On any issue of widespread interest--that is to say, on any political issue--there is a 15 per cent idiot factor on each side. 15 per cent of the electorate is opposed to it, 15 per cent favor it, even though none of that 30 per cent can verbally articulate their position. Nonetheless, if you are advocating a political issue, there is no point in your wasting time on the idiot factor. You can’t convert the opponents within it, and you don’t want those within it who agree with you trying to win over undecideds.
Bob Ellis continues to ask the irrelevant question, “How will having more intoxicated people in our community produce a better society?” The rest of his faction of the idiot factor rub their chins, smirk and nod their heads; their point is made.
Within the medical cannabis argument, Ellis appears to be implying that allowing sick, disabled and dying people legal access to an herb that will alleviate their suffering or save their lives will create “more intoxicated people in our community.”
Okay, that must mean that Ellis thinks that relief from pain or nausea is synonymous with “intoxication.”
Is there any reason to attempt further to reason with this person?