This is some funny stuff to me:

Graham Norton, one of BBC television’s top presenters, was in hot water after he revealed he had taken “loads of drugs” and hailed ecstasy as “just fantastic”.
The broadcasting corporation, which recently signed up Norton on a new multi-million-pound (-dollar, -euro) three-year contract, defended the 43-year-old’s comments, made to women’s magazine Marie Claire.

“The issues that Graham discusses in this interview are aimed at an adult audience and reflect the frank and open nature of his personality,” the BBC said.

The openly gay Irishman had told Marie Claire: “The only time I took ecstasy was years and years ago. It was absolutely amazing. It was just fantastic—really, really fun.

“I’ve tried loads of drugs, but it would really bug me if I got busted in the tabloids because I take them so rarely.”
[...]
A spokesman for the National Drug Prevention Alliance said: “We’re appalled, it’s absolutely mind-blowing that somebody has said that.”

Martin Barnes, chief executive of the charity DrugScope, said: “It would be naive to deny that people use drugs because they enjoy them but there are risks and many who use drugs do come to harm.

“We shouldn’t rush to condemn admissions of drug use but it is reasonable to ask that celebrities recognise a responsibility—that for many people there is a downside to drug use.”

The funny part is that this could possibly be a big story. No serious discussion of drugs can take place--whether from a “legalize now” or a hard-core drug warrior stance--without admitting the obvious: drugs are fun.

Okay, that’s not entirely fair, but it’s useful shorthand. Closer to the truth would be to say that people use drugs because they get something out of them. Maybe they get that mild, social release that comes from drinking a few beers with some friends. Perhaps it’s to ease pain or anxiety or to escape in large and small ways from the difficulties of daily life. Sometimes drug use is harmless (as with a friend of mine who is what I would consider a functional addict that needs his morning hit to get going but is never late for work and works harder than anyone else in his department) and sometimes it’s wildly self-destructive (as with the man who I considered a second father, who couldn’t sleep without being falling down drunk, who couldn’t find a way to live with himself, and who ended up dying a painful, bloody drunk’s death).

Talking about drugs in some monolithic way--treating “drug use” as one topic without distinguishing between the different kinds of drugs, casual users, functional addicts, dysfunctional addicts, and all the rest--is dishonest. For that matter, without talking about drugs in the context of legal drugs and controls (as with alcohol) is just as dishonest. We’re a society that likes our drugs in a myriad of forms; from our morning caffeine and our happy hour two-fers to our pack-a-day nicotine habit and our chopped power on a tabletop.

On the illegal side of the ledger, I’ve used coke, meth, pot, and more. I’ve abused legally and illegally obtained prescription drugs and had a strong love of morphine for quite some time. I tried to get my hands on opium, but the guy I paid disappeared with my money (and, yes, I’m still cranky). Why did I do it? Sometimes because I was curious about the effects and sometimes because I found that I liked the effects.

Coke made me happy like you wouldn’t believe. Meth was harsh and had a horrible aftermath. Pot left me bored. Morphine left me (physically and mentally) in pain, but far from caring.

There were times that I drank because I didn’t have the balls to kill myself and times that I drank because I couldn’t imagine tomorrow being better than today. Now I have a few drinks because it frees me to put my daily stress at arm’s length. That might not sound healthy--and maybe it isn’t--but I rarely drink and my drinking has yet to affect my relationships or my work life.

This isn’t a blanket encouragement to others to indulge in their own self-destructive behavior. I have the scars to prove that isn’t always such a great idea. I tend to think that people should be allowed to pour whatever chemicals they want into their own body--with the same kinds of rules and regulations that govern alcohol use, for instance--but would privately encourage people to understand why they use whatever they use. What need is it filling up in their lives?

I stopped using a long time ago mostly because the drugs weren’t that important to me. They didn’t feel a need most of the time; they filled a want. The potential damage to my career and my life is hardly justified by the transient, relatively small release afforded by an eight ball.

An honest, reasonable drug policy can’t be found until we have an honest, reasonable conversation about drugs and drug use. Even if you believe in abolition and have never touched an illicit drug, you aren’t being honest if you don’t acknowledge that the grand majority of users go on to have none of the Hollywood tragedies. If you’ve pulled yourself up from some addict’s hell to become an anti-drug crusader, you are being dishonest when you don’t admit that most people don’t end up the way that you did. And if you are a legalizer who doesn’t address the potential cost of a more liberal drug policy on individuals and a society, then you are missing a vital part of the conversation.

In the story about Graham Norton, at least the Martin Barnes admits that people have fun with drugs while noting the undeniable fact that illegal drug use can have negative consequences. Far too many people take the National Drug Prevention Alliance spokesman’s angle, seemingly afraid that any admission of the fun bits will completely invalidate their arguments.

Let me say this for the record: I had a great time on drugs. But I’m happy to be clean.

Update: Read this post from SJ Howard and then follow the link at the end. Apparently, Mr. Norton has been horribly misunderstood.