cannabisnews.com: Allow Medical Marijuana 





Allow Medical Marijuana 
Posted by FoM on December 16, 2000 at 07:46:45 PT
Editorial
Source: Providence Journal
Ever since voters in California and Arizona approved measures to legalize medical marijuana, in 1996, the federal government has scrambled to counter any idea that a controlled substance could be legally permissible and beneficial.Drug czar Barry McCaffrey responded unsuccessfully by trying to strip pot-dispensing doctors of their prescription-writing privileges. 
The government also implemented a five-year, $2 billion (half-public, half-private) federal campaign to convince the public that such drugs are bad in all circumstances. The result: Voters in Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Maine, Oregon, Washington, Nevada and Colorado all joined the prescription-pot party.But the government still isn't giving up. Last month, the Clinton administration asked the U.S. Supreme Court to apply the federal law criminalizing distribution and possession of marijuana to doctors prescribing the drug to patients in California. The court has agreed to hear the case. We hope it will let the states and their voters decide whether they want medical marijuana.Granted, marijuana can have negative health effects. It is a known toxin, and extended use can endanger the lungs, the reproductive system and the immune system. These are among the reasons it was declared illegal in 1937. But 10 raw potatoes or a pound of nutmeg can be toxic, too. So far as we know, no one has died of a marijuana overdose, and many more potent and dangerous drugs, including alcohol, are legal.One legally prescribed drug is Marinol, which contains synthetic THC. (THC is the active ingredient in marijuana.) Marinol is prescribed to quell nausea and stimulate hunger, just as is marijuana.Naturally, the real stuff is more effective. So why is the government so opposed to allowing medical marijuana? It opposes it although study after study and testimonial after testimonial have proved its effectiveness in relieving pain. And it fights it despite the clear intent of the voters in eight states, despite the fact that in several polls at least two-thirds of the public supports medical marijuana, and despite the fact that a less-effective ersatz version is legal.Perhaps the government's problem is pride. Considering the effort and costs expended on the increasingly ridiculous war on drugs, the government can't afford to be wrong. Marijuana has to be bad! And the more than 10 million marijuana users arrested since 1968? Could the government have made a mistake? Could marijuana actually have beneficial effects? No! Never!This is not a case of voters not knowing what is good for them. The growing evidence clearly supports the beneficial effects of marijuana in alleviating suffering. The will of the people seems clear. And any pretense that medical marijuana undermines the war on drugs is laughable, considering that the number of high school seniors reporting that they have used marijuana has risen from 33 percent in 1992 to 50 percent in 1999, according to the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency.There are few reasons to ban medical marijuana. Perhaps the only satisfactory explanation is that federal policymakers have spent too much time, er, researching the topic. Source: Providence Journal, The (RI)Published: December 16, 2000Copyright: 2000 The Providence Journal CompanyAddress: 75 Fountain St., Providence RI 02902Contact: letters projo.comWebsite: http://www.projo.com/CannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml
END SNIP -->
Snipped
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help




Comment #3 posted by Frank on December 17, 2000 at 04:58:05 PT
The Evil is Washington not Marijuana
“It is a known toxin, and extended use can endanger the lungs, the reproductive system and the immune system. These are among the reasons it was declared illegal in 1937.” This is an absolute lie. The reason marijuana is illegal is political and for no other reason. The marijuana laws are used to control "undesirables" i.e.: Hispanics, Blacks, Jazz musicians and FreeThinkers (young people of the 60’s). If you are not willing to “Kiss Up” to the bullyboys of Washington this is one of the tools they will use against you.  In reality they don’t give a damn about marijuana, it’s about power and control of you and anyone else who would dare say no to them. One of the greatest evils that exists today is the Jackbooters’ of Washington, DC. These people are a direct threat to you, your family, the Bill or Rights and the American Constitution.  
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by Dan B on December 16, 2000 at 21:31:53 PT:
Actually, It Is Mostly Correct
I agree that it is a stretch to call marijuana a "toxin," but much of this article is actually accurate. I like that the author comes out in favor of liberty with regard to medical marijuana. I like that the author points out the arguments in favor of marijuana as opposed to Marinol. I like that the author points out as false the government's reasoning that "Marijuana has to be bad!" simply because they have spent too much money, damaged too many lives, and ultimately are too prideful to accept the truth.And I like that the author agrees that, even if marijuana were toxic (as the government continually tries to convince us), that's really not the point. People know that tobacco has toxic effects, but that doesn't mean we should not be able to decide legally whether we want to smoke it. And I think that's why the author threw this counterargument in--to make that point. One of the best ways to argue against an opponent is to first agree with his or her premise, then show why his or her conclusions do not logically follow from those premeses.On the whole, I think the author did a pretty good job.Dan B
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by disgusted on December 16, 2000 at 09:47:55 PT
This paper is crap
I hope those of you who live in Rhode Island will write oin protest of the blatant lies and misinformation in this article."It is a known toxin," etc. That line is a lie. Everything that follows that line is a lie or distortion. Why should you listen to ANY paper that lies or, at the least, fails to fact-check what it prints?
[ Post Comment ]


Post Comment


Name: Optional Password: 
E-Mail: 
Subject: 
Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]
Link URL: 
Link Title: