Posted on 06/06/2005 7:16:18 AM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
...logical thinking, even.
Scalia argues the peasants might not get it right and Congress cannot and, therefore, the all-knowing must judge (Scalia's adverance against other governments, notwithstanding) and, you are happy?! This is a commomlaw nation with no need of such Napoleonic pronuncications.
LOL! I wish it were so funny. Unfortunately I have seen the effects on those who use it chronically. It's not a pretty picture and far exceeds the negative effects of alcohol no matter what the potheads...ooops I mean libertarians say.
Ooooh! That's going to leave a mark.
Section 1a: With the exception of VAWA and Lopez.
Freedom is a far more complex condition than smoking a joint. In fact, marijuana use diminishes autonomous life and trivializes freedom.
Not disagreeing. Just asking for clarification.Are you opposing the claimant's decision based primarily upon his denial of cooperation with the accusor?
Exactly. Scalia really disappointed me today.
Why don't you tell me real people that are using MJ for severe illnesses..A good friend of mine who had been taking Chemo for Breast Cancer was so sick with nausea she could not eat a thing threw up all the time, was getting weaker daily from not eating and from Chemo which is a posion the Doctor's gave her many meds that did not work, she finally was prescibed Marijuana which took her nausea
away helped her to resume her appetite, tell me should she of just suffered needlessly because of people like you that have some pre-conceived idea about the use of Marijuana for medical puposes?
Would you let your child suffer needlessly or let her smoke MJ to ease her pain?
Lastly I had a good friend of mine who had been in a car accident he was given so many hard core narcotics by his Doctors he became hooked on Morophine which led him into the world of Heroin when the Dr's cut him off cold turkey now he's dead...
REAL People My dear with REAL Issues...
I don't know why, but I feel compelled to say at this point that I never actually smoked pot, in my entire life. Not into the drinking or smoking either -- not a religious thing, just not interested.
I was merely personalizing my take on the ruling, not attempting to express a personal life choice.
My views on marijuana remain my own views, unstated, at least for purposes of this discussion.
Thank you for the opportunity to clarify my statement.
Ginsberg is another cancer survivor. I guess the quest for big Federal gov't outweighs any personal feelings they may have...
Google Sativex®.
"However, many in the MS community say they can throw half, if not all, their meds away (meds for spasticity, spasms, pain, etc) by just using MJ."
Gotta love anecdotal stories.
No major medical organization supports smoked marijuana for MS.
"Based on the studies to date, it is the opinion of the National Multiple Sclerosis Society's Medical Advisory Board that there are currently insufficient data to recommend marijuana or its derivatives as a treatment for MS. Long-term use of marijuana may be associated with significant serious side effects. In addition, other well-tested, FDA-approved drugs are available, such as baclofen and tizanidine, to reduce spasticity in MS."
While we're at it, let's outlaw my outrageous 8.675% sales tax (in NYC) since I go to Jersey (interstate commerce) and buy tax free clothes.
I'm screaming the States rights too.
Let's see, if I have sex with my wife, I am subject to this kind of BS, because I could be using an out of STATE HOOKER instead. And you a NAM vet and all, do you not see where this ends? There is no end...
Lurker
I, personally, take Zanaflex (Tizanidine)...it works for me. I, also, know there are MJ derivatives.
But I do believe folks who say that MJ works for them when certain drugs fail to help them.
Not every drug is effective for every person.
And as far as side effects...heck, we MS patients are shooting ourselves up with interferons on a regular basis...side effects from MJ would not be something that would concern me.
OK, I skimmed a lot of the 750 replies so sorry if someone else brought this up, but to me the most important part of this decision was a footnote. Stevens all but said that if the studies cited by the NORML crowd are correct, then, as a matter of law, marijuana could not be considered a Schedule I drug (the "hardest," most closely regulated drugs, which have no redeeming quality and cannot be possessed at all).
According to the opinion, NORML has brought five lawsuits trying to get the federal government's Schedule I classification of marijuana overturned. All failed. Justice Stevens seems to be inviting them to try a sixth time, and is hinting at the blueprint for success, at least in his opinion (and, presumably, the opinion of the other justices who signed the opinion). In other words, he protected the precious Commerce Clause big government types love so much, while laying the framework for court-imposed nationwide legalization similar to California's in a few years.
What's the contradiction? The law in CA provides for exactly what I said generally happens to users.
The FDA has you blinded I see....
Like Vioxx and all the other non lethal drugs out there on the market....
I am in the Medical Field it's a racket I could tell you stories that would blow you off this thread, but I will just say that is why people have opted for Natural remedies Homepathic solutions to treat disease..
DO you really think the FDA wants to Cure Cancer or MS Healthcare is Big Buisness and they make no money from Marijuana use when they do you will find it legal...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.