Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="CaptainJ, post: 869538, member: 1553"] This post was kind of a response to the argument in the post directly above it, about whose behaviors can be regulated, when, why, etc...and my general dislike for the word "drugs", which vary widely in type and degree, as species in the animal kingdom do. As I repeat later, I am not advocating anything other than putting more sensible evaluation into such matters. I bolded the name at the end to remind us that our team may not be immune(and because I dont expect the majority of folks to read all of this). Performance enhancing drugs I can understand. And if we want to talk BS about "[B]representing[/B]" the team, do we need to be reminded of how some of our "representatives" represented themselves at Chuck's or other drinking establishments/frat parties/places where doors can be kicked in? They actually DID things, were SEEN doing them, and often nothing is done. I'm not judging, just illustrating the inequality of how some things are judged. In such matters the actual reason is often a matter of [I]politics[/I] more than what many may assume. This society is starting to remind me of the movie "Minority Report", with the level of value we give to certain [I]presumptions[/I]. [I] Any [/I]addiction can be bad, and [I]any [/I]behavior(or even thought pattern) can be an addiction if done enough(goodness knows it's taken me awhile to learn this). Some are just easier to understand, the apparent effects more easily attributable and/or undesirable, and as such are more stigmatized often after government/media campaigns. Ones like drugs are a large money making industry(I'm not talking about the selling of the drugs, unless of course you mean the [I]licensed [/I]competition like big pharma, and/or all the testimony of ex-government officials regarding the CIA's endeavors such as making Freeway Willie Horton). If the dude's addiction was to sex, sugar, etc, they couldn't suspend him. If he were addicted to violence and somehow chose hoops over jobs that encourage it(police, military, maybe a bouncer), he wouldn't be banned if he found an outlet where it didn't get noticed(such as a masochistic girlfriend). I could go on forever. I mean Marv Albert wouldn't have been suspended if he had just yelled his trademark "Yes!", instead of biting the transvestite hooker in the back. And for that matter, while addiction may be likely, it shouldn't be an [I]assumed[/I]. Cannabis is not physically addictive, but some people like former pro-bowl RB Ricky Williams enjoy it, and for a time chose it and spiritual seeking over millions of dollars. Oddly, alcohol is quite addictive and often causes undesirable behavior/health problems, yet sponsors sporting events and is sold there. However(and I believe rightly so) any suspensions from alcohol would usually have to have more factored in than just mere use(age, location of use, and more than likely actions taken while using). Relax, I enjoy drinking, but many who do are hypocrites, even if by silently accepting the unfair treatment of others. A little more on addiction. LSD, which Steve Jobs(founder of Apple...just in case) said was one of the 3 most important things he ever did in his life... also not addicting, is not known to cause brain damage, and has extremely low toxicity relative to dose. Nowadays, some folks who want similar experiences to Jobs' have to settle for cough syrup or Benadryl(not joking), which indeed can be dangerous relative to dose. But of course I am told there [I]are [/I]very addictive drugs like heroin and cocaine. A recent study shows they are [I]less [/I]addictive than [B]Oreos[/B]. [url]http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsullum/2013/10/16/research-shows-cocaine-and-heroin-are-less-addictive-than-oreos/[/url] I am not necessarily advocating the use of any substance(or food for that matter), but am simply advocating that we as individuals and as a society start to evaluate each other in a different manner than we currently do. Change happens...segregation was not all that long ago. Alcohol prohibition isn't that relatively distant either. In the future we may laugh remembering things that were not accepted now, and/or may cry as we miss some of the freedoms we used to enjoy, including economically. PS I haven't followed the [B]Chris McCullough[/B](for those who don't follow recruiting, some say our best prospect since...) thing since he was banned by his prep school. At the last of my reading, he was not disclosing why. Possibly an Oreo binge that helped him to have an unfair advantage for the winning the Nobel prize for science? (Francis Crick, Kary Mullis, etc) [/QUOTE]

Verification: What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?