Pubdate: Thu, 14 Jun 2001
Source: Boulder Weekly (CO)
Copyright: 2001 Bolder Weekly
Contact:  http://www.mapinc.org/media/57
Website: http://www.boulderweekly.com/
Author: Danny Terwey, Jane Marcus, Christopher Largen, Myron Von
Hollingsworth
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/ocbc.htm (Oakland Cannabis Court Case)
Referenced: http://www.mapinc.org/drugnews/v01/n916/a09.html

POT, THE WONDER DRUG 

Bravo for the outstanding editorial that lambasted the Supreme Court for
their asinine interpretation of law in the recent medical marijuana case
(In Case You Missed It, "Conservatives for federalism," May 17-23). 

Now let me offer a few qualifiers. Timothy McVeigh used hideous and
dishonorable tactics. I hope I will never even consider using such means
to express my disgust with our federal government. However, if we wish
to see more people like Timothy McVeigh step forward with such tactics,
all we need do is let the federal government get away with such tyranny. 

Danny Terwey, Santa Cruz, Calif. 

- ------------------------------------------------

"It would be sending the wrong message to the children" is one of the
standard responses to arguments in support of medical marijuana. 

I'm convinced that by keeping marijuana a Schedule One Controlled
Substance, the federal government is sending the wrong message to my
14-year-old daughter. 

Our daughter's Sunday school teacher, a close family friend, contracted
HIV through a blood transfusion in 1982. Diagnosed more than a decade
later, AIDS eventually caught up with her. The side effects of the
medications she took forced her to stop teaching. She couldn't eat and
was being fed through a tube. She wasted away and looked like a
skeleton. After visiting her my daughter had nightmares. 

In January 1997, California's Compassionate Use Act, Proposition 215,
went into effect and we encouraged our friend to try cannabis, since she
clearly qualified for its use. As a Sunday school teacher, she thought
it would send the wrong message to her students. We finally convinced
her to try it in private. Within weeks she was eating voraciously. She
was out and about, enjoying herself. She returned to the classroom. 

Our young daughter saw the transformation. This unique medicine gave our
friend two more years of life. In May 1999, our friend died from a
ruptured pancreas, a result of the highly toxic AIDS medications she
took. 

My daughter fully understands that Congress has made possession of
marijuana a federal crime. I recently asked her whether the mixed
messages confused her and how she could reconcile the government's
stance with her own direct experience. "No, I'm not confused," she said.
"They're just stupid." 

I want the next generation to be able to look up to our government and
elected leaders. My daughter sees through the government's stubborn
refusal to admit to marijuana's obvious medical benefit and the
disinformation campaign used to support that inhumane position. And that
sends the wrong message to my kid. 

Jane Marcus, Palo Alto, Calif. 

- -------------------------------------------------

The Supreme Court ruling against medical marijuana reflects the
hypocrisy of the federal government. 

Justice Clarence Thomas stated that marijuana has "no currently accepted
medical use." If this is true, why does the federal government give my
friend George McMahon a monthly supply of 300 pre-rolled medical
marijuana cigarettes, courtesy of our tax dollars? 

George is one of only eight citizens in the US who continue to receive
marijuana through the Compassionate Investigational Drug program, which
was implemented under Reagan. George has a rare genetic disorder called
Nail Patella Syndrome, which causes bone deformities and painful
spasticity. His doctors state that if it were not for his supply of
government marijuana, which eases nausea and spasms, he would probably
be dead, and he has already lived 10 years beyond the life expectancy
for people with his disorder. Although George smokes 10 marijuana
cigarettes a day, he is eloquent and perceptive, and has spoken to
legislators, educators, doctors, and law enforcement officials. 

The DEA classifies marijuana as a Schedule One substance, which
recognizes no medical value in cannabis, and the Supreme Court ruling
reflects that opinion. Doctors can prescribe cocaine and morphine, but
not marijuana, and this has little to do with public health. The
pharmaceutical industry has a strong lobbying influence in Washington.
Marijuana cannot be patented in its natural form, but could be grown
easily by patients, and legal drug companies might lose a considerable
profit if marijuana were viewed as an acceptable medical alternative for
dying or chronically ill patients. 

The call for research operates in a circular fashion. When
pro-decriminalization groups push for drug law reform, the government
says more research is needed. However, we lack sufficient research
because of the drug laws, and legitimate scientists, who seek to perform
controlled empirical tests on marijuana, face a daunting gauntlet of
bureaucratic hurdles. In the meantime, while drug companies,
politicians, and lawyers wrestle over where to draw the line in the
sand, sick and dying people are arrested. We should not politicize
pharmacology. Our descendants may one day mock this folly. 

Christopher Largen, The Colony, Texas 

- ----------------------------------------------

Cannabis has no lethal dose and its pharmacological effects have never
caused a single death in more than 5,000 years of recorded history. 

The (unseen) driving force against medical (or unrestricted adult)
legalization of cannabis is the fact that cannabis can't be patented.
This precludes the need for big business to be involved and that fact
makes cannabis commercially unattractive to the pharmaceutical, tobacco
and alcohol industries (lobbies). It seems that if it can't be
profitized successfully the government can't justify legalization even
for the sick and dying. 

Furthermore, the war on cannabis drives the war on drugs. Without
cannabis prohibition, the drug war would be reduced to a pillow fight.
This is the politics and the economics of cannabis prohibition. 

Maybe the corrupt politicians and media are required to adhere to the
party line of cannabis prohibition because law enforcement, customs, the
prison and military industrial complex, the drug testing industry, the
"drug treatment" industry, the INS, the CIA, the FBI, the DEA, the
politicians themselves et al can't live without the budget
justification, not to mention the invisible profits, bribery, corruption
and forfeiture benefits that prohibition affords them. 

The drug war also promotes, justifies and perpetuates racist enforcement
policies and is diminishing many freedoms and liberties that are
supposed to be inalienable according to the constitution and bill of
rights. 

Myron Von Hollingsworth, Fort Worth, Texas
- ---
MAP posted-by: Doc-Hawk