ecstasy versus ecstasy

I cannot remember the last time that i read an article on a drug that i didn’t think was dreadfully biased. Usually, they’re either proselytizing the drug or condemning it for all it’s worth. This article about ecstasy has a very level-headed approach: there are pros, there are cons, some information is misinformation, a lot is unknown, safety is being ignored out of fear, fear tactics are not persuasive, the gov’t has lost its credibility in the war on drugs, etc. The arguments are laid out nicely and expressing who does ecstasy and why, while also conveying why the war on ecstasy is failing miserably and resulting in increased usage and deaths. And ultimately, it suggests that no matter what the authorities say, people will make their own decisions and that it is better to inform them and the public at large. I couldn’t agree more.

Plus, the article is clearly written with my favorite quote being: “And while Ecstasy is typically portrayed as the drug of choice among a fringe of bedeviled youngsters with a fondness for glow sticks and all-night dancing, in reality the drug cuts a wide swath across society.” I was quite psyched that the author noted why people did drugs at parties, but also noted that parties were not an excuse for drugs to be sold.

And, in response to an individual’s remarks, the author quoted one of the best quotes about why the gov’t is losing the war on drugs: “I have taken more out of alcohol than alcohol has taken out of me” – Winson Churchill.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email