Some of you got your wish

[Cecily]

If those centers stop one person from dying, it's worth the money. If they stop one mom from getting the news her kid ODed. If they stop one friend from having a decade long void in their soul. This is precisely what I want to do with my life. I want to help stop pointless death. I want to give people a chance to recover. I don't believe anyone is irredeemable until it's too late.

[maskedmelon]

subsidizing the behavior perpetuates the misery of the addicts, their families and all those around them. promoting suffering for the chance at placating one's own conscience in a good deed is inhumane. most empaths cant see the reason behind their feelings and most people endeavoring to cultivate their own empathy simply affect the thoughtless stance of the empath :c don't make others suffer so you can feel righteous.

the idea that addicts are bad people for not choosing to end their addictions is simple idiocy rooted in a virgin ignorance of the nature of addiction. people don't choose addiction aamymore than they choose frustration or incomprehension. it happens. there are steps to avoid dangerous situations, but they are not always foreseeable and it is uncomfortable acknowledging one's own inherent disadvantages.

i am immensely grateful to have people in my life willing to swat me if I stray and equally thankful to have received a personality amenable to correction. not everyone has that. i know if i didn't I'd be on a darker path. I could be on a brighter one too, but the odds are not favorable. at present the worst i have to deal with is F5'ing this damn forum ^^; THOUGH, i have done a pretty darn good job of abstaining... today [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the most powerful thing you can give someone who suffers addiction or depression is a reason. the need to be needed is an essential part of being human.

[skarlorn]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

subsidizing the behavior perpetuates the misery of the addicts, their families and all those around them. promoting suffering for the chance at placating one's own conscience in a good deed is inhumane. most empaths cant see the reason behind their feelings and most people endeavoring to cultivate their own empathy simply affect the thoughtless stance of the empath :c don't make others suffer so you can feel righteous.

the idea that addicts are bad people for not choosing to end their addictions is simple idiocy rooted in a virgin ignorance of the nature of addiction. people don't choose addiction aamymore than they choose frustration or incomprehension. it happens. there are steps to avoid dangerous situations, but they are not always foreseeable and it is uncomfortable acknowledging one's own inherent disadvantages.

i am immensely grateful to have people in my life willing to swat me if I stray and equally thankful to have received a personality amenable to correction. not everyone has that. i know if i didn't I'd be on a darker path. I could be on a brighter one too, but the odds are not favorable. at present the worst i have to deal with is F5'ing this damn forum ^^; THOUGH, i have done a pretty darn good job of abstaining... today [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the most powerful thing you can give someone who suffers addiction or depression is a reason. the need to be needed is an essential part of being human.

agreed this is what i wanted to say
thank you for this brilliant post, dear [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Cecily]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

subsidizing the behavior perpetuates the misery of the addicts, their families and all those around them. promoting suffering for the chance at placating one's own conscience in a good deed is inhumane. most empaths cant see the reason behind their feelings and most people endeavoring to cultivate their own empathy simply affect the thoughtless stance of the empath :c don't make others suffer so you can feel righteous.

Maybe you lack the empathy to see the thought behind it. Deferment of death means a chance for recovery. Death forfeits that. It's very simple.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by Cecily [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Maybe you lack the empathy to see the thought behind it. Deferment of death means a chance for recovery. Death forfeits that. It's very simple.

im not saying people should die ceci. im saying that subsidizing destructive behavior is wrong, more wrong in fact than doing nothing. yeah, it may be possible to negate some of the potential consequences, but you are compeling individuals to suffer and not just the ones who are behaving destructively, but also their families, friends and every other person around them. it's wrong. the inclination to want to help isn't what's wrong. acting on that inclination viscerally with no regard for the consequence is.

if you want to do something good, help them stop. help them fix themself or help them manage their problems. don't give them a place to safely continue destroying themself. that's awful :c

[loramin]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

if you want to do something good, help them stop. help them fix themself or help them manage their problems. don't give them a place to safely continue destroying themself. that's awful :c

Seriously Melon, I don't mean to be rude (especially given our history), but it's not like an addict's family has never thought to help them. So when you essentially say "keep doing what you're doing, even though it doesn't work", what you're really saying is "screw addicts, let them die: that's better than me spending money on freebies for them".

It's like telling someone with cancer "Cancer patients don't deserve freebies, just have your family pray for you." In the case of tobacco-smoking lung cancer victims, that's pretty equivalent to needle-using drug addicts. In either case, you can pretend that you care about the cancer patient/addict and their family, but really you're telling them to fuck off and die.

I'd argue that we should all be grateful we're not addicted to anything (except an elf sim), we should all have sympathy for both addicts and their families, and we should do whatever we can do to help them ... especially if that only means funding relatively cheap clean needle programs, so that the addicts can live long enough to get clean.

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seriously Melon, I don't mean to be rude (especially given our history), but it's not like an addict's family has never thought to help them. So when you essentially say "keep doing what you're doing, even though it doesn't work", what you're really saying is "screw addicts, let them die: that's better than me spending money on freebies for them".

it's okay, that's not what I said though. this isn't about money.

It's like telling someone with cancer "Cancer patients don't deserve freebies, just have your family pray for you." In the case of tobacco-smoking lung cancer victims, that's pretty equivalent to needle-using drug addicts. In either case, you can pretend that you care about the cancer patient/addict and their family, but really you're telling them to fuck off and die.

it's not about freebies, lor. it's about being an implement of suffering. I have three questions for you:

1. do you believe suffering is good?
2. do you believe that suffering should be minimized?
3. do you understand that safe injection sites subsidize suffering?

I'd argue that we should all be grateful we're not addicted to anything (except an elf sim), we should all have sympathy for both addicts and their families, and we should do whatever we can do to help them ...

we should.

especially if that only means funding relatively cheap clean needle programs, so that the addicts can live long enough to get clean.

it doesn't.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by maskedmelon [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

it's not about freebies, lor. it's about being an implement of suffering. I have three questions for you:

1. do you believe suffering is good?
2. do you believe that suffering should be minimized?
3. do you understand that safe injection sites subsidize suffering?

Excellent questions.

I only eat grass-fed/free-range meat because I believe that factory farming causes unnecessary suffering, so that answers #1. However I also have nothing against killing animals, even though that obviously involves some suffering, so clearly I'm in favor of minimizing suffering when it can't be eliminated completely (#2).

But then you have #3, and no I do not understand that safe injection sites subsidize suffering. Drug addicts don't think "gee, I could be addicted to smack today, but I'm out of clean needles ... well, I guess I better sober up". What they'll actually say is "I'm out of clean needles, guess I'll use a dirty one." And without a doubt dirty needles lead to disease, and disease leads to suffering.

So back at you: do you understand that not giving addicts access to clean needles means they will get diseases and suffer?