OTTAWA — It's illegal for kids under 18 to buy tobacco products in Canada and there's a movement afoot to make sure today's youth are never allowed to light up a cigarette — even after they come of age.
That school children should have access to illicit/highly addictive substances (that I mentioned above), because the pursuit of public health and wellness is hypocritically righteous?
No because the pursuit of public health for kids is not the same as the pursuit of things that make you feel righteous about protecting kids, they are often existentially opposed as they are in this case.
Disagree with what?
That school children should have access to illicit/highly addictive substances (that I mentioned above), because the pursuit of public health and wellness is hypocritically righteous?
No because the pursuit of public health for kids is not the same as the pursuit of things that make you feel righteous about protecting kids, they are often existentially opposed as they are in this case.
Uh huh…
Have you seen studies on the addiction level of opiates, or narcotics?
What’s your solution for dealing with the negative societal outcomes for the levels of addiction in people in a society devoid of any prohibition?
I assume you will say “legalize everything like Portugal” or something similar. What does that look like to you?
Show me the evidence before you try to find the details in my views to focus in on and distract from the larger point here with.
Evidence of what? That meth, opium and cocaine are addictive?
Is it your position that they aren’t?
What evidence are you looking for?
Why do you keep hyperfixating on addictiveness I am talking about prohibition?
What do you think the purpose of prohibition on underage drinking, narcotics or opiates is for?
To make adults feel like they solved the problem of alcohol abuse with kids so they can feel better about themselves?