cannabisnews.com: For Pain, Pleasure, or Caprice For Pain, Pleasure, or Caprice Posted by FoM on May 25, 2001 at 10:29:32 PT By Myles Kantor Source: LewRockwell.com The Supreme Court denied a medical necessity exemption to the Controlled Substances Act last week in United States v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Cooperative. I have examined this decision in another column. What I wish to do here is examine the assumptions and implications underlying the Controlled Substances Act and its ilk.Prohibition of medical marijuana is a flagrant consequence of drug prohibition in general. In their imperious fanaticism, the drug warriors will condemn a victim of cancer to periodic suffering. (William Bennett recently disdained medical marijuana initiatives as "little more than thinly veiled legalization efforts." Such is the icy compassion of puritans.)In his classic For a New Liberty, Murray Rothbard refers to the "totalitarian cage" imposed by "Pappa Government" that guts freedom of choice, writing in the context of drug prohibitions:Propagandize against cigarettes [or marijuana] as much as you want, but leave the individual free to run his own life. Otherwise, we may as well outlaw all sorts of possible carcinogenic agents – including tight shoes, improperly fitting false teeth, excessive exposure to the sun, as well as excessive intake of ice cream, eggs, and butter which might lead to heart disease. And, if such prohibitions prove unenforceable, again the logic is to place people in cages so that they will receive the proper amount of sun, the correct diet, properly fitting shoes, and so on. At their root, then, anti-drug laws are deprivations of our paramount self-ownership. (Thomas Szasz, "Drugs as Property: The Right We Rejected," in Our Right to Drugs: The Case for a Free Market.) Unfortunately, several opponents of the War on Drugs fail to ground their critique on this fundamental fact, instead making instrumental arguments. "The drug war can’t be won," they say, "so we should end it."The War on Drugs has been unsuccessful, but this obscures the larger point that the War on Drugs should not be successful. It is inherently illegitimate as much as it is instrumentally pitiful – a counter-constitutional, systematic offensive against freedom.When the authority-thirsty creature that is the State trespasses upon the self-ownership of drug users, it has issued a declaration of war against liberty to a totalitarian extent – totalitarian because the power to criminalize a non-aggressive recreation entails the power to criminalize anything. David Conway explains:Once governments are given the authority to restrict the liberty of some sane adults for what it considers their physical or moral welfare, there is no principled stopping point in terms of what governments will have the authority to prohibit. The consequence will be that virtually anything which anyone holds of most value may become prohibited to them on grounds of its being judged immoral or dangerous to them. There are practically no forms of activity in which sane adults like to engage that others are not able to find reasons to condemn as morally or physically bad for those who engage in them. This ranges from drinking alcohol and smoking tobacco, to eating certain types of food, to not taking exercise, to taking too much, engaging in dangerous sports, practising certain religions, not practising any religion, reading books on science, etc. Unless government draws the line at only prohibiting conduct that harms others against their will, no member of society can be secure in being able to do or have anything they most want and value. (Classical Liberalism: The Unvanquished Ideal, p. 19)Individuals suffering terminal illnesses have a salient justification for using narcotics, and those who would bar their alleviation are contemptible. Ultimately, though, freedom isn’t about needing a good reason. Whether to numb pain, seek pleasure, or fulfill a caprice, drug consumption is a property right of the most intimate order; and policies that impede this fundamental autonomy are expropriative vulgarities.The Communist Manifesto referred to "despotic inroads on the rights of property." James Madison wrote that man "has a property very dear to him in the safety and liberty of his person." For a Madisonian country, our current approach to drugs is positively Marxian.Complete Title: For Pain, Pleasure, or Caprice: Original Property and The Totalitarian Entailments of Anti-Drug LawsMyles Kantor edits -- http://www.FreeEmigration.com -- and lives in Boynton Beach, FloridaSource: LewRockwell.comAuthor: Myles KantorPublished: May 25, 2001Copyright: 2001 LewRockwell.comContact: rockwell mail.mises.orgWebsite: http://www.lewrockwell.com/Info: http://www.lewrockwell.com/about.htmlDL: http://www.lewrockwell.com/kantor/kantor52.htmlOCBC Verus US Governmenthttp://www.freedomtoexhale.com/mj.htmCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #4 posted by S.R.Hess on May 26, 2001 at 11:39:07 PT: Altered consciousness A friend of mine told me his theory about the making of drugs illegal. He [and I] believe drugs have been made illegal to control our consciousness. No mind expanding substances can be allowed in our Orwellian U.S. This, as you have pointed out, has stripped us of our most inalienable right-the right of self. Free thought is not tolerated in our society, let alone encouraged by allowing us to take into our own bodies the substances we feel appropriate. What has become of the land of the free, home of the brave? [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by SWAMPIE on May 26, 2001 at 00:23:05 PT THIS ASININE WAR This asinine war has got to go!We need to find and print the whole thing,or at least what is written here and pass it on to as many people as will read it!Our government is loaded with a$$holes/criminals who fund this whole mess off of our taxes,and the prison-industrial complex would become obsolete if more people would think this rationally,remove the blinders,rose-colored glasses,etc....There are alot of people who are very intelligent and just not interested in discussing this matter at all.these are the same people that carry the votes,but follow like sheep when it comes down to talking facts!Get out your printers and buy some paper!We will win!!!This is one great article!Onward through the fog!SWAMPIE [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by Dan Hillman on May 25, 2001 at 12:29:01 PT Drug war criminals headed for the dock. > In their imperious fanaticism, the drug warriors will condemn a victim of cancer to periodic suffering.Well put, Myles. Drug warriors listen up! Can you say "war crimes"? Can you say "Nuremberg trials"? I knew you could! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by JSM on May 25, 2001 at 11:59:22 PT Outstanding article This has to be one of the premier anti-drug articles I have seen at this site. Mr. Kantor has done an outstanding job. Congratulations! [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: