cannabisnews.com: Pot Lacks Purpose





Pot Lacks Purpose
Posted by CN Staff on September 25, 2007 at 18:57:21 PT
By Kyle Klavetter, Staff Writer
Source: Collegian
Oklahoma -- It would be nice to hear the government admit that it over-regulates, that it needs to mellow out and give citizens a little more control over their own lives. But must the first steps on the road to recovering freedoms from the fount of Constitutional federalism make legalizing marijuana a salient point?
The subject merits an open debate, particularly on economic grounds. In fact, a purely secular argument for the legalization of marijuana is entirely valid. But for much of America — especially red states — the marijuana money trail isn’t the issue. Arguments about unjustified societal intolerance of different lifestyles aren’t pertinent either. Economic or social progress mark fatuous successes if these are not attained in the pursuit of a greater purpose.America is a purposed nation. America serves God. The practical consequence arising from this belief is that means are not justified by ends. Rights do not exist in a vacuum. Progress measures success only after the method by which it is attained is subjected to the scrutiny of an independent moral code.In modern times this traditional view is regularly challenged. Secular scales measure the greatness of America’s identity — annual national growth, Dow Jones Index, national scholastic test scores, but at least the preceding markers indirectly measure morality: growth is largely a function of work ethic and disciplined minds.Other markers give no indication of the state of morality. One such category is the “right to.” America prides itself on how many “right to’s” it can accumulate — right to self-expression, right to privacy, right to abortion, right to inhale mind-altering substances. The more “right to’s” there are, the better America supposedly is. The problem lies in that these type of “rights” do not build up a foundation for the country. These “rights” aren’t meant to further a Godly end. Often these rights are beyond the judgments of good and evil. They are deemed “good” because they foster Man’s own ability to live as he pleases. Their ultimate purpose is the service of Man. This is a dangerous credo, one that in its fullest meaning resounded ahead of Communist Russia as it marched to perdition in the past century.Of course legalizing pot wouldn’t make America communist, but it would be one step toward a world where rights are justified not by their adherence to morality but because they further Man’s own ends. This political epistemology is antithetical to the American vision.The fountainhead of constitutional federalism springs waters meant to strengthen this country’s citizens for a pursuit greater than any individual’s capricious desires.Individual rights are given meaning by the purpose they enable man to strive for. It is by this meaning that these rights ought to be judged worthy. The legalization of pot would, at best, be self-gratification. This right would not serve the interests of God. The legalization of pot would tempt this country to stray from its moral heritage. It would be a jumping point for a new era in American politics in which the ends justify the means. The legalization of pot would be an immoral act, but America can at least handle those. However, to legalize pot would pose deeper troubles. It would signal to America a fundamental shift in politics: from service of morality to service of Man’s interests. Source: Collegian, The (U of Tulsa, OK Edu)Author: Kyle Klavetter, Staff WriterPublished: September 25, 2007Copyright: 2007 The CollegianContact: collegian utulsa.eduWebsite: http://www.utulsa.edu/collegian/CannabisNews -- Cannabis Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/cannabis.shtml
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #49 posted by whig on October 02, 2007 at 21:32:16 PT
The GCW
Do you have a source on Thomas Jefferson smuggling cannabis seeds from China? I want to be able to document this.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #48 posted by The GCW on October 02, 2007 at 20:54:26 PT
Response
US OK: PUB LTE: Anti Cannabis Letter Was IgnorantPubdate: Tue, 02 Oct 2007Source: Collegian, The (U of Tulsa, OK Edu) 
(Also) Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n1106/a01.htmlAuthor: Allan EricksonNote: Titled by NewshawkANTI CANNABIS LETTER WAS IGNORANT Dear Collegian Staff, Collegian staff writer Kyle Klavetter has laid a heavy dollop of righteous ambiguity on all our heads with his pretentious and off-key screed, "Pot lacks purpose." Cannabis is one of humanity's oldest agricultural commodities with a proud and prominent place in both global and U.S. history. Its prohibition is but seven decades old and a prohibition that began with a rotten and corrupt foundation, based on the xenophobic lies and perjured testimony before the US Congress by lifelong bureaucrat Harry Anslinger. Those corrupt beginnings are enough in themselves for any intelligent mind to see the moral failures, not in the use of cannabis, but in criminalizing those who consume it. Cannabis has defended our nation, clothed our early settlers and covered their wagons as they headed westward in our nation's exuberant early expansion. Cannabis was important enough that Thomas Jefferson saw fit to smuggle the multi-purpose plant's seeds from China at a time when that was a crime that carried a penalty of death. Napoleon thought cannabis important enough that it was a major factor in his invasion of Russia. So old are human relations with this plant that we bear receptors for its properties in our body's cells. It is not, as Klavetter would have us believe, our consumption of this wondrous plant that lessens the moral strengths of our nation but its prohibition that truly degrades us. Would young Mr. Klavetter consider our prison system, the world's largest ( both in total and per capita ) as a moral victory even though it has become a for-profit growth industry that incarcerates young black males at a rate almost six times greater than that of South Africa during Apartheid? This growth is fueled in large part by our War On Drugs. And have the 800,000 arrests each year in the United States for possession of pot done anything to stem the plant's popularity? Are there any successes to cannabis' prohibition that Klavetter can trumpet or even defend? Does Klavetter's condemnation include cannabis' useful medical properties - properties that may even hold a possible cure for cancer? Or should his condemnation be directed towards a policy founded on racist lies? This policy has seen our government attempt to hide the results of studies that show the promise this plant has in treating cancer. (Note: at the webpage, this seems to have continued) Posted at MAP http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v07/n1128/a03.html?397Webpage: http://www.utulsa.edu/collegian/article.asp?article=3427
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #47 posted by Toker00 on September 27, 2007 at 14:30:05 PT
Thanks whig.
At least the Cannabis part was accurate. Pot certainly has more purpose on this planet than the author of this article. Idiotic Bigot.The self-gratifying part would be, for me, the awareness that we are no longer putting people in jail for using a natural medicine as a legitimate treatment for medical issues over pharma poisons that can and do do more harm than good. It would be gratifying to know suffering people have a "New" old medicine proven over thousands of years to be safe and effective.Toke.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #46 posted by whig on September 27, 2007 at 13:54:40 PT
Toker00
Here's the gift, though. Since both translations of Kanehbos result in a psychoactive herb, anyone who uses scripture and denies that Kanehbos is Cannabis must be advocating people use Calamus. No?Cannabis is safe to use and effective. I don't know how safe Calamus is, there are claims that asarone is carcinogenic.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #45 posted by whig on September 27, 2007 at 13:50:04 PT
Asarone
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asarone
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #44 posted by whig on September 27, 2007 at 13:35:31 PT
Toker00
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMADifferent things. That's all I'm saying.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #43 posted by whig on September 27, 2007 at 13:22:46 PT
Toker00
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trimethoxyamphetamine
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #42 posted by museman on September 27, 2007 at 10:22:11 PT
wayne 34
"Because the God that I believe in loves me for who I am, because He created me the way I am. The God that I believe in is overjoyed that I come to talk to Him, even if it happens to be through the use of cannabis every now and then. And last but certainly not least, the God that I believe in will forgive me for my shortcomings when I fall short of His expectations. The God that I believe in doesn't lock people in their rooms without dinner until they decide to 'get with the program'. I'll never give up what I consider to be my rights, whatever they may be, simply because they make you and your kind uncomfortable. I would RATHER die. To hell with you and your kind, sir."Hey! That's My 'God' too! Same one, I recognize the love, forgiveness, and joy parts. The 'god' of prohibitionists has no living attributes, only dead presidents.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #41 posted by Sam Adams on September 27, 2007 at 09:50:27 PT
idiot
Legions of ignorant people like this are being exploited as this country shifts from service of morality to service of Big Oil. Service of bankers, real estate deveopers. Service of Communist China. Service of prison guard unions and pharmaceutical executives.Isn't it fasinating also that these Republican guys love bombing Iraq, the one place in the world where men run around constantly yelling "God is Great!" Somebody here is getting bamboozled.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #40 posted by John Tyler on September 27, 2007 at 08:23:36 PT
politics only
What a bunch of self-delusional drivel. Did it serve the country and God before prohibition as medicine, and for food and fiber and not after prohibition? (Oh yeah, it served the country and God again briefly again in 1943 to grow hemp for the war effort and then it didn’t serve the country and God again after the war.) This writer forgets his history. Serving the country and God wasn’t the reason cannabis was prohibited. Prohibition was based on racism and narrow financial interest. Prohibition was a political decision, and it will be political decision to end it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #39 posted by The GCW on September 27, 2007 at 05:36:35 PT
The problem isn't conservatives...
The problem isn't conservatives but rather disobedient Christians.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #38 posted by Toker00 on September 27, 2007 at 03:41:18 PT
whig
Thanks for pointing that out. Is this what you are referring to?Calamus contains an ingredient called aserone. This is a hallucinogen which is metabolized in the liver as trimethoxyamphetami ne or ecstasy.What part is not correct? The aserone part or the trimethoxyamphetami ne part? What is another word for trimethoxyamphetami ne? Why would someone make such a claim if it is a mistake? I'm not doubting your knowledge of ecstasy but why would someone say tri... is ecstasy?
TMOA? MDMA? Is Tri...three times stronger than Met...? I'm rambling now...not quite awake. That is why I put a disclaimer in my post. I wasn't sure about the Ecstasy claim. Thanks.Toke. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #37 posted by whig on September 27, 2007 at 01:24:04 PT
Toker00
Here's the thing... Is Calamus safe to take in any dose for any duration?Cannabis is.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #36 posted by whig on September 26, 2007 at 23:16:35 PT
Toker00
Calamus is not Ecstasy.Trimethoxyamphetamine is not Ecstasy.MDMA is. Methylenedioxymethamphetamine. Totally different chemical.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #35 posted by whig on September 26, 2007 at 23:15:29 PT
Toker00
"If you actually buy the Calamus translation for the Holy Oil, then you assume that God specified in Exodus 30:23 a drug commonly known as Ecstasy."Whoa. Whoa. Whoa.Calamus is not MDMA.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #34 posted by Wayne on September 26, 2007 at 21:50:42 PT
a few words for the asshat who wrote this article
"But for much of America — especially red states — the marijuana money trail isn’t the issue."Nobody asked the red states. These are after all the states who brought us our current President s*^&-for-brains. Whose God told him to invade foreign nations and spend lots of money. As far as I'm concerned, the red states should lose their seat at the table just because of that. And by the way, being that you're such a man of God, why should money be an issue AT ALL?"America prides itself on how many “right to’s” it can accumulate — right to self-expression, right to privacy, right to abortion, right to inhale mind-altering substances. The more “right to’s” there are, the better America supposedly is."Goddamn right. Personally, I always try to accumulate all of the 'right-to's' I can get my hands on. The Constitution tells us to (see amendments 9 and 10). Sir, are you mocking the Constitution? Surely not!"The legalization of pot would, at best, be self-gratification. This right would not serve the interests of God."I know several people who use cannabis in their religious practices who would strongly disagree with you, sir. And I firmly believe that cannabis has gotten me closer to God on more than just a couple of occasions.Because the God that I believe in loves me for who I am, because He created me the way I am. The God that I believe in is overjoyed that I come to talk to Him, even if it happens to be through the use of cannabis every now and then. And last but certainly not least, the God that I believe in will forgive me for my shortcomings when I fall short of His expectations. The God that I believe in doesn't lock people in their rooms without dinner until they decide to 'get with the program'. I'll never give up what I consider to be my rights, whatever they may be, simply because they make you and your kind uncomfortable. I would RATHER die. To hell with you and your kind, sir.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #33 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 20:59:55 PT
Taylor121
I remember something about the FDA not being able to regulate cannabis and that is one reason why it's hard to get the laws changed but I might not be right on that. I'm not concerned as much as I'm trying to find a loophole that could help cannabis get regulated if that would be a good thing but I haven't thought it through. Maybe someone will understand what I am trying to figure out but if not I understand because it's confusing to me. My poor little brain cell is working overtime tonight! LOL!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #32 posted by Taylor121 on September 26, 2007 at 20:45:25 PT
Yeah
The tobacco they put in cigs and other tobacco products isn't always just tobacco. They usually have additives. I'm not an expert on the subject though.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #31 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 20:13:56 PT
Taylor121
Oh the chemicals in tobacco not the tobacco plant itself? I didn't understand what she meant. Thanks. My thinking was they can't regulate cannabis because it's an herb so how could they regulate tobacco in it's pure form that is also an herb? 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #30 posted by Taylor121 on September 26, 2007 at 20:09:18 PT
FoM
They put extra chemicals in tobacco. That's what she's talking about I believe, and regulating nicotine levels.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #29 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 19:29:45 PT
Just a Question
I am watching the Democrats debate and Senator Clinton said she wants the FDA to regulate tobacco. Tobacco isn't a drug but an herb just like cannabis and they can't regulate cannabis so how could they regulate tobacco or vice versa? I could be wrong on this though.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #28 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 18:16:25 PT
Afterburner
I did and they are priceless! 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #27 posted by afterburner on September 26, 2007 at 18:11:07 PT
FoM #20 
Did you read the 51 comments? Priceless!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #26 posted by Toker00 on September 26, 2007 at 17:31:15 PT
Should I e-mail this to this Nit Wit?
Wanted to re-post for it's relevance to this article...Let's fight with a little Ancient Bible History... 
Most of you know this history but here it is again in case you want to share it or in case a new-by or two wants proof that Cannabis has historically been medicine from the beginning. Hopefully the person who sent this to me is as informed as I think they are. Let me know if any mistakes exist in this analysis.Marijuana in the Holy Oil? mfgersource Submits- " by Terry Winger Was there marijuana in the anointing oil as described in exodus 30:23?The original Hebrew for calamus, is Kaneh-bosem or Qaneh (Kaw-naw) Bosem. Some translations have this as fragrant cane or aromatic cane. Some researchers have argued that this is actually Sweet Cane or Sugar Cane, although the term sweet does not occur in the original manuscripts. Kaneh-Bos sounds remarkably close to the modern day word Cannabis. Could it be that cannabis was the plant given by God to be used in the Holy Anointing Oil?Cannabis has certainly been cultivated since the beginning of recorded history. Its uses for rope, sails and rigging into ancient times are well documented. Imagine the amount of cannabis rope it would have taken to construct the Temple of Solomon. What other way was there to construct ropes at that time, which could lift the weights of not only the Temple of Solomon, but in fact, the Pyramids themselves. Cannabis was thought to be an Indo-European word specifically of Scythian Origin. The Scythians were largely responsible for the spread of cannabis into Europe. The Scythe, was an invention of the Scythians, used for the harvest of cannabis. This has come to us in the legends of the Grim Reape. Herodotus, an early Greek ethnographer, in the 5th Century BC wrote of the Scythians and their use of cannabis. The Scythians as they were known by the Greeks, were known, by the Semites as the Ashkenaz. Among the earliest references to Ashkenaz people is found in Genesis 10:3 where Ashkenaz was listed as the son of Gomer, the great Grandson of Noah. The Sythians lived around and traded with the Semites at least as early as 600 BC. Zoroaster the prophet of the Ancient Magi, whose kings followed the Star of Bethlehem based on the ancient prophesies, used a drink called Haoma which has been documented to contain cannabis. As early as 1925 experts have argued that, both the Assyrians and the Babylonians, used Cannabis in their temple incense, Circa 500 BC. In 1993, the Albany New York Times Union reported, that the first physical evidence that Marijuana was used as a medicine in the ancient Mideast, was found. The Israeli scientists found residue of marijuana along with the skeleton of a girl who had died 1600 years before. In this press release, researchers from the Hebrew University, stated that references to marijuana as a medicine are seen as far back as 1,600 BC in Egyptian, Assyrian, Greek, and Roman Writings. If you actually buy the Calamus translation for the Holy Oil, then you assume that God specified in Exodus 30:23 a drug commonly known as Ecstasy. Calamus contains an ingredient called aserone. This is a hallucinogen which is metabolized in the liver as trimethoxyamphetami ne or ecstasy. The Middle Eastern version of this plant is far more toxic than it`s North American Cousin. This is deadly to flies and other insects.The Exodus 30:23 reference refers to sweet Calamus. If you look at this in the Strongs concordance where they spell this as qaneh rather than kaneh, they pronounce this as Kaw-Naw, a reed, calamus, and cane are listed as possible translations. The term sweet used in Exodus 30:23 in Hebrew is Bosem. According to the Webster's New World Hebrew Dictionary, Bosem is perfume; scent. The Concordance: the Hebrew is Bosem #1314, fragrance, by impl. spicery; also the balsam plant:----smell, spice, sweet (odour). In some Bibles sweet calamus is translated as aromatic or fragrant Cane. It is where the bosem is fused to the word kaneh or qaneh that the cannabis translation becomes apparent. So then to pronounce this we have kaw-naw-bosem, and is spelled in English qaneh-bosem or kaneh-bosem.In 1936, Sara Benetowa, later Known as Sula Benet, an etymologist from the Institute of Anthropological Sciences, in Warsaw wrote a treatise, "Tracing One Word Through Different Languages." This was a study on the word Cannabis, based on a study of the oldest Hebrew texts. Although the word cannabis was thought to be of Scythian origin, Benet's research showed it had an earlier root in the Semitic Languages such as Hebrew. Benet demonstrated that the ancient Hebrew word for Cannabis is Kaneh -Bosem. She also did another study called Early Diffusion and Folk Uses of Hemp. There is a reprint of this in Cannabis and Culture ISBN:90-279- 7669-4. On page 44, she states, "The sacred character of hemp in biblical times is evident from Exodus 30:23, where Moses was instructed by God to anoint the meeting tent and all of its furnishings with specially prepared oil, containing hemp." On page 41 Sula Benet writes: In the course of time, the two words kaneh and bosem were fused into one , kanabos or kannabus know to us from the Mishna. According to the Webster's New World Hebrew Dictionary, page 607 the Hebrew for hemp is kanabos. Sara Benetowa discovered that the Kaneh-Bosm or Cannabis is mentioned 5 times in the Old Testament. The first occurrence appears in the Holy Anointing Oil as Calamus, (Exodus 30:23). Sara argued that the translation of Calamus was a mistranslation which occurred in the oldest Bible the Septuagint and the mistranslation was copied in later versions.Cheers Terry Winger Producer of "The Fire Baptism and the Lost Sacraments" Toke. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #25 posted by Yanxor on September 26, 2007 at 17:05:02 PT
Pot legalization = shift to immorality?
This article is as wrong as it can possibly be. Not only does this individual not realize that god and state are totally seperate, but he thinks that until now our laws have been vastly serving god.Man-made laws are supposed to serve man, not an imaginary father-figure.And America's laws are already fully man-serving. We have legal precidence for divorce (not god serving) abortion (not god serving) patents (not god serving) minimum wage increases (not god serving). Point is...he is delusional. There is no god, and we're certainly not supposed to be crafting our laws to please a character in Kyle Klavetter's wild imagination. Even if an ungodly percentage of America is having the same hallucination.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #24 posted by Taylor121 on September 26, 2007 at 16:44:45 PT
Higher Learning
"This is a pretty sad reflection on the state of "higher learning" today if kids write like this."There are SOME idiots that are in higher education. This person shouldn't represent the whole spectrum of the intellectual scene, rather the religious right faction of that scene. There are all kinds of fringe views in universities which is why they're so great, since they are a free exchange of ideas. I wouldn't be surprised if that article was widely condemned to that newspaper's audience. Furthermore, the article was written with a poor understanding of ethical theory and how Americans view ethics and the whole concept of individual rights. Certainly from an utilitarian perspective, the ethical thing to do would be to legalize marijuana. From a rights point of view in the Locke sense (the philosopher that inspired the Declaration of Independence), this author's argument as to what a right is would be off-base. The basic rights of life, liberty, and the PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS are not to be qualified by any other criteria. Rights, by the common nature they are used in, are an end and are not to be judged by any other principle. Although a utilitarian could break a rights statement down into strong obligation, even then a right is something that is taken to mean a strong obligation that reduces suffering if taken seriously. I don't know what the hell this author was thinking. I guess he wanted to spin the definition of a right and try to mold his own definition consistent with his personal biblical moral code and force it on others.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #23 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 16:21:26 PT
charmed quark
 People that I know don't think the Constitution is followed anymore. They think it had good ideas but that's about it.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #22 posted by charmed quark on September 26, 2007 at 16:01:17 PT
So many want to flush the Constitution
"America Serves God". This is a big movement in recent years. Of course, the only 2 mentions of religion in the Constitution are 1)to restrict it - no religious test for office, and 2) to keep it out of religion - the first amendment establishing freedom of religion. The word God does not exist in the Constitution.The Constitution establishes this country as a secular state where the purpose of the state is to create an environment where individuals can decide what to do with their life. Yet a recent poll showed that 55% of Americans believe the Constitution establishes us as a Christian nation. 2/3rds of evangelicals. And this is one of the places it leads to - state control of what we can put in our bodies.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #21 posted by cannabliss on September 26, 2007 at 15:33:02 PT
whig
Thanks...they do make it easy sometimes, huh? ;-)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #20 posted by FoM on September 26, 2007 at 13:50:53 PT
Conservative Leaders No Easy Targets
Conservative Leaders No Easy Targets in Push for NY Medical Marijuana Legalization September 26, 2007http://rawstory.com//news/2007/potpartdeux_0926.html
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #19 posted by whig on September 26, 2007 at 11:10:51 PT
cannabliss #16
That was a most impressive takedown.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #18 posted by museman on September 26, 2007 at 09:25:42 PT
purpose -The Point
Dear sweet Oblio and Arrow proved to the world that the point was really pointless. However such innovative modern ethical updates have been thrown over for antiquated, medieval, simple-minded belief systems based on class distinction, economic comparisons, and religious mythos stretched to the point of illogical ridiculousness. The equation of "In God We Trust" happens to be printed on the most filthy substance known to man, it's double entendre meaning all but missed by the simple minded worker-class who are thoroughly indoctrinated into the power scheme of the ruling class.Ah, the author of this tripe no doubt felt quite superior with his usage of the language, an elegant rendering of empty air and ambiguity. Alas, his psuedo intellectua is revealed in his obvious ignorance of true facts, and his lame attempt to write 'God' into the immoral acts of this corrupt government, and it's filthy money mongers that sit in it's seats of power.Cannabis is the 'drug of truth.' No guarantees, but if you smoke it with purpose, the truth will be revealed. That is the "purpose" that is so greatly feared by the naked emporers clothed in their man-made illusions of wealth and propriety."God" is not god. That is a second-hand label for those who do not know. So is "Jesus." These 'names' are false, and have only the false power assigned to them by the ignorant, and the deceivers. The use of these 'names' to guilt-trip, and mind f--k the masses into submission has about reached it's terminal saturation, and Rome, as well as Babylon is finally reaching it's last days, even as the police state raises it's ugly head for one last violent struggle for supremacy. It's just a matter of time, and survival. I can just about guarantee no place for fools such as this author in the world to come, so I can see no reason to credit them with substance (especially since there isn't any to begin with) to this vocabular rendering of BS.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #17 posted by Truth on September 26, 2007 at 08:55:04 PT
1st page
The author knows better then God on the first page.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #16 posted by cannabliss on September 26, 2007 at 08:51:45 PT
Future National Review Columnist
A hallmark of the NR viewpoint is angry fascist screeds masked as thoughtful conservativism by dint of their gratuitous polysyllablism."But must the first steps on the road to recovering freedoms from the fount of Constitutional federalism make legalizing marijuana a salient point?""Economic or social progress mark fatuous successes if these are not attained in the pursuit of a greater purpose.""it marched to perdition..." "This political epistemology is antithetical to the American vision. The fountainhead of constitutional federalism springs waters meant to strengthen this country’s citizens for a pursuit greater than any individual’s capricious desires."OK, OK! I get it! You have a Word-Of-The-Day calendar! Now, please learn to actually write clearly! This is a pretty sad reflection on the state of "higher learning" today if kids write like this.Stripped to its core, the message of this piece is "God wants me to kill you if I don't like what you're doing."As I said - perfect National Review material - monstrous evil with a veneer of pretensiousness.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #15 posted by OverwhelmSam on September 26, 2007 at 08:29:46 PT
In The Name of God
Man will destroy himself by his own hand.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #14 posted by Zandor on September 26, 2007 at 07:54:16 PT
so no seperation of church & state?
Yet another mouth piece for the Christian right who believes we all should drop to our knees and worship at his alter of their version of god!"America is a purposed nation. America serves God. " This is another lie from the Christian right.What about our founding fathers who made it a point to exclude GOD from government? Guess he used that part of our constitution to wipe his ass just like Bush does every morning when he take a dump. He wipes his ass with our constitution and flushes our civil rights everyday! This is yet another glib mouth piece talk out the hole in his ass again!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #13 posted by mayan on September 26, 2007 at 05:16:07 PT
Serve Morality???
Who in the hell is morality? It seems Kyle Klavetter would rather us serve hard time!
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #12 posted by aolbites on September 26, 2007 at 00:24:04 PT
No It Does NOT!!!
America serves God.Bullshit. That is so so so so wrong...
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #11 posted by whig on September 25, 2007 at 22:49:09 PT
Republicans
Forbid marriage between people they disapprove, and they require abstinence from God's creation, Kaneh-bos.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #10 posted by whig on September 25, 2007 at 22:47:04 PT
1 Timothy 4:1-4
  Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will turn away from the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and demonic instructions2
  through the hypocrisy of liars with branded consciences.3
  They forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth.4
  For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving,
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #9 posted by whig on September 25, 2007 at 22:44:10 PT
180 degrees off
Kyle Klavetter has it exactly backwards.Cannabis is moral and Godly. Prohibition of cannabis is an evil work.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #8 posted by afterburner on September 25, 2007 at 22:03:25 PT
God Created Cannabis for our Food & Medicine
Jesus walked among us. Imagine the brutality he witnessed, not only to Himself, but also to all His creations. He walks among us still in the spirit-filled hearts of saints (believers still). We were created in His image: our feelings are reflections of His glorious feelings. Like Jesus, the saints experience the nastiness and feel sadness, and occasionally the joy of life's wonder.What would Jesus do? He would turn water into wine. He would anoint Himself and his followers with kaneh-bosm. He would feed the multitudes bread and fish. He gave us the story of the Good Samaritan. He wants us to care for each other. He wants us to care for the widows and the orphans and not to put stumbling blocks in their way. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #7 posted by Hope on September 25, 2007 at 21:01:04 PT
Kyle Klavetter
He's wrong. Perhaps, I should just say that I disagree with him... very much.Man made rules and laws. Puritanical human traditions. Don't have to love them.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by FoM on September 25, 2007 at 20:31:46 PT
Not a Nut And He Really Believes What He Says
That is what scares me. This is what has happened to the Republicans. This is the meaning of being a Conservative to many people. That's why I fear the Republican Party. 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by Taylor121 on September 25, 2007 at 20:27:08 PT
What a nut
No other words for this author.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by OverwhelmSam on September 25, 2007 at 19:58:57 PT
Dumb Ass Writer Lacks Purpose
Another terrified soul who believes that anarchy will ensue if pot is legalized. LOL 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by mykeyb420 on September 25, 2007 at 19:39:57 PT
oh my god
"The legalization of pot would, at best, be self-gratification. This right would not serve the interests of God. "whatever dude,,the god I believe in made the stuff in the first place,,,and HE dont make mistakes,,,mankind made it evil by making it illegal... throwing HIS children in jail for using something that HE made is soooo anti-god,, ya think in the bible belt,they would be more compassionate about it,,but Okieville must be stuck in the dark ages,,,,wake up america
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by dongenero on September 25, 2007 at 19:12:51 PT
Okay...that's scary
what more to say?
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by RevRayGreen on September 25, 2007 at 19:03:23 PT
Man's interests ?
d ^^n neo-con.So Beer has a purpose, I see.......not.
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment