[elohiym]

According to the New York Times, the AP, and other media outlets. This week the VA was supposed to announce a policy that would allow sick veterans to use medical marijuana if they are legally allowed to use it in their state. According to the New York Times...

The Department of Veterans Affairs will formally allow patients treated at its hospitals and clinics to use medical marijuana in states where it is legal, a policy clarification that veterans have sought for several years.

A department directive, expected to take effect next week, resolves the conflict in veterans facilities between federal law, which outlaws marijuana, and the 14 states that allow medicinal use of the drug, effectively deferring to the states.

Well, turns out that's not true...at all. In fact, the policy appears to be saying the opposite. It's as though the New York Times and all those other media outlets didn't even read the VA policy before writing about it. Here is the policy from the new directive on the VA website:

POLICY: VA providers must comply with all Federal laws, including the Controlled Substances Act. Due to marijuana’s classification as a Schedule I drug under the Controlled Substances Act, it is VHA policy to prohibit VA providers from completing forms seeking recommendations or opinions regarding a Veteran’s participation in a state medical marijuana program. If a Veteran presents a prescription or authorization for medical marijuana to a VA provider or pharmacist, VA will not provide marijuana nor will it pay for the prescription to be filled by a non-VA entity. NOTE: Possession of medical marijuana by Veterans while on VA property is in violation of VA regulation 1.218(a)(7) and places them at risk for prosecution under the Controlled Substances Act.

So nothing has changed.

[aSeattleConserv]

The medicinal marijuana movement is a phony ploy by the "dopertarian movement" to legalize marijuana (and later all recreational narcotics).

"All marijuana use is medicinal," according to Dennis Peron, a candidate for Governor in California and founder of the Cannabis Cultivators Club, the now-legal outlet for purchasing marijuana.

What makes the whole issue even more of a farce is the total lack of evidence that marijuana smoking has any positive medical impact. The opposite is more likely the case. Marijuana smoke, which has more than 2000 different chemicals in it, causes lung damage, increases the risk of pneumonia, and, in spite of claims to the contrary, actually weakens the immune system for cancer and AIDS patients. In short, there is no support for the concept of marijuana use as a medicine, beyond temporary relief of nausea -- which can be achieved with more effective legally prescribed drugs which have none of the harmful side effects of smoking marijuana.

The catch is defining "medicinal." To most folks, including most voters, the image we conjure up is an unfortunate fellow diagnosed with some incurable cancer or disease; puffing on a joint helps relieve the suffering a bit. That is the "compassionate use" aspect of it. If this were the truth, legalization for medicinal use would not seem out of line.
But the real-life scenario is much different. Take, for example, "Anthony," who, under California's new law qualifies as a "seriously ill patient" who can openly purchase and publicly use "medicinal" marijuana. His illness is rather unusual. He suffers from "officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse."
http://www.electricnevada.com/pages98/ira_0621.htm

[PlastikBuddha]

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

But the real-life scenario is much different. Take, for example, "Anthony," who, under California's new law qualifies as a "seriously ill patient" who can openly purchase and publicly use "medicinal" marijuana. His illness is rather unusual. He suffers from "officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse."
http://www.electricnevada.com/pages98/ira_0621.htm

Does a hernia from overstrenous intercourse hurt less than any other kind that he should be denied treatment for it? What's your point?
I'm curious- as a conservative is it your default position to leave the power to decide what people should do with their own bodies as the responsibility of the government or are things like marijuana and homosexuality exceptions?

[aSeattleConserv]

Originally Posted by PlastikBuddha

Does a hernia from overstrenous intercourse hurt less than any other kind that he should be denied treatment for it? What's your point?

My point is that the dopers that are passing off medicinal marijuana as a compassionate way to help the terminally ill, are using it for their own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

"Take, for example, "Anthony," who, under California's new law qualifies as a "seriously ill patient" who can openly purchase and publicly use "medicinal" marijuana. His illness is rather unusual. He suffers from "officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse." (If Anthony's diagnosis is correct, I expect to see a lot of senior citizen men buying rolling papers in the convenience stores, now that Viagra's on the market.)
When I first read this, I about laughed my head off. Talk about a phony excuse to smoke dope. But in fact he supposedly has a doctor's "oral" prescription and quite legally smokes pot four or five times a day. Currently 39 years old, Anthony admits to having used marijuana since age 16, and calls himself a "potaholic."

I'm curious- as a conservative is it your default position to leave the power to decide what people should do with their own bodies as the responsibility of the government or are things like marijuana and homosexuality exceptions?

I guess it depends on what you think the role of government is for.
I'll go with the following:

"The Lord established three fundamental institutions for the governance of men: family, the Church, and civil government. While these three institutions are separate spheres of authority under God, they clearly have mutually supportive, interwoven functions.

... the ruler, "is the minister of God to thee for good" (vs. 4). The ruler is God's minister, His diakonos. He is a deacon, a laborer, a ministrant, an attendant to people for God. As the derivation of diakonos shows, he is one who runs errands: God's errands. In particular, he is to be a Christian teacher and pastor. If the ruler is the minister of God to men for good, then he must rule in accordance with God's judgment of the good, not man's willful, subjective desire to redefine the good.

The teaching, pastoring function of the ruler or magistrate is of crucial importance. We are popularly told today that the government should not seek to enforce morality — especially (Surprise!) Christian morality — because "you can't legislate morality." Clearly, this contention is at best a half-truth, and as such is a dangerous distortion. It is a distortion which fits quite well with the Humanist canard that "you can't mix religion and politics." All law commands human action; it seeks either to restrain or to urge particular actions. It necessarily says either "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not," and it backs these commands to action or restraint with coercion, with sanctions enforced by the power of the sword."
http://reformed-theology.org/html/is...government.htm

That being said, let's see what Scripture says about intoxication:

"Why does God tell us not to get drunk? Because life is a spiritual battle, and we must be self-controlled and alert (1 Thess. 5:6). First, we need to be alert in order to serve God. God wants us constantly tuned into Him, and people have needs at very unexpected times. The servant of God is always “on call,” and must be ready and willing to serve. Second, our enemy, the Devil, prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour (1 Pet. 5:8). Satan’s evil spirits usually infiltrate people through their minds, and Scripture is replete with instructions about properly managing our minds by controlling our thoughts and making them godly thoughts.

Drugs used to alter one’s mental state and thus “escape reality” do the same thing that excess alcohol does, that is, they render a person “out of control” of his mind. As with alcohol, the individual who is “high” on drugs is in no position to fulfill the command to “be alert and self-controlled.” Many drugs are hallucinogenic, and a hallucination is “a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; or delusion.” In the Bible, the Greek word for “truth” means “reality.” Satan’s goal is to get people to act upon a false reality."
http://www.truthortradition.com/modu...ticle&sid=1033

[Paulos]

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

My point is that the dopers that are passing off medicinal marijuana as a compassionate way to help the terminally ill, are using it for their own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

You mean like how Rush Limbaugh passed off his prescription for OxyContin and used it for his own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh?

Many medicines can be abused for selfish reasons. Just because a medicine can be abused does not mean that it doesn't have a legitimate medical use, and marijuana does have many legitimate medical uses. See here for examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical...l_applications

[aSeattleConserv]

Originally Posted by Paulos

You mean like how Rush Limbaugh passed off his prescription for OxyContin and used it for his own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh?

Go through cochlear implant surgery and get back to me.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=34902

Many medicines can be abused for selfish reasons. Just because a medicine can be abused does not mean that it doesn't have a legitimate medical use, and marijuana does have many legitimate medical uses. See here for examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical...l_applications

If I want information on "the mating practices of the Foothill Yellowed Legged Frog", I'll use Wikipedia. For anything controversial, it IS manipulated.
http://www.seomoz.org/blog/the-dark-side-of-wikipedia

[Squishes]

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

Drugs used to alter one’s mental state and thus “escape reality” do the same thing that excess alcohol does, that is, they render a person “out of control” of his mind. As with alcohol, the individual who is “high” on drugs is in no position to fulfill the command to “be alert and self-controlled.” Many drugs are hallucinogenic, and a hallucination is “a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; or delusion.” In the Bible, the Greek word for “truth” means “reality.” Satan’s goal is to get people to act upon a false reality."
http://www.truthortradition.com/modu...ticle&sid=1033

I have to conclude that you've never smoked pot before. Marijuana does not render a person "out of control", and they certainly are not the risk-takers that drunk people tend to be.

[Paulos]

Originally Posted by Squishes

I have to conclude that you've never smoked pot before. Marijuana does not render a person "out of control", and they certainly are not the risk-takers that drunk people tend to be.

I agree... It is apparently the case that marijuana causes paranoia in people who have never smoked it.

Drunkenness is certainly sinful, as scripture warns against getting drunk in numerous places, but nowhere in the Bible are we told that alcoholic wine should be illegal. Even the most draconian portions of the Mosaic law make no such pronouncement in that regard. In fact, scripture actually makes numerous references to the use of fermented wine. 1 Corinthians 4:6 says that we are "not to think beyond what is written", so the prohibitionist position actually violates scripture, because nowhere in scripture does it state that these things should be illegal.

"[T]he science is clear that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana." -- Source: Dr. Aaron M. White, Duke University Medical Center, Newsweek, June 25, 2007; Available URL: http://www.newsweek.com/id/33729/output/print

If the Bible never made alcoholic wine illegal, and "the science is clear that alcohol is more dangerous than marijuana", why should any Christian believe that marijuana should be illegal?

[aSeattleConserv]

Originally Posted by Squishes

I have to conclude that you've never smoked pot before. Marijuana does not render a person "out of control", and they certainly are not the risk-takers that drunk people tend to be.

Smoking a few doobies and tossing back some cold ones with the boys doesn't make you an expert on either.

Let's read from those that are:

http://www.justice.gov/dea/demand/speakout/01so.htm

[rexlunae]

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

My point is that the dopers that are passing off medicinal marijuana as a compassionate way to help the terminally ill, are using it for their own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

"Take, for example, "Anthony," who, under California's new law qualifies as a "seriously ill patient" who can openly purchase and publicly use "medicinal" marijuana. His illness is rather unusual. He suffers from "officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse." (If Anthony's diagnosis is correct, I expect to see a lot of senior citizen men buying rolling papers in the convenience stores, now that Viagra's on the market.)
When I first read this, I about laughed my head off. Talk about a phony excuse to smoke dope. But in fact he supposedly has a doctor's "oral" prescription and quite legally smokes pot four or five times a day. Currently 39 years old, Anthony admits to having used marijuana since age 16, and calls himself a "potaholic."

There's some truth to this. All you have to do is walk down Venice Beach to see that how marijuana is marketed has little to do with real necessity and a lot to do with finding an excuse to circumvent federal law.

That being said, the more fundamental problem is that prohibition is really an overstepping of federal authority, not to mention a really bad idea. It makes sense to regulate drugs at the federal level. But banning anything should be the result of a serious evaluation of the real harm done by it versus the cost to liberty of prohibition. And the policy of the U.S. against marijuana is absolutely disproportionate to the harm that it can do.

And because the demand for the drug is so high, prohibition distorts our entire system of government by forcing states to pass laws contradicting federal law, it empowers criminal drug lords, making the sources less safe than they otherwise could be, it distorts medicine by politicizing the evidence of the benefits and risks, and it robs innocent, peaceful people who have a legitimate desire to use the drug recreationally of their liberty. It's just not worth it.

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

I guess it depends on what you think the role of government is for.
I'll go with the following:

"The Lord established three fundamental institutions for the governance of men: family, the Church, and civil government. While these three institutions are separate spheres of authority under God, they clearly have mutually supportive, interwoven functions.

A minority view even amongst conservatives. I hope you can understand why most of the rest of us aren't going to adopt this understanding.

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

That being said, let's see what Scripture says about intoxication:

"Why does God tell us not to get drunk? Because life is a spiritual battle, and we must be self-controlled and alert (1 Thess. 5:6). First, we need to be alert in order to serve God. God wants us constantly tuned into Him, and people have needs at very unexpected times. The servant of God is always “on call,” and must be ready and willing to serve. Second, our enemy, the Devil, prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour (1 Pet. 5:8). Satan’s evil spirits usually infiltrate people through their minds, and Scripture is replete with instructions about properly managing our minds by controlling our thoughts and making them godly thoughts.

Drugs used to alter one’s mental state and thus “escape reality” do the same thing that excess alcohol does, that is, they render a person “out of control” of his mind. As with alcohol, the individual who is “high” on drugs is in no position to fulfill the command to “be alert and self-controlled.” Many drugs are hallucinogenic, and a hallucination is “a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; or delusion.” In the Bible, the Greek word for “truth” means “reality.” Satan’s goal is to get people to act upon a false reality."
http://www.truthortradition.com/modu...ticle&sid=1033

I take it that you're an advocate of prohibition of alcohol as well, right?

[aSeattleConserv]

Originally Posted by rexlunae

That being said, the more fundamental problem is that prohibition is really an overstepping of federal authority, not to mention a really bad idea. It makes sense to regulate drugs at the federal level. But banning anything should be the result of a serious evaluation of the real harm done by it versus the cost to liberty of prohibition. And the policy of the U.S. against marijuana is absolutely disproportionate to the harm that it can do.

I forgot, sin and the destruction of human life is a "States Rights matter". I wonder if God see's it that way?

And because the demand for the drug is so high, prohibition distorts our entire system of government by forcing states to pass laws contradicting federal law, it empowers criminal drug lords, making the sources less safe than they otherwise could be, it distorts medicine by politicizing the evidence of the benefits and risks, and it robs innocent, peaceful people who have a legitimate desire to use the drug recreationally of their liberty. It's just not worth it.

Cite your source (let me guess: High Times?).

A minority view even amongst conservatives. I hope you can understand why most of the rest of us aren't going to adopt this understanding.

It goes without saying. (I'll say it anyway). You're liberals.

I take it that you're an advocate of prohibition of alcohol as well, right?

Someone asked me the other day how I felt about the push to legalize marijuana. My response: Like we don't already have enough alcoholics.

[PlastikBuddha]

Originally Posted by aSeattleConserv

My point is that the dopers that are passing off medicinal marijuana as a compassionate way to help the terminally ill, are using it for their own selfish purpose: to get hiiiiiiiiiiiigh.

And?

Should we also deny people painkillers because some people use them to get hiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiigh?

"Take, for example, "Anthony," who, under California's new law qualifies as a "seriously ill patient" who can openly purchase and publicly use "medicinal" marijuana. His illness is rather unusual. He suffers from "officially, hernia discomfort from overstrenuous intercourse." (If Anthony's diagnosis is correct, I expect to see a lot of senior citizen men buying rolling papers in the convenience stores, now that Viagra's on the market.)
When I first read this, I about laughed my head off. Talk about a phony excuse to smoke dope. But in fact he supposedly has a doctor's "oral" prescription and quite legally smokes pot four or five times a day. Currently 39 years old, Anthony admits to having used marijuana since age 16, and calls himself a "potaholic."

Anecdotes aren't very impressive, you know. Since this example was using pot before MMJ was made legal in his area you can't really blame his "addiction" () on the reforms can you?

I guess it depends on what you think the role of government is for.

Exactly. Is it micromanage every aspect of your life? Funny, that seems glaringly at odds with the conservative credo.

I'll go with the following:

"The Lord established three fundamental institutions for the governance of men: family, the Church, and civil government. While these three institutions are separate spheres of authority under God, they clearly have mutually supportive, interwoven functions.

... the ruler, "is the minister of God to thee for good" (vs. 4). The ruler is God's minister, His diakonos. He is a deacon, a laborer, a ministrant, an attendant to people for God. As the derivation of diakonos shows, he is one who runs errands: God's errands. In particular, he is to be a Christian teacher and pastor. If the ruler is the minister of God to men for good, then he must rule in accordance with God's judgment of the good, not man's willful, subjective desire to redefine the good.

The teaching, pastoring function of the ruler or magistrate is of crucial importance. We are popularly told today that the government should not seek to enforce morality — especially (Surprise!) Christian morality — because "you can't legislate morality." Clearly, this contention is at best a half-truth, and as such is a dangerous distortion. It is a distortion which fits quite well with the Humanist canard that "you can't mix religion and politics." All law commands human action; it seeks either to restrain or to urge particular actions. It necessarily says either "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not," and it backs these commands to action or restraint with coercion, with sanctions enforced by the power of the sword."
http://reformed-theology.org/html/is...government.htm

That being said, let's see what Scripture says about intoxication:

"Why does God tell us not to get drunk? Because life is a spiritual battle, and we must be self-controlled and alert (1 Thess. 5:6). First, we need to be alert in order to serve God. God wants us constantly tuned into Him, and people have needs at very unexpected times. The servant of God is always “on call,” and must be ready and willing to serve. Second, our enemy, the Devil, prowls around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour (1 Pet. 5:8). Satan’s evil spirits usually infiltrate people through their minds, and Scripture is replete with instructions about properly managing our minds by controlling our thoughts and making them godly thoughts.

Drugs used to alter one’s mental state and thus “escape reality” do the same thing that excess alcohol does, that is, they render a person “out of control” of his mind. As with alcohol, the individual who is “high” on drugs is in no position to fulfill the command to “be alert and self-controlled.” Many drugs are hallucinogenic, and a hallucination is “a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; or delusion.” In the Bible, the Greek word for “truth” means “reality.” Satan’s goal is to get people to act upon a false reality."
http://www.truthortradition.com/modu...ticle&sid=1033

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."

[The Barbarian]

Limbaugh abusing drugs? C'mon, can't be. See what he thinks of people like that:

And we have laws against selling drugs, pushing drugs, using drugs, importing drugs. And the laws are good because we know what happens to people in societies and neighborhoods which become consumed by them. And so if people are violating the law by doing drugs, they ought to be accused and they ought to be convicted and they ought to be sent up.
Rush Limbaugh show, Oct. 5, 1995

What kind of a moron would say something like that, and then illegally abuse drugs?

[Squishes]

I never claimed that marijuana doesn't have negative side effects. It harms the lungs and decreases energy levels as well. But no one is banning computer games or forcing 15 hours of exercise a week either.

[allsmiles]

I can't remember who said it and how exactly it goes so this will be a paraphrase:

"The first instance of prohibition was in the Bible, when, in the Garden of Eden God prohibited Adam and Eve from eating the apple. It didn't work then with only two people and God was the cop."

I don't think medicinal use is needed as a justification to decriminalize marijuana use. The drug war is a colossal failure, prohibition doesn't work. The potential for legitimate revenue is too great, especially in a time of economic recession... survival is not a moral dilemma. Remove the drug war and you remove billions spent a year on a failing war. Regulate it and tax it and you suddenly realize millions, perhaps billions in profits. You cut out a massive wasteful expenditure and you simultaneously bring in never before realized profits. Makes sense to me.

Smoking pot makes me feel good. I don't smoke before I go to work or before or during any obligations I may have. I do it in the privacy of my home. If I'm depressed it turns my mood around. I have a bunch of laughs with my friends. I eat a lot of snacks. Does it do damage to my lungs? Sure, but only because inhaling smoke of any kind is harmful to our lungs. Let's criminalize bonfires and barbecues.

Alcohol is far more harmful, indeed, withdrawing from alcohol can kill someone. When someone withdraws from THC they don't even notice. Either completely decriminalize marijuana or completely criminalize alcohol.