NationStates Jolt Archive

I figured as long as there's a weed thread, why the hell not...

From what I've heard (and read), it's not going to damage your brain. It's all natural, for whatever that's worth. It's been used for thousands of years (I know, not always a guarantee of safety). And I hear it's even legal if you're using it as part of a bona-fide religious ceremony.

So. What's the worst that can happen to someone who does peyote?

Do people even use peyote? Not many of us live in a climate that supports it in nature, and it takes many, many years to grow a cactus to maturity from a seed or small clipping, in my experience growing (non-hallucinogenic) cacti. Whether mescaline is damaging to the brain though, I'm not too sure. I know there's some debate.

The greatest danger is losing trust in your own mind, it's amazing how much we take sanity for granted, and some aspects of sanity are actually somewhat insane.

So where something distorts your perception, you can start to think everything is perception and your own perceptions can become more real, leading all the way to paranoia.

So, if you're going to do it, do it with good friends who you can trust.

I'd say the same for any drug to be honest.

Taking peyote will open your mind to new experiences, like getting busted by the cops for possessing a Schedule I controlled substance.

Peyote generally makes one puke. Don't take it on a full stomach.

I figured as long as there's a weed thread, why the hell not...

From what I've heard (and read), it's not going to damage your brain. It's all natural, for whatever that's worth. It's been used for thousands of years (I know, not always a guarantee of safety). And I hear it's even legal if you're using it as part of a bona-fide religious ceremony.

So. What's the worst that can happen to someone who does peyote?

Any drug that alters your perception of the world around you is going to have bad effects if used too much.

Taking peyote will open your mind to new experiences, like getting busted by the cops for possessing a Schedule I controlled substance.

I'm sorry... I can't hear you over the sound of your awesomeness... rofl :D

I'm sorry... I can't hear you over the sound of your awesomeness... rofl :D

n00bs in love.

Most "leisure" users of mind altering substances are losers and weaklings. I'd rather face reality than indulge some fake stuff.

It's all natural, for whatever that's worth.

So is poison oak. "All natural" doesn't always mean "good", but it looks like you are already aware of that.

Most "leisure" users of mind altering substances are losers and weaklings. I'd rather face reality than indulge some fake stuff.

The mind is a wonderful thing to play with as long as you're very respectful of its limits.

The greatest danger is losing trust in your own mind, it's amazing how much we take sanity for granted, and some aspects of sanity are actually somewhat insane.

So where something distorts your perception, you can start to think everything is perception and your own perceptions can become more real, leading all the way to paranoia.

You don't need hallucinogens to hold that belief nor does it necessarily lead to paranoia.

So. What's the worst that can happen to someone who does peyote?

You might end up having sex with a dog.

That's from a book I read by an experienced 'psychonaught', and not from personal experience.

So is poison oak. "All natural" doesn't always mean "good", but it looks like you are already aware of that.

Yeah.
Most people seem to be of the: "Physically, it may be safe, but legal and psychological consequences apply."

But the law in this town serves two purposes: waiting by the road with a radar gun and keeping the local Dunkin' Donuts in business.
And the crippling insanity, terrifying inner-demon experiences, and inexplicable acid-like flashbacks that result from peyote use are like, half the fun, right?

You might end up having sex with a dog.


I actually know someone who has had sex with a dog.
Not from peyote use, though. Just from being a drunk, bored, lonely hick.

However, this is definitely a consequence worth considering.

Most "leisure" users of mind altering substances are losers and weaklings. I'd rather face reality than indulge some fake stuff.

Will you be my anti-drug?

Peyote is an endangered.
If you must do this sort of thing to yourself:
either use artificial mescaline
; or use the San Pedro Cactus.
The San Pedro cactus has the added benefit of not getting your thrown in jail unless the police just happen to catch you while your preparing it for consumption.
You want to be a druggie fine but at least make half an effort to be a responsible druggie.

And I hear it's even legal if you're using it as part of a bona-fide religious ceremony.

Last I checked, torturing people and then nailing them to a cross is ALSO part of a religious ceremony...

i don't know about what does and does not and to what degree damages the human brain and i rather suspect most average people don't really either, however much political hay has been made by conning them into imagining that they do, on both sides of everything.

the same goes for winners and loosers. i think thats itself a terminology "made of fail".
everyone wins some and looses some, whatever their outlook or perspective. there is of course the use of better and worse sense.

now mind altering/neurotropic, substances, in ritual, is one thing, in medicine is one thing, in persuit of gratification is quite another.

to each their own as long as their not tearing up their neighbors and the world we all have to live in in the proccess.

i don't think i need to label anyone anything, and there are many who would brand me looser for not being emotionally attatched to the persuit of symbolic value, yet at the same time, my take on persuing gratification by emparing one's own judgement is simply for me, its one of those places where i've never found any.

just as the persuit of trying to impress anyone is another.

And I hear it's even legal if you're using it as part of a bona-fide religious ceremony.

?

Only if your a Native American on a reservation.

I grew some once in the UK.

Last I checked, torturing people and then nailing them to a cross is ALSO part of a religious ceremony...
is this a hint to rumsfield's legal defense team?

I grew some once in the UK.

I've googled and can't find it but I'd read a nice, little story on people in Britain who grow opium in their back yard, apparently the opium poppy itself is not illegal, just the harvesting for opium.

I've googled and can't find it but I'd read a nice, little story on people in Britain who grow opium in their back yard, apparently the opium poppy itself is not illegal, just the harvesting for opium.

I was at a horticultural show and there was a stall selling them as well as orchids and bromeliads. So I bought one. Kept it for a few years.

I'd advise you to be very comfortable with hallucinations before you take it.

My grandfather took Peyote from a shaman in the 50's -- Sounded pretty awesome, and it certainly didn't make him crazy, but I really wouldn't recommend anyone taking it by themselves, or at a Party. My grandpa told me about him having visions in a cave and walking into the fire ... and the whole time he was actually at the guys house in Mexico. From his description it really doesn't sound like a party drug ... Not really even pleasant. So all you druggie ravers should probably stay away. On the other hand, for the purposes of really expanding your mind and using it in the ceremony for which it was intended with the proper supervision ... well it's your choice.

My grandfather took Peyote from a shaman in the 50's -- Sounded pretty awesome, and it certainly didn't make him crazy, but I really wouldn't recommend anyone taking it by themselves, or at a Party. My grandpa told me about him having visions in a cave and walking into the fire ... and the whole time he was actually at the guys house in Mexico. From his description it really doesn't sound like a party drug ... Not really even pleasant. So all you druggie ravers should probably stay away. On the other hand, for the purposes of really expanding your mind and using it in the ceremony for which it was intended with the proper supervision ... well it's your choice.

psychedelics are generally not party drugs. Ecstasy being an exception. LSD being sort of possible provided the party is a lovely dovey hippie party. The drug itself is not the danger its how open and vulnerable you are to influence and suggestion that is the danger.

Most "leisure" users of mind altering substances are losers and weaklings. I'd rather face reality than indulge some fake stuff.

Hmm, okay, now define reality for me. Provable reality if you will. I mean, it's not as if you can actually prove anything going on outside of your own skull isn't a delusion.

Last I checked, torturing people and then nailing them to a cross is ALSO part of a religious ceremony...

No it isn't......
Most "leisure" users of mind altering substances are losers and weaklings. I'd rather face reality than indulge some fake stuff.
Pretty much everything is a mind altering substance in some sense.

No it isn't.......

*In true pantomime fashion*

Oh yes it is

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1901095.stm

Hmm, okay, now define reality for me. Provable reality if you will. I mean, it's not as if you can actually prove anything going on outside of your own skull isn't a delusion.

No, you believe in whatever magical polka dot lions you wish to believe in, and I'll believe in mine. Still, without proof I won't try to imply my magical lions should be seriously and forcibly considered by anyone. They'll just be a personal thing. Which is why if I was some dopey eyed crackhead, I (would hope I) wouldn't try to spout off goofy rationalizations and pseudo-science to excuse my weak character.

Pretty much everything is a mind altering substance in some sense.


And some things are exclusively so without another intended purpose to their use, that's a key difference.

*In true pantomime fashion*

Oh yes it is

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/1901095.stm

I doubt highly the Vatican approves of this.

They'll just be a personal thing. Which is why if I was some dopey eyed crackhead, I (would hope I) wouldn't try to spout off goofy rationalizations and pseudo-science to excuse my weak character.

Why do you equate recreational drug taking with a weak charector?

Why do you equate recreational drug taking with a weak charector?

Because typically it's fact.

Because typically it's fact.

How so, whats your rational behind that belife?

How so, whats your rational behind that belife?

Basic logic.

Basic logic.

So what you mean here is 'I really don't know it is just a belife I have'.

So where did this belife come from, where you brought up to belive it, does it stems from junkies you know, have you had some bad experiances with drug takers, do you put too much faith in the media?

So what you mean here is 'I really don't know it is just a belife I have'.

So where did this belife come from, where you brought up to belive it, does it stems from junkies you know, have you had some bad experiances with drug takers, do you put too much faith in the media?

I put trust in my judgment, not my 'belife'. Alcoholics, smokers and drugees are weak. Period. A simple denial doesn't dream of countering this notion.

I put trust in my judgment, not my 'belife'. Alcoholics, smokers and drugees are weak. Period. A simple denial doesn't dream of countering this notion.

What is your definition of weak?

I put trust in my judgment, not my 'belife'. Alcoholics, smokers and drugees are weak. Period. A simple denial doesn't dream of countering this notion.

Yeah but your judgement if not based on empirical evidance is just a belife now isn't it. Nice way to avoid the questions BTW!:D

What is your definition of weak?

To begin with, these people set aside their health for instant gratification. From there, the same type of reasoning, or lack thereof, daisy chains a long list.

Yeah but your judgement if not based on empirical evidance is just a belife now isn't it. Nice way to avoid the questions BTW!:D

Health and science are not empirical? Ok, I guess your denials are air tight statistics.

To begin with, these people set aside their health for instant gratification. From there, the same type of reasoning, or lack thereof, daisy chains a long list.

So those that jump out of airplanes just for fun, or bungee jump, or white water raft, or go on any fairground rides, you would consider weak?

Health and science are not empirical? Ok, I guess your denials are air tight statistics.

What denials? I have not denied anything yet.

To begin with, these people set aside their health for instant gratification.

Just like sitting on a computer on NSG is not particularly healthy, you could be outside exercising instead. Regardless, why on earth is your definition valid, what reason do we have to agree with this unorthodox definition of weak?

So those that jump out of airplanes just for fun, or bungee jump, or white water raft, or go on any fairground rides, you would consider weak?

If they do "leisure" drugs, yes. You see, equating any activity with risk to life and limb with a virtually guaranteed chemical damage to the body is just about as flawed a logic as they come, and that's just for starters. One could be considered a sport, pretty much everything has risk. The other is not a mere risk but a factual poisoning, instant gratification but delayed damage, also often to others not just themselves.

So no, just because all life has risk of varying degrees does not mean that's what defines it is weak. Stupidest thing I've ever heard. Substance addicts are weak because they gratify themselves with an easy factual damage devoid of competition, not a competitive risk.

Just like sitting on a computer on NSG is not particularly healthy, you could be outside exercising instead. Regardless, why on earth is your definition valid, what reason do we have to agree with this unorthodox definition of weak?

That's what's called proportionality. Reading and writing on a screen is nowhere near as damaging as a substance addiction. Also, calling drugees weak is not a scientific consensus, it's my take on it. Though many would agree with it.

If they do "leisure" drugs, yes. You see, equating any activity with risk to life and limb with a virtually guaranteed chemical damage to the body is just about as flawed a logic as they come, and that's just for starters. One could be considered a sport, pretty much everything has risk. The other is not a mere risk but a factual poisoning, instant gratification but delayed damage, also often to others not just themselves.

So no, just because all life has risk of varying degrees does not mean that's what defines it is weak. Stupidest thing I've ever heard. Substance addicts are weak because they gratify themselves with a factual damage devoid of competition, not a competitive risk.


So then you have already contradicted your own argument, and defintion of weak.

What proof have you of this 'virtually guaranteed chemical damage to the body' that recreational drugs cause, or is this another of your belifes?

Is all chemical damage, and therefore any substance that causes such, to the body a no no in your book?

So then you have already contradicted your own argument, and defintion of weak.

What proof have you of this 'virtually guaranteed chemical damage to the body' that recreational drugs cause, or is this another of your belifes?

Is all chemical damage, and therefore any substance that causes such, to the body a no no in your book?

Don't waste my time.

Pretend science doesn't know about things like liver damage and brain damage from drugs, and put words in my keyboard, just don't expect me to care.

Don't waste my time.

Pretend science doesn't know about things like liver damage and brain damage from drugs, and put words in my keyboard, just don't expect me to care.

Shit man what are you talkign about? Yes of course booze can do your liver in, and yes of course smoking is not good for your helath. I'm talking about the wider health issues of all drugs. What facts have you got for health effects of peyote, for example? What facts have you got for the health effects of LSD, or Extasy, I mean what do you actualy know, how do you know these things.

Are you widely read on the subject, is it all gleaned from news papers and web sites?

What about phamecutical drugs, sleeping pills, laxatives, do youview these in the same way?

I'm try to get to the root of your stance, I'm trying to undertstand your reasons.

You can help or hinder me, if you don't want to play just say so.

Shit man what are you talkign about? Yes of course booze can do your liver in, and yes of course smoking is not good for your helath. I'm talking about the wider health issues of all drugs. What facts have you got for health effects of peyote, for example? What facts have you got for the health effects of LSD, or Extasy, I mean what do you actualy know, how do you know these things.

Are you widely read on the subject, is it all gleaned from news papers and web sites?

What about phamecutical drugs, sleeping pills, laxatives, do youview these in the same way?

I'm try to get to the root of your stance, I'm trying to undertstand your reasons.

You can help or hinder me, if you don't want to play just say so.

You're assuming I give a crap about proving anything to you, for pete's sake, I don't. And mentioning medicinal drugs is...I don't know what it is, but you're lost.

Basic logic clearly tells me that consuming large amounts of such altering agents as popular drugs are likely to cause some level of damage, if we use as point of reference the studies that are long been done about certain drugs like alcohol and acid. Only an idiot would believe that something can be taken excessively without consequence because it hasn't been studied yet.

Say what you want. Any crackhead can rationalize and desperately seek redemption to their reputation all they want, but it's none of my concern. I wouldn't trust their character with anything important as far as I could throw them, and neither would much of society. That's harsh reality for you, now smoke some good shit to forget about it.

I put trust in my judgment, not my 'belife'. Alcoholics, smokers and drugees are weak. Period. A simple denial doesn't dream of countering this notion.

If it's a fact then you can prove it. Please proceeded to do so.

What is your definition of weak?

obviously it is: Someone who drinks, smokes, or does drugs.

No, you believe in whatever magical polka dot lions you wish to believe in, and I'll believe in mine. Still, without proof I won't try to imply my magical lions should be seriously and forcibly considered by anyone. They'll just be a personal thing. Which is why if I was some dopey eyed crackhead, I (would hope I) wouldn't try to spout off goofy rationalizations and pseudo-science to excuse my weak character.

The point my good man is that you can't prove anything. Once you realize your brain controls completely your perception of the world and all that's in it you begin to realize the irrelevance of it all. Attachment to the illusory reality blocks the way to enlightenment.

The greatest danger is losing trust in your own mind, it's amazing how much we take sanity for granted, and some aspects of sanity are actually somewhat insane.

So where something distorts your perception, you can start to think everything is perception and your own perceptions can become more real, leading all the way to paranoia.

So, if you're going to do it, do it with good friends who you can trust.

I'd say the same for any drug to be honest.

The danger of losing trust in your own mind?

Call me crazy, but I always thought that was the point, in addition to whatever pleasure it may bring.

Sure weed gives you a warm fuzzy and acid makes you see all sorts of weird stuff, but I've got a bathtub with hot running water and I've got Fantasia on DVD.

But what those don't give you is a controllable means of subjecting your brain to a chemical influence so that you know how to control it. Take conscious account of your perceptions so you can keep some measure of humility when claiming that you understand things the way they truly are.

When I saw the floor of the subway flake away like 30 year old lead paint revealing a swirly purple Satan who informed me that he would be sweeping fiery destruction (the fire would be the traditional orange) upon the earth the following Halloween, I was able to remind myself that this was the result of a chemical soup in my brain.

Now when I feel like I'm stuck in a useless dead-end job that I will not be able to escape for the rest of my life, I'm able to remind myself of the same thing. Except now the chemical soup is the same naturally occurring one that we've all got (precise seasonings may vary.)

Whatever fits of anger, depression, anxiety, or outright fear I may feel in my day-to-day life others frequently remark on my contagious calm. I credit my youthful experimentation with drugs with teaching me that a mind is not a possession or an identity, it's a skill.

So what you mean here is 'I really don't know it is just a belife I have'.

So where did this belife come from, where you brought up to belive it, does it stems from junkies you know, have you had some bad experiances with drug takers, do you put too much faith in the media?

He said "basic."

Toads have warts.
Some people have warts.
therefore, Some people are Toads.

No wait, that's deductive. i.e. We retained the basic and deducted the logic.

You're assuming I give a crap about proving anything to you, for pete's sake, I don't. And mentioning medicinal drugs is...I don't know what it is, but you're lost.

Basic logic clearly tells me that consuming large amounts of such altering agents as popular drugs are likely to cause some level of damage, if we use as point of reference the studies that are long been done about certain drugs like alcohol and acid. Only an idiot would believe that something can be taken excessively without consequence because it hasn't been studied yet.

Say what you want. Any crackhead can rationalize and desperately seek redemption to their reputation all they want, but it's none of my concern. I wouldn't trust their character with anything important as far as I could throw them, and neither would much of society. That's harsh reality for you, now smoke some good shit to forget about it.


So here you change your stance slighty to include the term 'large ammounts' , umm interesting!

Ohh and you presume much about me, I have not yet defended nor condemed your stance, nor have I proffered my own to you.

I merely ask in order to understand from where you get your POV. Since though it seems that you can't defend it without getting aggresive, then I'll assume that it is nowt more than a knee-jerk reaction to the topic and based on no logic at all.

Last I checked, torturing people and then nailing them to a cross is ALSO part of a religious ceremony...

Right, but it's not legal. That's the point.

Also, crucifixion was a Roman punishment and in no way related to Judaism. This thread isn't a platform for anti-Semitism. Thanks.

To begin with, these people set aside their health for instant gratification. From there, the same type of reasoning, or lack thereof, daisy chains a long list.

Aversion to seeking gratification because of fear for your own personal health could be construed as weakness.
Self-preservation is a natural animal instinct, and overriding natural animal instincts is often a sign of being human. For example, we don't walk around naked, don't piss on the street, and don't fuck the first bitch in heat we come across. Instead we wear clothes, find a bathroom, and wait for a mate we really like. Well, some of us do ;)

You're assuming I give a crap about proving anything to you, for pete's sake, I don't.

You're so mad you almost said a dirty word.

And mentioning medicinal drugs is...I don't know what it is, but you're lost.

Drugs are a remedy for boredom.

Basic logic clearly tells me that consuming large amounts of such altering agents as popular drugs are likely to cause some level of damage, if we use as point of reference the studies that are long been done about certain drugs like alcohol and acid.

Too much of anything can kill you. That goes for food, water, and yes, even air. :)
In reference to alcohol and acid, you may notice that the title of this thread is "peyote." Thank you.

Only an idiot would believe that something can be taken excessively without consequence because it hasn't been studied yet.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem.html

Say what you want.

Ok.

Any crackhead can rationalize and desperately seek redemption to their reputation all they want, but it's none of my concern.

And yet here you are.

I wouldn't trust their character with anything important as far as I could throw them, and neither would much of society.

Again, not crack, peyote. And throwing a crackhead isn't hard, they often cooperate fully because they hope that with sufficient momentum, they'll be able to fly.

That's harsh reality for you, now smoke some good shit to forget about it.

:O Looks like somebody here is holier than me.