cannabisnews.com: Medical Marijuana Foes Irked Medical Marijuana Foes Irked Posted by FoM on September 07, 2000 at 08:49:59 PT By John Sanko, DRMN Capitol Bureau Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News Legislative Blue Book omits group's argument. Critics of a plan to legalize the medical use of marijuana say the November ballot issue sends the wrong message to Colorado's children, but they won't get that argument in the state's official Blue Book.Lawmakers decided against adding the warning Wednesday after the measure's supporters said its passage actually would send the right message to youngsters that marijuana is not for recreational use. Rather than sending mixed signals in the state's official publication explaining the pros and cons of ballot issues facing Colorado voters on Nov. 7, members on the Legislative Council voted to scrap both arguments.About 1.6 million Blue Books will be printed by the state to describe the 12 measures that will be on the ballot. The medical marijuana proposal was discussed at length as legislators spent a second full day working on the pamphlet's wording.If Amendment 20 is approved by voters, it would allow the medical use of marijuana in Colorado for those seriously or chronically ill if approved by a doctor.Former U.S. Attorney Mike Norton, who is general counsel and treasurer for Coloradans Against Legalizing Marijuana, urged that the pamphlet include a warning that "government endorsed and approved marijuana, even though by a vote of the people, would send a terrible message to our children."But Luther Symons, a spokesman for Coloradans for Medical Rights 2000, argued that passage of similar measures in Oregon, Washington and elsewhere actually had sent a good message to youngsters."When viewed as medicine, it sends the opposite message to children," Symons said. "It sends a message it is a serious drug and is not to be used recreationally."Opponents and backers of the various ballot issues jockeyed for the wording that they thought was most favorable to them. In one case, the argument involved whether to use bullets or checkmarks to explain requirements of Amendment 24, a ballot measure designed to control unchecked growth.Attorney Joan Fritsche, who represented opponents to the measure, argued that bullets should be used in place of checkmarks which "connote approval while bullet points are neutral." Legislators, with their staff's recommendation, agreed and approved the change.The Blue Books are scheduled to go to the printer Monday.Published: September 7, 2000 Source: Denver Rocky Mountain News (CO)Copyright: 2000 Denver Publishing Co.Contact: letters denver-rmn.comAddress: 400 W. Colfax, Denver, CO 80204Website: http://www.denver-rmn.com/ Related Articles & Web Site:Coloradans For Medical Rights http://www.medicalmarijuana.com/Drug Policy Forum of Coloradohttp://www.drugsense.org/dpfco/Personal Becomes Political for MMJ Issue Advocatehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6842.shtmlDeadline Today for Ballot Petitions http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6642.shtmlPopular Themes for Ballot Initiatives http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread6493.shtmlCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archives:http://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on September 08, 2000 at 12:29:47 PT: Messages If the Government is so concerned with 'messages', how about this one: It has been providing bona fide *prescriptions* for cannabis to the remaining 8 members of the Compassionate Use Program since the 1970's. Why is it that they refuse to bring that up? Why do they convenently 'forget' that? Afraid of the message that *that* would send? That cannabis IS a medicine, otherwise, how could they PRESCRIBE it? (That's right folks, the stuff the U of Miss grows for the US Guv comes in packages with *prescription* labels on it, SPECIFYING WHAT CONDITIONS IT IS MEANT TO ALLEVIATE.) It already IS considered a medicine! How's *that* for hypocrisy?Some days I wished I'd studied law instead of 'ballistics'; there's simply so much factual information out there, so much figurative ammunition for a lawyer who's seriously considering challenging the Guv's position, that I fail to see how anyone can miss bringing it up in court. If it could all be assembled in one place, in one suit, in a truly neutral court, and thrown at the antis in one go, they'd be laughed out of the courtroom, and slink away in well-earned shame. Messages imply communication. Communication implies a two way transfer of information. Feedback. Someone should tell the antis that we are all tired of their dreary, monotonous monologues and come up with some new material. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by MikeEEEEE on September 07, 2000 at 16:07:39 PT Ha Ha Are we born propaganda makers, do we go around sending messages, ha ha, ignorance is funny, in the case of the drug war it dangerous. [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by Kanabys on September 07, 2000 at 10:54:57 PT I don't know about everyone else, but I am really getting SICK & TIRED of this "Send a Message" crap!!! How can anyone send a message to anyone else when they can't get "the message" themselves that the majority of voters would support MMJ? Geez, I'm disgusted with their 'witty' little phrases!! [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: