the government, and die-hard anti-marijuana campaigners still refuse to believe, despite what statistics, study, and research is shown to them. Colorado has already legalized it for recreational use. I'm assuming California isn't that far behind. Many states have legalized it for medical use. You'll never see another "drug", as you call it, make it even close to that point of legalization. Nor will you ever see another study conducted highlighting the medicinal benefits of another, quote - "drug".
One of the primary problems with Christianity - is with the Bible. After so many years of re-translations being written in another language, again and again, and with the Catholic Church meddling with the Bible, the "Gospel" has been diluted to all hell. Half the stuff that's in there now is probably completely screwed up from the original intended message.
F A L S E
This is one of many common rumors regarding ancient religious texts- particularly the Bible. No, it is has not been changed, at least not intentionally. At most, the translations from Hebrew to Greek have impacted the meaning of some phrases, particular sentences, et cetera, but by and large the Bible is the same as it has been for thousands of years.
Actually the Bible has been changed. Mistranslation upon mistranslation from language to language, from era to era, and not to mention whatever the Vatican/Catholic Church may or may not have had to do with it........
Call it a conspiracy theory or whatever you'd like, but there are many - including scholars - whom support this claim. Even if it were just mistranslations that we are talking about, there are still single words that could have/were indeed changed. And knowing how "Biblical Realists" whom take every word in the Bible in literal translation read things.....
Not to mention when the first versions of the Bible were printed, over half the population of said places were educationally ignorant and illiterate. So it's not uncommon to think that some things may have been changed for somebody's own personal will, or that the priests could have just stood there telling the people whatever the fuck they wanted to tell them, and as long as the people believed that what he said was ACTUALLY in the Bible, well, then.... But alas, this last paragraph really has nothing to do with the original topic at hand (not the
original topic, but the one which you brought up).
