It's called kidnapping and you will go to prison for it.

Also, until an addict chooses sobriety, the best thing you can do let them know you care but refuse to enable them.

Tell me u didnt read the post without telling me you didnt read the post.

Couldn't I say the same thing about smokers? Their brain chemistry has been rewired to never want to quite.



You are assuming that we, by default, have agency. I don't think that's a particularly useful way to look at it. We are deprived of our agency all the time, by substances or other factors. I don't see this as a unique situation where agency has been deprived when compared to all the other things in your normal life that also remove agency. In fact I'd say the capitalist need to work for basic necessities is a much more important factor for why this homeless person is in such a desparate situation.

This post was edited by NetflixAdaptationWidow on Sep 9 2022 01:56pm

It's immoral and illegal... and it's a very stupid question.

I mean what is wrong with you? Did you fall out of bed and hit your head this morning?



Duuhhhrhrhrhrhrhrhrrr

This post was edited by Superman on Sep 9 2022 02:00pm

In and of themselves, yes, that's what I'm saying. As a society, we don't grant certain degrees of agency to minors until they come of age. But once they do, they're entitled to make their own decisions, whether they're poor decisions or not.

I think you're misunderstanding something about addiction and are substituting that for them having "lost agency".

All mental illness, including addiction, has an environmental component. ADHD is only an illness if it interferres with your normal life. If you are in a high tech job and it helps you get all your tasks done by frequently task switching then you don't have ADHD. You've just got a mind that's well suited to the job.

Same with most other things including addiction. If we treated smokers the same way we treated fentanyl addicts we would have A LOT of nicotine addicts that were destitute and would have "lost agency". They'd be fired from their jobs for bringing cigarettes to work, become homeless, get arrested frequently, and probably live on the streets.

The factors that cause people to be homeless and destitute has much more to do with how society treats the addicts than the addiction itself. Our society is absolutely cram full of addicts. Caffeine, nicotine, alcohol... but often they are treated fine by society so they can function and aren't considered to have "lost agency" despite smokers being overwhelmingly unable to quite.

This is well illustrated with how marijuana has been treated. A drug that is much less harmful than tobacco created an entire generation of "addicts" who had "lost agency" and were "a danger to society" because of how society responded to it.

In other words, X is less harmful than Y so it should be legal. That's like saying being shot is less harmful than being blown apart by a bomb, therefore guns should be illegal. It's also a type of false dichotomy.

It's always the addict's fault they are an addict; ultimately, it's the addict who made their choice. It's not societies job to take responsibility for an individual's actions.

I think you need to work on your reading comprehension. You don't seem to understand what anybody is actually saying and just jump on whatever bumper sticker line you can think of first.

Are you typically so offended by thought exercises?



do you have an example where someone is incapable of making their own choices and should have agency removed? or do you just not think addiction takes peoples' choices away?



sure people do look favorably on cigs because of movie stars, and bad on pot because of DARE and cia fuckery. but hard drugs which cause u to lose jobs, grind you teeth until u lose them, or die from an overdose should be stigmatized heavily. i think its foolish to suggest more addicts have been damned by this stigma than people who have been saved by never trying the drugs themselves. omelets need eggs.



this is entirely accurate, dudes a textbook pard tourist.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Sep 9 2022 02:24pm

You don't own other people .. even if it is your children. They are on their own life path .. all you can do is keep the door open. That is why learning responsibility, building selv-respect and self-assurance early in life is healthy. Of course in healthy doses. Because then they won't need drugs to the point of killing themselves.

But even if they do, it's their choice, and they must figure out whatever they're going through on their own. Whether you are against it or not, if you are, you are simply applying pressure and increasing the risk of them feeling more left out and thus drugging themselves more. Keeping a door open, of course with rules and limits, is a way to lower the risk that it turns fatal.

Very little in life is really 0% or 100% .. we cannot guard against everything. Trying to help is often the most efficient thing. Or simply being open-minded.

This post was edited by Taurean on Sep 9 2022 02:25pm