[cassepipe]

Most people would agree that drug dealers hold more moral responsibility for delivering a product that they know is highly addictive but on the other hand no one would absolve an addict of any responsibility. Even you think addiction is a illness, we still expect people to help themselves by deciding to get help/seek treatment to fight the addiction.

[dangus]

This sounds sensible in isolation, but the real analogy is that the drug dealers have spent billions of dollars convincing the general public that drugs are healthy and better than the alternative of sobriety.

And also, when I go to the store to buy my daily needs like food and soap, they’re all packaged in the drugs.

Oh and I have to consume the drugs to get to the store because there’s no safe way to get there on foot or on a bike, and there’s no bus or train service because someone at GM/Ford paid my representatives to not fund that.

Then when I take my used drugs to the drug recycling center, they don’t actually get recycled because it isn’t profitable. But my recycling agency tells me that all my drugs get reused.

Seriously, just watch a paper towel ad or something. They act like it’s impossible to clean up a spill with something reusable.

[cassepipe]

Enjoyed reading your comment but the fact that it's more environmental than it is biological (is it though ? Isn't comfort appreciation biological too ?) doesn't change the moral calculation of my analogy which imho still holds: Quitting drugs is hard but it needs the addict's involvement