Report: 92 Percent Of Souls In Hell There On Drug Charges

Did we blog this Onion story yet? If not, we should have. If so, always worth a second read:

Report: 92 Percent Of Souls In Hell There On Drug Charges

HELL--A report released Monday by the Afterlife Civil Liberties Union indicates that nine out of 10 souls currently serving in Hell were condemned on drug-related sins.

"Hell was created to keep dangerous sinners off the gold-paved streets of Heaven," ACLU spokesman Barry Horowitz said. "But lately, it's become a clearing-house for the non-evil souls that Heaven doesn't know how to deal with."

Whole thing here. Funny 'cos it's true.

Comments

theOneState | October 21, 2005, 11:38am | #

Nick, I thought the headline was yours. Woulda been one your best ever.

ralphus | October 21, 2005, 11:45am | #

This is almost as funny as last night's CSI. Apparently if you grow kind bud in your basement the high school football players your son writes term papers for will slaughter your family and throw you in a lake.

The fact I watch every week is a credit to how well written and produced it is. Each episode is like a swift kick to my libertarian balls.

Jeff P. | October 21, 2005, 11:52am | #

And when there's no more room in Hell, the stoners will walk the Earth.

What would a vegetarian zombie crave?

The perceived effects of drugs on CSI is nothing new. I remember episodes of Adam 12 and Emergency where teenagers on pot (NOT acid) would grip their heads and cry "I'm freakin' out, maaaaaan!"

John | October 21, 2005, 11:56am | #

War the "Blue Boy" episode of Dragnet!

Like PJ O'Rourke said, "Pot makes you acutely sensitive and in today's society; what worse punishment is there?"

A Vegetarian Zombie | October 21, 2005, 12:18pm | #

(shuffle shuffle drool shuffle lurch)

BRAN...

BRAN...

BRAN...

(shuffle lurch shuffle)

thoreau | October 21, 2005, 12:25pm | #

Meaning no disrespect to Reason, but The Onion is my favorite libertarian publication. Reason comes in #2, then The Economist (yeah, I know, not pure libertarian, but they have enough sympathies in that direction).

dhex | October 21, 2005, 12:28pm | #

wrong, zombie!

"GRAINNNSSSSSSS....WHOLLLE GRAIIINNNSSSSSSSs......."

ralphus | October 21, 2005, 12:29pm | #

It's not just the perceived drug effects that get me. It’s worse than that. The family on last nights show seemed to be a happy and healthy one, but the evil plant in their basement was their death certificate.

And according to CSI, if you're into kinky sex, gambling, going to strip clubs, or owning guns or anything else that's you know fun - you're fucking doomed to a grisly death.

And just once when they ask someone for a DNA sample or to search their car or home I'd like to hear the words "As soon as you get a warrant."

But like I said. I still love the show.

Stoner Zombie | October 21, 2005, 12:36pm | #

BRAINS!

oh and

CHEETOS!

and

BEN AND JERRY'S!

and ooh I could really go for

MOUNTAIN DEW!

and some

WHITE CASTLE!

would fucking rule right now and

TWIZZLERS!

oh yeah and

BRAINS!

dhex | October 21, 2005, 12:37pm | #

ever notice that only the guilty ever ask for a warrant?

on all of these fucking shows?

Herman | October 21, 2005, 12:44pm | #

So George Romero will direct the Harold and Kumar sequel?

Lowdog | October 21, 2005, 12:45pm | #

cuz hey, if you're innocent, what do you have to hide?

That's why I can't fucking stand those shows.

Akira MacKenzie | October 21, 2005, 12:47pm | #

Yeah, I wonder if Jerry Bruckheimer is getting checks from the government to use CSI into an clandestine anti-drug, anti-gun, anti-gambling, and anti-sex PSA. Then again, you can say that about any crime show in this day and age.

ralphus | October 21, 2005, 12:53pm | #

ever notice that only the guilty ever ask for a warrant?

Only because they have something to hide. What are you trying to hide dhex? Just cooperate and everything will be fine. Civil liberties are the last refuge of a scoundrel.

Now on to stoned zombies. Ever seen the underrated movie Idle Hands?

Seth Green and his stoner buddy are killed and become zombies. It's not because they possessed or something. It's just because when they die they see the light at the end of the tunnel and it's really beautiful and all, but it's like really, really far away dude. So they just stay on earth and smoke a bowl and play video games.

The Real Bill | October 21, 2005, 12:57pm | #

Who doesn't have something to hide?

matt | October 21, 2005, 12:58pm | #

"Ever seen the underrated movie Idle Hands?"

That movie is great. And even if it wasn't, it would be worth watching just to stare at Jessica Alba.

Chris | October 21, 2005, 1:06pm | #

Stoner Zombie http://tinyurl.com/e4jq2

Jeff P. | October 21, 2005, 1:26pm | #

dhex, I hang my head in shame that I did not think of "grains." My geek mojo has failed me.

As true stoners tend to shuffle and mumble, It might be tough to tell if they're dead or not.

David | October 21, 2005, 1:32pm | #

ever notice that only the guilty ever ask for a warrant?

on all of these fucking shows?

I can remember one episode of SVU where a guy refused on principle, and was innocent. But only that one, as most times these shows go out of their way to remind us of how inconvenient legal protections for suspects make things for the cops.

MikeP | October 21, 2005, 1:33pm | #

For a non-satiric take on religion and drug policy, one of the mailing lists I'm on earned me a letter from the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative.

They list an impressive roster of denominations supporting their positions, the most prominent of which is drug sentencing reform.

It's the first I had heard of them. They're worth looking up if you want to see some sane drug policy proponents from a decidedly middle America stance.

dhex | October 21, 2005, 2:15pm | #

"But only that one, as most times these shows go out of their way to remind us of how inconvenient legal protections for suspects make things for the cops."

yeah, basically.

"if it weren't for this goddamn, bleeding-heart constitution, mccoy, we'd have solved the problem of crime by now!"

eric mattingly | October 21, 2005, 2:18pm | #

MikeP,

That's really cool man.

thoreau | October 21, 2005, 2:24pm | #

The worst example of the "civil liberties get in the way" stuff was on 24 several months ago. A lowly terrorist henchman is busted. His main duty seemed to be helping smuggle people out of the country after they finished their role in the operation. Miraculously he knew exactly where to find the Big Bad Terrorist Boss.

(If I were an evil mastermind, my lowly henchmen would take orders via telephones and intermediaries, and never actually find out the location of my secret hideout.)

When the henchman is captured, the Big Bad Terrorist Boss calls "Amnesty Global" and says that a guy is being held in custody without access to legal counsel, and will be tortured. Within about 10 minutes a lawyer shows up with a court order and a US Marshall to enforce it.

The "good guys" solved the problem by releasing the henchman from custody, waiting for his lawyer and US Marshall to depart, and then capturing and torturing him. After about 15 seconds of torture he broke and gave away the location of the Big Bad Terrorist Boss's secret hideout.

Of course, when attractive women are captured on 24 they're usually offered immunity deals. The lesson? If you're a terrorist and you're afraid you might be caught, it helps to have cleavage.

poco | October 21, 2005, 2:24pm | #

Funny 'cause it's true and UNfunny in real life.TWIZZLERS! oh yeah and BRAINS! ...And some Funyuns. Yeah.

duncan | October 21, 2005, 2:28pm | #

I was watching SVU last night where Elliot kicked down the door of a suspect BEFORE they got a search warrant. Then they made the ADA look bad because for some reason she couldn't produce a warrant on the spot. I just wanted to yell at the screen, "But she's right!"

Yes, the suspect was a scumbag (and played by Martin Short of all people) and time was of the essence but at least don't make the ADA look like an obstructionist ass whenever she wants to follow the rules. Hell, they should be thanking her for not getting every case Elliot handles thrown out of court.

Some Guy Who Watches USA Network | October 21, 2005, 3:01pm | #

Yes, the suspect was a scumbag (and played by Martin Short of all people) and time was of the essence but at least don't make the ADA look like an obstructionist ass whenever she wants to follow the rules. Hell, they should be thanking her for not getting every case Elliot handles thrown out of court.

But my question is, did Mariska Hargitay (sp) get a change to work in there how she was a child of rape?

'Cause I think that means you don't need a warrant...

Dirty Harry | October 21, 2005, 3:18pm | #

"Well I'm broken up about that man's rights!"

ralphus | October 21, 2005, 3:29pm | #

Dirty Harry has always presented a great conundrum for libertarian leaning types. On one hand he stomps all of the rights we cherish, but on the other he sticks it to officious bureaucrats we hate. And he likes guns.

The same goes for all of his pop culture offspring. We love the lone wolf that plays by his own rules on film or TV. But we fear him in reality.

Lost_In_Translation | October 21, 2005, 3:29pm | #

I think police training should contain a semester long class on the constitution, you know, just so they know what exactly they're there for.

Johnny Clarke | October 21, 2005, 3:32pm | #

Had to laugh at the FBI possibly loosening their pre-employment standards on prior drug use. On the one hand all the "get tough" and "zero tolerance" programs suggest drug users are useless pond scum who should be locked away forever, and on the other the FBI was whining that they have to turn away high-quality job applicants for minor drug use in their past.

So which is it, children? Useless pond scum or high-quality applicants? Is this determined by whether or not the person gets caught?

We live in a strange, mysterious world.

RA | October 21, 2005, 3:59pm | #

I can only hope that all you people who consider drug use to be innocuous, that all your children will enjoy the benefits of you philosophy. This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force. And that is the correct outcome.

Dirty Harry | October 21, 2005, 4:09pm | #

ralphus, listen punk, a man's got to know his limitations.

ralphus | October 21, 2005, 4:13pm | #

RA,

Keep riding your kids to outperform everyone and they're going to discover drugs all on their own.

By the way, what do you pull down a year? I'm doing pretty well for myself. Drugs and all.

mediageek | October 21, 2005, 4:21pm | #

RA-

Actually when and if I decide to have kids, they'll be raised in the great libertarian tradition of being able to put holes in things with great precision using high-velocity lead-relocation devices.

And then they can clean them for me. (Hey, what's the point of having kids if they aren't going to do any chores?)

tchiers | October 21, 2005, 4:22pm | #

CSI taught me that doing PCP will turn you into a crazed cannibal and you'll eat your friends in an orgy of lust and violence.

And RA,
I can only hope that if you consider alcohol use to be innocuous, that all your children will enjoy the benefits of your philosophy. This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force. And that is the correct outcome.

dhex | October 21, 2005, 4:25pm | #

"This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force."

we are the sobrie-borg!

Wealthy Computer Programmer | October 21, 2005, 4:35pm | #

I can only hope that all you people who consider drug use to be innocuous, that all your children will enjoy the benefits of you philosophy. This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force. And that is the correct outcome.

Ha, ha! Sorry guys. RA is my robot. I programmed him to say that, just to piss you all off.

So, anybody got any cocaine or mushrooms? I've got a long weekend ahead of me.

Wealthy Computer Programmer | October 21, 2005, 4:41pm | #

He's still in his beta version, by the way.

Instigator Bot | October 21, 2005, 4:45pm | #

I think Intelligent Design has its merits. Why don't you guys want it taught in science class? After all, lots of scientists agree with it.

And why shouldn't local governments take private property to build stadiums? Sports franchises generate lots of revenue.

What's wrong with gun control? After all the cops can protect you. That's what we pay them for.

And so what if the feds want to know what books you check out of a library? I mean if you have nothing to hide what's the problem?

Morgan Spurlock makes a lot of good points.

Phil | October 21, 2005, 5:36pm | #

"Funny 'cos it's true?" It's true that 92 Percent Of Souls In Hell Are There On Drug Charges?

Satan | October 21, 2005, 5:46pm | #

Obviously you haven't been doing your stats homework, Phil.

I suggest you read Hell's Almanac 2005 before you embarass yourself further.

Eion | October 21, 2005, 5:51pm | #

"I can only hope that all you people who consider drug use to be innocuous, that all your children will enjoy the benefits of you philosophy. This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force. And that is the correct outcome."

Unless, of course, 'our' children are smarter than yours - stupid parents tend not to have smart kids. Or if some of the drugs 'our' children choose to take are performance-enhancing (weren't the pro-War on Some Drugs people on here crowing about how drug use could give students an unfair advantage, a little while back?)

Ellie | October 21, 2005, 11:45pm | #

"This way my children will out perform yours in academia and the work force."

we are the sobrie-borg!

"It appears that the collective have stopped their attack ... and are having a keg party."

James Anderson Merritt | October 22, 2005, 12:06am | #

Nick-

I read most of the Onion piece to my wife, who reacted as you would, had I recited a Lenny Bruce routine to you.

Just goes to prove that one person's heaven is another's hell, I guess.

Larry A | October 22, 2005, 2:00pm | #

I think police training should contain a semester long class on the constitution, you know, just so they know what exactly they're there for.

Actually, such a class could easily be taught in a week or so. Just end up the last lesson with, "And all the other stuff Congress says the Constitution lets them do? Well it don't."

On the one hand all the "get tough" and "zero tolerance" programs suggest drug users are useless pond scum who should be locked away forever, and on the other the FBI was whining that they have to turn away high-quality job applicants for minor drug use in their past.

Sort of like when they asked parents to lie to their kids about the parent's juvenile drug use. Because it would "confuse" their kids.

Yeah.

As in "If everyone who takes a hit of MJ ends up OD on coke and meth and H, where did all these solid-citizen parents come from?"

Ruthless | October 22, 2005, 9:26pm | #

"Hell was created to keep dangerous sinners off the gold-paved streets of Heaven," ACLU spokesman Barry Horowitz said. "But lately, it's become a clearing-house for the non-evil souls that Heaven doesn't know how to deal with."

If there are red-lights on the gold-paved streets, that alone, will cause me to say to St. Peter, "Thanks, but no thanks."

I wonder if the Reason Foundation might consider changing its slogan from "Free minds. Free markets" to "a clearing-house for the non-evil souls that Heaven doesn't know how to deal with."
Could Robert Poole get jiggy with that?

radek | October 23, 2005, 9:07pm | #

"That's why I can't fucking stand those shows"

And that's why The Wire is way above'em