Still havent answered. Deflecting lol what your doing is a lawyers ploy. I never said this I never said that. You want to push the dirt but not get your hands dirty. Your saying there should be no consequences for college athletes (KIDS) for smoking weed, but not advocating for them to actually do it as if that isnt going to be the direct outcome.
I asked the CBD and schedule 1 question for a reason.
CBD and Marijuana have very similar benefits, the difference is the psychoactive portion of weed. This is why I love the introduction of CBD. It destroys all the weed head arguements. "I smoke weed bc it helps my pain/anxiety/w.e.". No ***** u smoke weed to get high.
Finally its a schedule 1 drug bc it can not be categorized as a stimulant, depressant, or hallucinogenic. It effects different people in very different ways, which is extremely dangerous.
Ok, since you insist, I'll play....
First, it appears you glazed over the part of my response where I said this wasn't a discussion of marijuana vs sobriety. Just like I am very pro vaping, but not in terms of "I think vaping is 100% safe and wonderful and everyone should do it!". **** no! I hope people choose never to consume nicotine in ANY form as long as they live. It does nothing good for you and it harms you. Period. But if they ARE a nicotine user, yes, vaping is a much better option than cigarettes, and it's not even remotely close. Trying to argue against that last statement by comparing vaping to not smoking anything is irrelevant and disingenuous. And that's what you're doing here.
I agree with your points re sobriety, Joe. I'm happy to answer this seminole question of yours. What is the point of allowing a student athlete to smoke marijuana? Well, first of all, when you use the term "allow" then by definition you must only be talking about a student athlete that is 21 years of age and goes to school in a legalized state. Otherwise, it wouldn't be "allowed" anymore than an underage student athlete is "allowed" to drink alcohol. The question Frost proposed is why is the student athlete who chose to take a pull off a legalized joint getting hammered by the NCAA so much more than the student athlete who elected to have a ****tail instead? I'm not at all arguing there should be no consequences, as you falsely stated above. The question being asked is why are the consequences so vastly different.
But what is the point of a student athlete smoking marijuana (meaning, how is it a net-positive)? For the vast majority of them, it isn't. It's simply what they choose as their form of recreational intoxication. If you want to have a separate discussion as to why a college athlete doing no form of intoxicant (marijuana, alcohol, other drugs, anything) is better than them getting buzzed on whatever, I would happily engage with you on that and likely agree with you. But again, that wasn't the discussion here.
You keep referencing CBD. I happen to be a big proponent of CBD as well; in fact, my brother runs his own CBD company. Yes, CBD allows one to get most of the medicinal benefits of cannabis without the intoxicating effects. This is why I personally think it's so fantastic. But what is the relevance of that to this discussion? I don't think anyone here (and definitely not Scott Frost) was trying to make an impassioned plea for the medicinal benefits of the cannabis plant. The entire point is that it doesn't make sense to penalize a student athlete for electing to get a buzz on marijuana in a legalized state vastly more than they penalize a student athlete who elects to get a buzz on vodka instead.
And lastly, that's actually NOT the basis for Schedule 1 classification. That criteria is (1) no currently accepted medical benefit and (2) high potential for abuse. Have you ever actually taken a look at the DEA's list of Schedule 1 narcotics?
Heroin (diacetylmorphine)
LSD (Lysergic acid diethylamide)
Marijuana (cannabis, THC)
Mescaline (Peyote)
MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine or “ecstasy”)
GHB (gamma-hydroxybutyric acid) - except formulations in an FDA-approved drug product sodium oxybate (Xyrem) are Schedule III
Ecstasy (MDMA or 3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine)
Psilocybin
Synthetic marijuana and analogs (Spice, K2)
Methaqualone (Quaalude)
Khat (Cathinone)
Bath Salts (3,4-methylenedioxypyrovalerone or MDPV)
Hmmmmm. One of these is not like the others. But even that is not the discussion here.
