To: *Wod_list
ping
To: getsoutalive
A friend with weed is a friend indeed!!
3 posted on
12/20/2001 4:50:34 PM PST by
Nitro
To: getsoutalive
Huh???:Wha...??? Hey ma-a-a-a-n!! Your right on dude!!
4 posted on
12/20/2001 4:52:13 PM PST by
keithtoo
To: getsoutalive
Clarence Thomas wrote "It is clear from the text of the Act that Congress has made a determination that marijuana has no medical benefits worthy of an exception." Thus cannabis is not medicine because Congress SAYS SO!No. He said it "has no medical benefits worthy of an exception."
6 posted on
12/20/2001 4:56:34 PM PST by
xm177e2
To: getsoutalive
I wish they would come up with a legal variant that improves appetite.
/john
To: getsoutalive
The argument that there is any major medical advantages to smoking dope is a lot of crap.
The "legalize it" lobby would be better served if it was honest and used the angle that it's much less dangerous and much less intoxicating than alcohol, and that sending someone to jail for possising it is beyond absurd.
I can never climb on the libertarian boat that wants alldrugs (even the most dangerous) legalized, but the time and resources we utilize going after people who smoke weed is crazy, given its relatively mild effects.
13 posted on
12/20/2001 5:30:45 PM PST by
AAABEST
To: getsoutalive
I'm all for "The Patch." But, inhaling any burning material is just plain stoooopid. I guess I'd be more inclined to the medical arguments if the lwwyers I see involved didn't have long, long ponytails and beards (and don't forget the little, gold-rimmed glasses!)
To: getsoutalive
I would say that your actual evidence is good.
The problem with the "medical marijuana" debate is that the pro-legal forces are being intellectually dishonest. No reputable doctor would EVER prescribe a medicine like marijuana, which is a cocktail of more than 40 active chemicals, some of which are carcinogenic.
Now, separating ONE chemical, doing research and clinical trials on it that are based on science is a good idea.
The anti-legal forces fear, correctly, that the agenda underlying "helping the sick people" has to do with recreational use of marijuana rather than medical use. Obviously being able to grow it yourself for "medical reasons" is de facto legalization, since cops won't be able to the intentions of the grower.
The PARS method is credible. Other methods that involve smoking the whole thing are not.
17 posted on
12/20/2001 5:59:35 PM PST by
ikka
To: getsoutalive
bump
To: getsoutalive
Wonder Weed or Devil Weed? Neither. And it doesn't matter anyway. An adult has the right to smoke anything they want.
To: getsoutalive
Not only has the SCOTUS ruled cannabis to be totally unworthy of consideration, the Attorney General has determined that its mere possession is as bad as bearing arms against the US and in support of the WTC bombers!
To: getsoutalive
"Your right to inhale or ingest stupifying substances shall not be infringed ... UNLESS you become a problem, an annoyance or a liability to me or to society ..."
30 posted on
12/20/2001 8:15:36 PM PST by
_Jim
To: getsoutalive
I really don't care if weed is a wonder medicine. I also don't care about making paper out of it, or all that other stuff. Don't get me wrong, that stuff is all great, but I just want to be able to smoke it legally. I am not sick, I just enjoy smoking the stuff once in a while. I pay taxes, I work hard, I never use a sick day. I am a moral person. I value my family, hard work, and the American way. I just can't understand why anybody would be concerned that I smoke a bowl or two in the quiet of the evening.
37 posted on
12/20/2001 8:51:06 PM PST by
shempy
To: getsoutalive
The dope grown here in Humboldt County flows more sap than Maple trees in Vermont in spring. Just passing by will make most people dizzy. They took 50,000 indoor plants this season and 20,000 outdoors. On Monday in one grow operation they took 2,000. Thats a lot of little feel good pills. And I will not work next to a pot head for well documented reasons.
To: getsoutalive
To my way of thinking, marijuana is less of a medical issue and more of a rights issue. I don't agree that the government should ban an herb such as mj from the personal use of its citizens, or spend our tax dollars financing the enforcement of this nonsense.
As a side note, an acquaintance controlled his schizophrenia with pot.
46 posted on
12/21/2001 7:50:49 PM PST by
Osinski
To: getsoutalive
Cannabis was never banned because it was a "drug".
It was banned because a certain company developed a new synthetic fiber (nylon) and needed hemp fiber out of the picture,before it's new product could gain a foothold in the market place.
The first salvo of the attack was with the "Marihuana Tax act of 1937"
That was a attempt to price it out of the market,couple that with a Federal Drug Agency that needed a new "bad guy" to stem the hemorraging of it's budgets and importance,Resulted in an out right ban.
My bet is that "lots of Campaign Contributions" and Scare tactics concerning a certain minority group was smoking it and raping white girls helped push it through Congress
50 posted on
12/21/2001 8:24:49 PM PST by
HP8753
To: getsoutalive
420 bump . . .
64 posted on
12/22/2001 6:53:39 AM PST by
BraveMan
To: getsoutalive
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson