[ibogaine] health care for all or military killing machines...hmmm

preston peet ptpeet at nyc.rr.com
Sun Jul 28 15:04:08 EDT 2002


Brett,
    My pissed-offedness was derived from the "If you want to have kids and ruin their lives and don't have enough common sense to know your a mess that's your business and I feel sorry for the kids but it shouldn't be my tax dollars paying for all that" comment. And it's fair enough actually, I suppose we should get to choose what our taxes are spent on, (except who'd pay for things like roads nstuff?). My ire is from hearing said view expressed over and over in the US, but rarely do I hear the same kind of comments about our taxes subsidizing the War machines. That's all.
    Birth control is great btw. And if some mother want to choose to sterilize themselves for $200 bucks after sitting in a rooms for hours, as Patrick pointed out is probably not going to be undertaken by many junkies anyway, more power to them. I wonder if the same group would be willing to give that same $200 bucks to the women who could then buy food for the kids they already have.
Peace
Preston
Peace,
Preston
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Brett Calabrese 
  To: ibogaine at mindvox.com 
  Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 12:40 PM
  Subject: Re: [ibogaine] health care for all or military killing machines...hmmm


  Preston  "!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      God, I'm actually a bit pissed off at this post. I
  can't stand this attitude. Where does this come from?
  When did people become so dumbed down and willing to
  pay for death, but not life?"

  NO ONE was talking about killing anyone, not even an
  abortion. What is this, we are going to mourn for
  every sperm and egg that "got spilt" and never made a
  baby, better put those people who use condoms in jail.
  The issue was a rebate of sorts for those who wished
  to get steralized OR (and some keep ignoring this)
  long term birth control - you keep focusing on DEATH,
  lost opportunities, the what-ifs (baby) that never
  happened (not even a fertilized egg). It is (IMO) not
  like someone killed a child, geez, what "killing" are
  you talking about (NONE IMO). There is a difference
  between being fruitful and multiplying and growing
  like weeds. 

  No one is talking about forcing anyone into anything
  or killing anything. Doesn't it come down to some
  religious belief that birth control is bad and this is
  birth control? So, (specifically talking about the
  CRACK $200 rebate for LT birth control/sterilization)
  what death is it you are talking about that is being
  offered - and yes, the Gov't has their military
  killing machines, the US imprisons more people than
  any other country per capita and a zillion other
  issues - those are OTHER ISSUES (IMO) and Yes there
  should be treatment that is far better than it is
  today, the DRUG wars are bad and there are a thousand
  evils out there - we are talking about one tiny issue
  and without solving all the other problems with drug
  abuse, this is CRACK's issue that they choose to deal
  with, just like you or anyone else has their causes.

  Brett

  --- preston peet <ptpeet at nyc.rr.com> wrote:
  > >As somebody who works for a living and has had
  > their share of drug problems I don't have any
  > interest in paying for some crackwhore's kids being
  > taken care of when she keeps having them. I resent
  > that. If you want to have kids and ruin their lives
  > and don't have enough common sense to know your a
  > mess that's your business and I feel sorry for the
  > kids but it shouldn't be my tax dollars paying for
  > all that. <
  > 
  > This is brilliant (stupidity), and as a former hard
  > core drug abuser and works very hard for a living,
  > I'm very glad you posted this opinion here.
  > Out of curiosity, do you like, (or not resent), your
  > tax dollars going to build nifty neato military
  > killing machines? How about bombs dropped on
  > innocent Afghans? Do support the outrageous military
  > spending by the US, and the outrageous amounts
  > already being spent to lock up the druggies in the
  > name of a War on Drugs? If you are, but aren't
  > willing to help pay for health costs of drug addicts
  > and other fellow Americans, I am stumped at this
  > attitude.
  >     Where does the attitude come from that "we don't
  > want to pay for druggies' health costs" when that is
  > already EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DOING NOW by locking them
  > all up, THEN paying their health costs. Why add that
  > imprisonment cost to the total? Why is it better to
  > pay taxes for killing people and imprisoning them,
  > (and propping up foreign corrupt government growing
  > drugs), but not for helping American citizens, real
  > honest to goodness people, even druggies who "don't
  > have enough common sense to know" they're a mess to
  > use your phrase.
  >     This simply strikes me as blindly following
  > along behind prohibition hatered, ignorance, and
  > dogma. Those Dirty Druggies (of whom you were one
  > once apparently) don't deserve my help....but by god
  > we need a STRONG MILITARY so we can go in and prop
  > up some more drug producing tin-pot didctators
  > around the world so they can produce tons of drugs
  > so the DEA can ship them across our borders by the
  > TON in so-called "controlled" shippments they
  > themselves cannot account for tons of RIGHT NOW!
  >     Of course, I could be wrong and this might not
  > be your position at all, as you haven't actually
  > mentioned the military spending, or for that matter,
  > the incredibley shoddy accounting the government
  > actually does to keep track of your, and my, taxes.
  >     But I hear and read this king of thinking all
  > the time in the US, and it drives me CRAZY! Who are
  > these heartless people who are silent about the
  > trillions spent by our military for NOTHING but
  > killing, death, and propping up drug producing
  > cartels, (KLA, Northern Alliance, Vladamir
  > Montesinos to name but a few usual US-allies), but
  > can't find it in their hearts to pay taxes towards a
  > universal health care system, as that would be
  > SOCIALISM. 
  >     BAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  >     God, I'm actually a bit pissed off at this post.
  > I can't stand this attitude. Where does this come
  > from? When did people become so dumbed down and
  > willing to pay for death, but not life?
  > Peace,
  > Preston
  > 
  > 
  >   ----- Original Message ----- 
  >   From: ascending at hushmail.com 
  >   To: ibogaine at mindvox.com 
  >   Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 2:16 AM
  >   Subject: Re: Re: [ibogaine] C.R.A.C.K Original
  > statement and more comments
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  > 
  >   I see no problem with this at all. It's not as if
  > these future moms are being herded into the
  > sterilization pens.
  > 
  >   As somebody who works for a living and has had
  > their share of drug problems I don't have any
  > interest in paying for some crackwhore's kids being
  > taken care of when she keeps having them. I resent
  > that. If you want to have kids and ruin their lives
  > and don't have enough common sense to know your a
  > mess that's your business and I feel sorry for the
  > kids but it shouldn't be my tax dollars paying for
  > all that. 
  > 
  >   Sorry but that's reality. In case none of you read
  > anything except drug lists there is this over
  > population problem with the world, there is no
  > shortage of babies. None at all.
  > 
  >   >> Who gets to decide who is worthy and who is
  > not?
  >   >
  >   >The person getting sterilized, seems very
  > reasonable
  >   >to me. And for the money that they are likely to
  > use
  >   >for drugs, well that goes for the welfare check,
  >   >pay-check or any other check they get their hands
  > on.
  >   >This is not forced sterilization, it is $200
  > (rebate)
  >   >should someone choose to get sterilized OR (and
  > you
  >   >seemed to focus on the sterilization part) long
  > term
  >   >birth control.
  >   >
  >   >> When does simple drug use become reason enough
  > to
  >   >> sterilize mothers? 
  >   >
  >   >I don't see anyone being forced to do any such
  > thing,
  >   >no suggestion or hint of such - though really, I
  >   >personally think there are cases where a person
  > should
  >   >be forcibly sterilized, at any age (eg, sorry MS
  > 17
  >   >year old but you had a child at 12, another at
  > 14,
  >   >another at 15, another at 17, you are unmarried,
  > had
  >   >all 4 children taken away because of abuse and
  > your
  >   >drug addiction and you are pregnant again...).
  > But
  >   >that is my "opinion" but maybe I am looking at it
  > like
  >   >MOM made her decisions about her life and
  > shouldn't be
  >   >allowed (at some point) to have her children
  > suffer
  >   >for her disease. Sorry but I just don't see a
  > problem
  >   >with someone taking the choice to be sterilized
  > or use
  >   >specific birth control methods as some violation
  > of
  >   >morality.
  >   >
  >   >
  >   >Brett
  > 
  > 
  >   Communicate in total privacy.
  >   Get your free encrypted email at
  > https://www.hushmail.com/?l=2
  > 
  >   Looking for a good deal on a domain name?
  >
  http://www.hush.com/partners/offers.cgi?id=domainpeople
  > 
  > 


  __________________________________________________
  Do You Yahoo!?
  Yahoo! Health - Feel better, live better
  http://health.yahoo.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.mindvox.com/pipermail/ibogaine/attachments/20020728/d6449a93/attachment.html>


More information about the Ibogaine mailing list