It seems to me it's of poor taste to accuse someone sick and doing everything they can to help awareness about a disease of abusing cocaine.
FWIW I'm inferring from the post you replied to that they think 'drugs are bad' so saying that Fox did drugs in his youth is a condemnation when you have that mindset.
If someone thinks drugs are so bad that an even-handed curiosity whether a particular drug could have been at play is unseemly, the problem is with them, not with the reasonably sanely grounded curiosity. Replace cocaine with alcohol or aspirin and @influx’s comment is the same.
I don't see how acknowledging that possibility is doing a disservice to an actor I've always had a soft spot for.
Perhaps consider your own projections?
- ed
nngh - swapped 'ignoring' for 'acknowledging' so as to make the point I wanted, NOT the exact opposite.
Even with the recent changes, a history of drug use has a negative connotation. Weed is minor bad, cocaine is bigger bad (except in finance, but that's another story).
By suggesting that MJF disease was fueled by his drug habit:
- you will be causing more people to see him with a negative light
- you might impede what seems to be his good will effort to put his money and fame against the disease
There is no perfect solution, but I think we should at least be aware of these second order effects -- see also The Dark Knight for when Batman decides that preserving the previous good reputation of Double Face was more important, because it gave hope to people.
My personal take: Disease do not come from doing "good" or "bad" deeds - they just are. As someone else said, even if it was 100% due to drugs, that does not precludes compassion.
Also, even if I'm neutral on drugs, lots of people aren't. Therefore, making this connection, while technically true, may bring very little upsides but lots of downsides, so it's better not to, if only because we should leave MJF himself decide what to disclose or not, while by default extending the benefit of doubt.