cannabisnews.com: Situational Conservatives Situational Conservatives Posted by FoM on May 27, 2001 at 10:23:16 PT By F. T. Rea Source: Richmond.com On May 14, a 31-year-old federal law – the Controlled Substances Act – trumped California's state laws allowing for the supply of medical marijuana. The U.S. Supreme Court found in favor of the federal government and against the Oakland Cannabis Buyers' Cooperative. The loud cheer we heard in the background was from the right-wing crowd glad to hear the news. A good many of them have been calling themselves compassionate conservatives of late. This same cast of characters has long extolled the virtue of minimizing federal interference in the affairs of the 50 states. But since they are happy to defer to Uncle Sam on certain issues – especially on personal and medical matters – perhaps it would it be more appropriate to call this squirrelly batch of states-rights promoters situational conservatives. From my vantagepoint, it seems the strident opposition to medical marijuana only sees another battle line in their perpetual cultural warfare against anything they connect to the "permissiveness" of the '60s. Rather than noting the heartbreaking need of a terminal cancer patient, these compassionate partisans are concerned with what message recognizing the legitimacy of medical marijuana could send, as well as the slippery slopes toward legalization. As we know, the same news from the highest court was not applauded in all circles. No, the unlucky folks more likely to be denied access to relief from their chemotherapy-related nausea aren't cheering the Supreme Court's so-called wisdom. Still, the court's decision doesn't appear to overturn state laws such as Virginia's that allow for possession of marijuana with a prescription. The trick is in how to obtain the substance. A True Story: More than 20 years ago, I witnessed a scene that comes into my mind every time this topic comes up. The unusual transaction took place in an old friend's carriage house art studio. As planned, I showed up at about 5:15 p.m. to give my teammate a ride to a softball game scheduled to start at 6 p.m. As it turned out, we had to wait for his brother to stop by to score some pot. Although he was a regular consumer, my friend was not ordinarily a dealer in such commodities. On top of that, the artist's older brother was a buttoned-down lawyer who had never smoked pot in his life. So, on the face of it, the situation seemed odd. The artist explained that his brother had asked him to buy the pot for a senior partner at his law firm. The partner wanted it for a client of his who had an advanced form of cancer. Apparently the patient, a retired judge, had been told by his doctor that smoking marijuana might help. The doctor indicated he wasn't in a position to help with actually obtaining the contraband. As the story went, the judge asked his friend and personal attorney for some discreet help with the matter. Moments later, the blue-suited lawyer arrived and said his curt hellos. As he accepted the parcel – a brown paper bag containing a plastic bag filled with two ounces of primo weed – the lawyer laughed nervously and said toward me, "I suppose he told you what's going on?" I indicated that I was aware of the circumstances. Then I asked about something that had just occurred to me: Would this old judge know what to do with the stuff in order to smoke it? Did he know to remove the seeds and stems? Did he have a pipe or know how to roll a joint? The lawyer was stumped. But he admitted it was likely the old man would not know how to handle it. He chuckled and said this particular man, whose name wasn't mentioned, was about as old-fashioned and straight-laced as they come. "Good point," said the artist, pulling out a tablet of drawing paper. Then he started to create a set of written instructions, with simple pen-and-ink drawings to illustrate each step. As the guide was put together – it made us late for the softball game – the three of us polished off half a six pack of cold beer and talked about the bizarre situation. Finishing his mission of mercy, the artist had a few words for his always-cautious brother. In essence, my friend said – Here's this old judge, who would have been happy to throw any of us in jail yesterday for possession of this same bag. Now the judge is in a jam. His doctor can't help him. Neither could his accountant or his preacher. No, in his darkest hour of need, the judge had to turn to the only Good Samaritan available, an unrepentant hippie willing to break the law out of kindness for a stranger. Then my friend threw a pack of rolling papers into the bag so the novice pot-smoker would have what he needed to get started. By the way, for his services, he did not mark up the product or charge the blue suits one red cent. The Hard Truth: Since the Controlled Substances Act does not allow for an exception for "medical necessity," the Supreme Court basically threw up its hands and said it could find no way to protect California's suppliers of medical marijuana from federal prosecution. However, the jurists did not go so far as to say a patient with a doctor's prescription for marijuana was in any new jeopardy. Thus, the matter remains unsettled. As it's not always feasible for a person to grow his own medicine, I call for some reliable way of obtaining medical marijuana to be allowed for by Congress, pronto. The Old Dominion has permitted for its doctors to prescribe marijuana for cancer and glaucoma since 1979. And I don't believe it's any of the federal government's business to oversee what medicine is prescribed by a state-licensed doctor – Californian or Virginian – for his patient. Hey, if the patient says it helps and his doctor says it helps, why isn't that good enough for compassionate congresspersons? For humanitarian reasons, the argument of whether to allow for obtaining marijuana for doctor-authorized treatment simply must be separated from strategies for or against legalizing marijuana across the board. Bottom Line: Congress needs to sweep away the cobwebs and take a hard look at amending its Controlled Substances Act. Much has been learned about these matters since 1970. Naïve as it might sound, I'd still like to believe there's a difference between being conservative and being cruel. The opinions expressed here are the writer's own and do not necessarily reflect those of richmond.com, its management or its owners. Note: So-called "compassionate conservatives" aren't fighting for states' rights in the medical marijuana battle.Contact F. T. Rea at: ftrea richmond.com Newshawk: DdCSource: Richmond.comAuthor: F. T. ReaPublished: Monday May 21, 2001Copyright: 2001 Richmond.comWebsite: http://www.richmond.com/Contact: http://www1.richmond.com/about/contact.cfmOCBC Versus The US Governmenthttp://www.freedomtoexhale.com/mj.htmCannabisNews Medical Marijuana Archiveshttp://cannabisnews.com/news/list/medical.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #7 posted by FoM on June 13, 2001 at 12:04:17 PT F. T. Rea Thank You F. T. Rea,Maybe we will overcome someday! Thank you for the link too! Freedom To Exhale [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by F. T. Rea on June 13, 2001 at 11:30:27 PT: another rant of mine What a nice surprise to find my little essay on this site. Here’s the link to another piece on drugs I wrote -- I’m a freelance writer -- for the same folks at richmond.com. This one is about the Drug War. It’s called "War And Peace":Some of you may enjoy looking at it. As well, there are many other articles at that site, that were part of a series, called One-on-One, dealing with political/philosophical/cultural topics. -- F. T. Reaftrea richmond.com War and Peace [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by Dan Hillman on May 28, 2001 at 15:45:08 PT States rights. "Conservatives" only like "states rights" when it suits their needs. Otherwise, strictly centralized federal control will do quite nicely, thank you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by kaptinemo on May 28, 2001 at 11:10:18 PT: The ugly truth I'm sure you all caught the irony:"Finishing his mission of mercy, the artist had a few words for his always-cautious brother. In essence, my friend said – Here's this old judge, who would have been happy to throw any of us in jail yesterday for possession of this same bag. Now the judge is in a jam. His doctor can't help him. Neither could his accountant or his preacher. No, in his darkest hour of need, the judge had to turn to the only Good Samaritan available, an unrepentant hippie willing to break the law out of kindness for a stranger.That's what it all comes down to, doesn't it? An unjust law broken by those whose compassion outweighs any slavish devotion to a code written by racist bigots and perpetuated by those who seek to hide their own modern-day bigotry under color of law.And, in this case, and God knows how many others, to help people who would smilingly toss them in jail for their compassion were it not directed towards them.Cicero said it best: The Law is a whore that smiles at the man with the biggest purse. I'll bet the Supreme Court wore some very large s**t-eating grins that day. And for my money, still do.While patients suffer and die. Needlessly.Hey, Joyce! Frances! Pray you don't get cancer; Thanks to your zealotry, those whose suffering you've aided and abetted are far less likely now to share with you what you'd need to survive. [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by Lehder on May 27, 2001 at 19:35:34 PT What gives? What gives congress the wisdom to control how Carl Sagan does astronomy, Paul McCartney and John Lennon how to write music? You and me to live our lives? [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by dddd on May 27, 2001 at 18:36:15 PT Indeed this is an excellent article.Nice to see you m.o.g.dddd [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by military officer guy on May 27, 2001 at 15:08:28 PT brovo... that was awesome...i especially like these couple of lines "Congress needs to sweep away the cobwebs and take a hard look at amending its Controlled Substances Act. Much has been learned about these matters since 1970. Naïve as it might sound, I'd still like to believe there's a difference between being conservative and being cruel." we can win this war... [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: