I won't get into what I've done and haven't (real name) but it's not negativity so much as caution. First, spiritual experiences are hard to describe but I'm n

I won't get into what I've done and haven't (real name) but it's not negativity so much as caution. First, spiritual experiences are hard to describe but I'm not impressed by people who claim to have had profound experiences. People will also claim profundity out of the "drugs" of the bourgeois nincompoops-- power and money-- because the thrill of power is profound to a typical vapid nincompoop. That's the fundamental problem with drugs: the upsides are subjective and personal-- that doesn't mean they aren't real-- while the downsides are often visible and awful. Is LSD evil? No. Is there "something to it"? Yes. In fact, there was a lot of good research being done on these drugs until the 1960s, when they were (improperly) listed as Schedule I, meaning they have no medical value (which is not true). Should it be stigmatized? No, a lot of great people (not just "burnouts") have done it. Is it dangerous? Yes, it is. Can LSD be spiritual for some people? Yes. Do you need psychedelics to be spiritual or to have spiritual experiences? No, absolutely not. If you choose to use these drugs, you're doing something that society knows very little about. You're experimenting with stuff about which our knowledge is in its infancy. Because society doesn't know enough about these drugs, it fears them, hence the stigma. That also means that if things go wrong for you, you will get no sympathy from the vast majority of people.