Thread: Lets talk about drugs!

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

But, if the topic of drugs comes up in a thread related to dreaming, we are still able to provide some sort of information (and, like I said, anyone requesting more can be directed to sites like erowid, etc.)

Dreaming is inseparable from psychedelics. Removing discussion on psychedelics from a forum about dreaming, leaves the forum castrated.

I understand ( thought not agree with ) your views that psychedelic drugs discussion are bad for kids to read. But this is a site about psychedelic experiences. If you don't want to discuss psychedelic experiences, then your only solution is to shut down the site.

You are afraid to harm little children with the information presented on the site? Then shut down the site. A site about dreaming, is a site where psychedelic experiences are discussed. If that is dangerous, then any site about dreaming is dangerous.

A site without psychedelic experiences discussions, is not a site about dreaming. It is a lame, cowardly site about politically correct anecdotes.

I don't care so much if you censor views that you don't like, for example if you decide to censor any mention of file-sharing software, or any mention of the war in Irak, who cares, it doesn't matter to a site about dreaming.


But it's a million times more serious than that.

This isn't an argument about censorship, it's an argument about the nature of the site. Is it going to be a great site about dreaming, or is it going to be lame, politically correct site, about only some of the aspects of dreaming that you are not afraid to discuss.

Right, I read somewhere that DMT is the drug released in your brain which causes you to dream...so maybe if we ever decided to allow the topic of drug discussion it should be specific drugs, deemed acceptable by the forum leaders.

Also, the type of discussion allowed would need to be given as well. For example, no "it was great when I saw a purple elephant" comments. It would have to be limited to no perception on the desirability of it, so you would take out it was great and be left with "I saw a purple elephant."

You can post about drugs if it stays with the topic of lucid dreaming. So anytime you want to talk about a drug or drugs, simply say, "this helped my lucid dreaming out as well", at the end of your post. or somewhere in the middle say, "it was just like a lucid dream!" would this work? Im just saying that this little exception is bs and funny at the same time.

btw it isnt illegal to be high on any drug if you are in your home. its only illegal to possess illegal substances, or be out in public under the influence. So, talking about a psychedelic experience isnt talking about doing illegal activities. Talking about possessing those substances or going around town on them isnt illegal either, but talks about an illegal situation. So, whats the big deal?

Kids are only being taught biased opinions on drugs which is fucked up. They should get to see both sides of the story. They are not only harmful thats bs. No one should influence kids to use drugs either though, but they should see that drugs are just like soda, or coffee, or anything else. Nothing is good for you if you abuse it, and many many many things can become addictive. A lot of you are probably alcoholics lol. even exercise and stuff can be bad if you over do it... But many things can cause positive outcomes when used responsibly and most pleasurable experiences are worth repeating.

Originally Posted by Michael

btw it isnt illegal to be high on any drug if you are in your home. its only illegal to possess illegal substances,

It's kind of hard to "be high on any drug" without possessing said drug.

So, talking about a psychedelic experience isnt talking about doing illegal activities.

No, but talking about illegal drug {usage} IS talking about illegal activities.

Kids are only being taught biased opinions on drugs which is fucked up.

And how is drug talk here any different?

No one should influence kids to use drugs either though,

But that's essentially what you're fighting for.

but they should see that drugs are just like soda, or coffee, or anything else.

Way to trivialize the dangers and situation.

Originally Posted by Oneironaught

It's kind of hard to "be high on any drug" without possessing said drug.


No, but talking about illegal drug {usage} IS talking about illegal activities.


And how is drug talk here any different?


But that's essentially what you're fighting for.


Way to trivialize the dangers and situation.

you can be high on a drug and not possess that drug... you just have to be in possession for a little bit

you dont have to talk about illegal drug usage to talk about a drug experience. you just have to say you were under the influence of a certain drug. you dont have to say you smoked it, or shot it up, or orally took it...

drug talk on here is different because people like you, will talk negative about drugs, and people like me will talk positive about them. Thats both sides.

Im not fighting for kids to try drugs. when did i ever say this? Kids that will try drugs either WANT to try them, or fall into peer pressure which is because of bad social skills or bad parenting. So it will happen either way.

and your last point was just........ nvm

In response to Michael

Yes but the point being made is that discussing experiences with drugs and drug talk can give the drugs a little more credibility, because you talk about your experiences it makes the drug seem a little more safe to an individual because you have tried it and nothing happened. I just don't see why its necessary to brag about drug experiences, we don't want anyone on here getting into drugs, i mean there maybe many youngsters out there who are curious about drugs, because alot of drugs carry a label of being unsafe they are automatically avoided by the majority. But if your talking about your experiencing saying that it was good and you had no problem with it it is likely that someone could pick up on that and think that the drug isn't as bad as people make it out to be. Seriously though, can't drug experiences at least be reduced to PM form.

I see your point seeker, but shouldnt freedom of speech play a part in this? Kids have their freedom to come on this site IF their parent allow them to use the internet. Kids can find anything on the internet, I know I did at a young age.

If their parents let them on the internet, that isnt our fault.

Originally Posted by dodobird

Dreaming is inseparable from psychedelics. Removing discussion on psychedelics from a forum about dreaming, leaves the forum castrated.

I understand ( thought not agree with ) your views that psychedelic drugs discussion are bad for kids to read. But this is a site about psychedelic experiences. If you don't want to discuss psychedelic experiences, then your only solution is to shut down the site.

You are afraid to harm little children with the information presented on the site? Then shut down the site. A site about dreaming, is a site where psychedelic experiences are discussed. If that is dangerous, then any site about dreaming is dangerous.

A site without psychedelic experiences discussions, is not a site about dreaming. It is a lame, cowardly site about politically correct anecdotes.

I don't care so much if you censor views that you don't like, for example if you decide to censor any mention of file-sharing software, or any mention of the war in Irak, who cares, it doesn't matter to a site about dreaming.


But it's a million times more serious than that.

This isn't an argument about censorship, it's an argument about the nature of the site. Is it going to be a great site about dreaming, or is it going to be lame, politically correct site, about only some of the aspects of dreaming that you are not afraid to discuss.

Though I understand where you are coming from, that is a completely unrealistic argument.

The psychedelic experiences that happen, in dreams, happen in the relative safety of the dream-state. This is where (usually) the body is paralyzed, autonomously, to keep one from acting out their responses to the psychedelic experiences in dreams, in the physical world. We are all subject to the experiences that we have, in dreams, and nature has provided us with a way from harming ourself, due to those (often intense) experiences.

This is not the case, with psychedelic drugs. Taken irresponsibly, many drugs cause a serious risk to those that take them, whether it be from dehydration (being active while on things like ecstasy), or bugging out due to hallucinations and, as a result of "running from oneself" - so to speak - causing yourself serious injury and/or death. I, personally, have lost friends to drugs, and do not take the possibilities (and frequency) of them being mis-used or abused very lightly.

One can relate to dreaming without having ever taken a single psychedelic drug in their life. Having no experience in drugs, in no way, cheapens one's experience in, or research of, the dreaming mind. This site is about dreaming - not "psychedelic experiences, in general" though we recognize the connection and find it fitting to allow such relevant discussion, having to do with that connection. Sure, the two are similar, and sure, drugs can cause a dreamlike state, but to say a site about dreaming with no (even though that is not the case we are intending) discussion about psychedelic drugs is a "castration" of the concept of the site, itself, is, by no means true. At all.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Though I understand where you are coming from, that is a completely unrealistic argument.

The psychedelic experiences that happen, in dreams, happen in the relative safety of the dream-state. This is where (usually) the body is paralyzed, autonomously, to keep one from acting out their responses to the psychedelic experiences in dreams, in the physical world. We are all subject to the experiences that we have, in dreams, and nature has provided us with a way from harming ourself, due to those (often intense) experiences.

Dreaming can be just as dangerous as drugs. People sleep walk out of windows, drive sleeping, all sorts of stuff. At least on drugs, your awake and know what your doing.

Originally Posted by Michael

Dreaming can be just as dangerous as drugs. People sleep walk out of windows, drive sleeping, all sorts of stuff. At least on drugs, your awake and know what your doing.

This is why I put (usually) in parentheses. The difference is that sleep-walking is a natural occurrence, and is not brought on deliberately, in the common sense, by taking a substance. No amount of "positive discussion" about sleep walking is going to be able to make someone go out and decide to try sleep-walking. Therefore, discussion about sleep-walking is not something that stands the chance of causing someone to sleep-walk out of a window, or get in their car and drive, while sleeping.

And rational, strong-minded people that know how not to "over-do" their hallucinogens, and keep themselves in check, know what they're doing. Many people that take psychedelics completely freak out and do not know how to handle themselves. I've seen this happen many times. It often takes a room full of friends to keep that person calm and out of any dangerous positions, until their trip wears off. I may know what I'm doing. You may know what you're doing. But I can guarantee that there is a very large number of people out there who have absolutely no idea what they're doing, and many of them don't wait to get full knowledge, before deciding to try something new.

Originally Posted by dodobird

I didn't say that dreaming is exactly the same taking psychedelic drugs, but they both fall under the same larger category of psychedelic experiences. They are sister topics, with a lot of common ground.

You are correct. They are sister topics - which, like I said, made such a decision to limit their discussion very hard for many of us to reach an understanding on. There is absolutely no way that we can make such a decision without stepping on someone's toes. It sucks, I know, but better to err on the side of caution.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

This is why I put (usually) in parenthesis. The difference is that sleep-walking is a natural occurrence, and is not brought on deliberately, in the common sense, by taking a substance. No amount of "positive discussion" about sleep walking is going to be able to make someone go out and decide to try sleep-walking. Therefore, discussion about sleep-walking is not something that stands the chance of causing someone to sleep-walk out of a window, or get in their car and drive, while sleeping.

And rational, strong-minded people that know how not to "over-do" their hallucinogens, and keep themselves in check, know what they're doing. Many people that take psychedelics completely freak out and do not know how to handle themselves. I've seen this happen many times. It often takes a room full of friends to keep that person calm and out of any dangerous positions, until their trip wears off. I may know what I'm doing. You may know what you're doing. But I can guarantee that there is a very large number of people out there who have absolutely no idea what they're doing.

you're right, i cant argue with this.

edit: This isnt something I'm going to leave the site over so it's not a huge deal to me. I just liked to be able to talk about this stuff. It was one of the things I liked about this site. Thats just one more downgrade, but not something to leave over. That would just prove drugs are too important to me.

Originally Posted by Michael

Thats just one more downgrade, but not something to leave over. That would just prove drugs are too important to me.

Well said.

Drugs are not a popular thing among many of todays society, in fact people are cast out because if it, they go to jail. I think that if you want to discuss drugs and your experiences you should find a forum which is strictly people talking about drugs and their experiences. I'm not saying you can't talk about drugs on here, i just wish that you would try to be a little more responsible and consider other peoples well beings. Do you see what i'm saying, feel free to post stuff about drugs but i for one will be disappointed if you do continue to. I mean i have nothing wrong with you discussing drugs at all, but i do have a problem when you consider how young some of the members are on this forum.

I'm just thinking about the wellbeing of those younger than me because i know that some of them can easily trust what people say, its happened to me alot when i was younger, i took peoples word for it.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Though I understand where you are coming from, that is a completely unrealistic argument.

The psychedelic experiences that happen, in dreams, happen in the relative safety of the dream-state. This is where (usually) the body is paralyzed, autonomously, to keep one from acting out their responses to the psychedelic experiences in dreams, in the physical world. We are all subject to the experiences that we have, in dreams, and nature has provided us with a way from harming ourself, due to those (often intense) experiences.

This is not the case, with psychedelic drugs. Taken irresponsibly, many drugs cause a serious risk to those that take them, whether it be from dehydration (being active while on things like ecstasy), or bugging out due to hallucinations and, as a result of "running from oneself" - so to speak - causing yourself serious injury and/or death. One can relate to dreaming without having ever taken a single psychedelic drug in their life. Having no experience in drugs, in no way, cheapens one's experience in, or research of, the dreaming mind. Sure, the two are similar, and sure, drugs can cause a dreamlike state, but to say a site about dreaming with no (even though that is not the case we are intending) discussion about psychedelic drugs is a "castration" of the concept of the site, itself, is, by no means true. At all.

Damn, your good. You almost got me convinced.
I have to remobilize my troops..
I didn't say that dreaming is exactly the same taking psychedelic drugs, but they both fall under the same larger category of psychedelic experiences. They are sister topics, with a lot of common ground.

I care about this forum deeply, and I want it to be a good forum.

In my opinion, dismissing psychedelic drugs discussions will greatly damage the forum.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Though I understand where you are coming from, that is a completely unrealistic argument.

The psychedelic experiences that happen, in dreams, happen in the relative safety of the dream-state. This is where (usually) the body is paralyzed, autonomously, to keep one from acting out their responses to the psychedelic experiences in dreams, in the physical world. We are all subject to the experiences that we have, in dreams, and nature has provided us with a way from harming ourself, due to those (often intense) experiences.

This is not the case, with psychedelic drugs. Taken irresponsibly, many drugs cause a serious risk to those that take them, whether it be from dehydration (being active while on things like ecstasy), or bugging out due to hallucinations and, as a result of "running from oneself" - so to speak - causing yourself serious injury and/or death. I, personally, have lost friends to drugs, and do not take the possibilities (and frequency) of them being mis-used or abused very lightly.

One can relate to dreaming without having ever taken a single psychedelic drug in their life. Having no experience in drugs, in no way, cheapens one's experience in, or research of, the dreaming mind. This site is about dreaming - not "psychedelic experiences, in general" though we recognize the connection and find it fitting to allow such relevant discussion, having to do with that connection. Sure, the two are similar, and sure, drugs can cause a dreamlike state, but to say a site about dreaming with no (even though that is not the case we are intending) discussion about psychedelic drugs is a "castration" of the concept of the site, itself, is, by no means true. At all.

Oneironaut I brought this up earlier but wanted to throw it past you. Could a thread (substance related, legal or illegal) have a legal disclaimer (pop up window) protecting DV upon clicking. Therefore the user proceeding understands the legalities, expressions, views of DV etc.. Just a thought.

My point was even legal supplements can possibly do damage if taken excessively (this could be long term) and would also need to protect DV along with talk of substances that are currently illegal.

Originally Posted by dodobird

Well Oneironaut, it's clear that you care, and I appreciate that.
I think some other staff members can learn a thing or two from you about being civil and diplomatic.

I pretty much ran out of ammunition here, so now for the doomsday weapon:
Why don't you out-law any off-topic discussion that can be dangerous?
How about parkour, free-running, sky-diving, cliff-hanging, motor-cycle driving, scooter driving, car driving, hunting, owning a gun, cigarette smoking, alcohol drinking, red-meat eating, breathing polluted air while stuck in traffic, working in construction, fighting in a war.
I can go on and on, all these things are more dangerous than psychedelic drugs. I don't have the statistics, but still I'm sure that I am correct about this. Much much more people die or get hurt while doing these things.
Why not outlaw all these topics, which unlike psychedelics have very little to do with dreaming?

Main reasoning falls back to the fact that none of those acts are illegal, and the risks involved are often much more apparent than taking drugs. A site the condones parkour is not likely to receive any negative blow-back for someone taking a jump too high for them and breaking their legs (or worse) while doing parkour. A site that is a breeding ground for new users of controlled substances, most likely, would. Also, remember that a main goal of this site is, and has always been, to be a respectable and (somewhat) distinguished site about lucid dreaming. It's not like we ask everyone to walk around in collared shirts and penny loafers, but we would like this site to continue to stand out as a respectable site for lucid dreaming information, above all else. Discussion about and/or promotion of the activities you mentioned is not a threat to that idea. Drugs are a different story (not that I fully agree that they should be a different story, but that is the reality of it).

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

Oneironaut, you need to be promoted from moderator to site attorney. You have absolutely kicked ass at arguing the site's position on the issue.

Thanks, UM.
And I know what you mean, about the alcohol thing. I've always been one to criticize the legalization of alcohol over many illegal substances. But, as far as discussion of it on this site is concerned (at least this is how I interpreted) it does come down to the fact that it's not so much a liability issue, just as you said, as alcohol is legal for those of legal age.

Originally Posted by phoenelai

Oneironaut I brought this up earlier but wanted to throw it past you. Could a thread (substance related, legal or illegal) have a legal disclaimer (pop up window) protecting DV upon clicking. Therefore the user proceeding understands the legalities, expressions, views of DV etc.. Just a thought.

My point was even legal supplements can possibly do damage if taken excessively (this could be long term) and would also need to protect DV along with talk of substances that are currently illegal.

Very true (about legal substances) but I'm not too savvy on what all can be done with the forum software and whatnot, or whether or not all of admin would agree to such a disclaimer would be necessary/efficient on all threads that talk about legal substances, so I can't really answer that one, myself. Maybe if admin is reading, they would like to chime in on that one, or some more discussion about it will be brought up. I could see it as a good idea for the illegal drugs - in particular - though.

Originally Posted by Oneironaut

Main reasoning falls back to the fact that none of those acts are illegal, and the risks involved are often much more apparent than taking drugs. A site the condones parkour is not likely to receive any negative blow-back for someone taking a jump too high for them and breaking their legs (or worse) while doing parkour. A site that is a breeding ground for new users of controlled substances, most likely, would. Also, remember that a main goal of this site is, and has always been, to be a respectable and (somewhat) distinguished site about lucid dreaming. It's not like we ask everyone to walk around in collared shirts and penny loafers, but we would like this site to continue to stand out as a respectable site for lucid dreaming information, above all else. Discussion about and/or promotion of the activities you mentioned is not a threat to that idea. Drugs are a different story (not that I fully agree that they should be a different story, but that is the reality of it).

So you agree that the danger argument is irrelevant.
The only remaining issues are the legal issue, and the respectability issue.

Answer to the legal issue:
1) Many psychedelic drugs are still legal in most places.
2) I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know it is not illegal to discuss drugs, only to use or posses or sell them. There is no legal issue here.

Answer to the respectability issue:
Here SKA's point about political peer pressure comes into the picture. Why are you against discussions about psychedelic drugs, and not against discussions about other activities which are a million times more dangerous ( such as participating in a war, or all the examples I gave before )?
The reason is that psychedelic drugs are considered taboo by the government and by the ruling classes of society. And why do they consider them taboo? Because they are afraid that if people open their mind they will not be herded by the government and ruling classes that want to perpetuate their power, position, property ( money ), and way of life. They want you to be a good, hard working, tax paying, obedient citizen, and educate your children to be the same as you, so the process continues to the next generation.

If people open their mind, by means of thinking for themselves, reading books of radical authors, meditation, and also mind-altering plants and chemicals, they will be subversive, because they will see the injustice imposed by the government and ruling classes. They will no longer go along with the system. The will not be "good boys". They will rebel, either passively by not participating in actions that involve injustice, or by direct activity.

This is the one and only reason why psychedelics are considered not-respectable.

You can choose to play along with their indoctrination, for wanting to have a good image. Or you can resist it, for the sake of justice.

Originally Posted by dodobird

2) I am not a lawyer, but as far as I know it is not illegal to discuss drugs, only to use or posses or sell them. There is no legal issue here.

It is not illegal to merely discuss them, but according to federal court decisions, one of the exceptions to our First Amendment, which allows freedom of speech/expression, is the direct promotion or incitement of illegal activity. A more extreme example would be getting on television and calling for the president to be assassinated. I don't think the government would spend resources on arresting people for trying to talk people here into taking illegal drugs, but if something really messed up happened to somebody who claims somebody flat out said people should take illegal drugs, there could be a potential lawsuit. Making it off limits here to directly encourage illegal drug use would get around that if it were easy to keep people on the right side of that line, but that situation could easily turn into a confusing clusterfuck.

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

It is not illegal to merely discuss them, but according to federal court decisions, one of the exceptions to our First Amendment, which allows freedom of speech/expression, is the direct promotion or incitement of illegal activity. A more extreme example would be getting on television and calling for the president to be assassinated. I don't think the government would spend resources on arresting people for trying to talk people here into taking illegal drugs, but if something really messed up happened to somebody who claims somebody flat out said people should take illegal drugs, there could be a potential lawsuit. Making it off limits here to directly encourage illegal drug use would get around that if it were easy to keep people on the right side of that line, but that situation could easily turn into a confusing clusterfuck.

I see, thank you for the correction. It's a bit of a weird thing, because if you want to change a law, you need to ask the people to vote for you so you can change it ( or for others that want to change it ), and this is encouraging them to break the current law, because you say to them that the changed law is better. So the only way to change a law legally is to pretend that you don't want to change it until you are elected. Pretty warped, isn't it...