Yea, someone is smokin' alright...
Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:41:54 -0800
Sometimes I really fucking wonder about people trying to advocate a
position. I read that and wanted to smack them.
FIrstly, they have a much better chance of getting people to buy the
argument if they accentuate pot's actual proven qualities (allowing the mind
to forget -- via canabanoid receptors, always good for those painful crampy
cramps), plus the general relaxation and release of endorphins and good
stuff. Instead they have to go after a very limited (and as Adam pointed
out) unrealistic side note. I dunno about you folks, but when I get high, I
go for the munchies.
Perhaps the most bothersome bit about this article was that my MOTHER sent
this to me.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Adam L. Beberg" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2002 2:10 PM
Subject: Yea, someone is smokin' alright...
> Wait, you mean if we legalize pot women wont get fat? *laughs* what about
> that after-smoke pigout?
> - Adam L. "Duncan" Beberg
> Pot: A Women's Issue?
> LONDON (Reuters) - Female members of Britain's biggest trade union have
> added their voices to calls for the legalization of cannabis, but they
> an unusual argument -- the drug offers women a calorie-free way to relax.
> Women members of Unison's eastern region say the decriminalization of
> cannabis is a ``women's issue'' because it presents a healthier and less
> fattening way to chill out.
> ``Cannabis can be used for women to relax and de-stress without calories,
> contrast to alcohol or chocolate,'' the women will argue in a motion to
> union's 9,000-strong women's conference in Cardiff next month.
> Women lead ``amazingly stressful lives... with many different roles, jobs
> and multi-tasking. It is important that women can relax and escape the
> stresses of life.''
> The group even have a proposal for those who do not smoke: ''Non-smokers
> use cannabis by incorporating it into recipes and cooking with it.''
> presumably not in a chocolate cake.
> A spokesman for Unison dismissed the motion on Tuesday, saying it was
> unlikely to be passed.
> ``Of course it is up to the members,'' she said. ``But it is not exactly
> of the more serious items on the agenda. It is tongue-in-cheek, so to