Re: When Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally)

[Guest guest]

What if the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients

when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as

M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind?

The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels

out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and

according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to

suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the

ONLY one in the right and everyone else is wrong.

If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion

with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the " medicine "

they need.

Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is

legal.

I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to

pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where

it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical

purposes.

No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it?

Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in

enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the

border.

I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you

wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced

to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to the fact that I

would never have a cigarette again.

I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to

OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up

obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the

law down and dance upon it.

So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right

to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to

have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that

it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they

expect these children to obey the law?

I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand.

Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they

do. I just don't get it.

Tom

Administrator

When Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally)

It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering

patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy

such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects,

not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that

can ease suffering.

[Guest guest]

What if the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients

when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as

M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind?

The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels

out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and

according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to

suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the

ONLY one in the right and everyone else is wrong.

If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion

with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the " medicine "

they need.

Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is

legal.

I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to

pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where

it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical

purposes.

No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it?

Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in

enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the

border.

I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you

wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced

to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to the fact that I

would never have a cigarette again.

I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to

OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up

obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the

law down and dance upon it.

So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right

to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to

have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that

it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they

expect these children to obey the law?

I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand.

Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they

do. I just don't get it.

Tom

Administrator

When Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally)

It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering

patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy

such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects,

not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that

can ease suffering.

[Guest guest]

Tom,At this time the police wont enforce federal law if a patient has a doc script. It would be a mistake to make a patient into the sterotypes of a pot head.I am one for individual rights over that of the popular majority, but I was debating with myself the two exremes of moralist (controlist) and the true intent of freedom.I believe that when it comes to the law and this issue, state rights are greator, I think government worries of the further distribution, that is why I agree with a moderate view between the true intents of freedom and that of the controlist governmental mentality.California has voted, feds can stick it where the sun don't shine. Yet dispite the P.R the federal government could if it was really a bad group of folks take the records of all patients in the system who volunteered to be in the "special med pot systems" go to there homes and jail them all. They have not, so I think when it comes to med pot issues its political for a few

reasons.1. The typical political issues between parties, one doesn ot want to change their P.O.V for the other as to be seen as lossing.2. I admit that even I worry of terrorism and drugs. There need to be ways of controling medicines so that criminals are not profiting.environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: What if the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind? The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the ONLY

one in the right and everyone else is wrong. If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the "medicine" they need. Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is legal. I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical purposes. No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it? Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the border. I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to

the fact that I would never have a cigarette again. I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the law down and dance upon it. So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they expect these children to obey the law? I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand. Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they do. I just don't get it. Tom Administrator When

Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally) It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects, not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that can ease suffering. I'm from this planet, the rest of you are

not.Please go back to Mars or Venushttp://www.simplecomplexities.org/community/

Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Guest guest]

Tom,At this time the police wont enforce federal law if a patient has a doc script. It would be a mistake to make a patient into the sterotypes of a pot head.I am one for individual rights over that of the popular majority, but I was debating with myself the two exremes of moralist (controlist) and the true intent of freedom.I believe that when it comes to the law and this issue, state rights are greator, I think government worries of the further distribution, that is why I agree with a moderate view between the true intents of freedom and that of the controlist governmental mentality.California has voted, feds can stick it where the sun don't shine. Yet dispite the P.R the federal government could if it was really a bad group of folks take the records of all patients in the system who volunteered to be in the "special med pot systems" go to there homes and jail them all. They have not, so I think when it comes to med pot issues its political for a few

reasons.1. The typical political issues between parties, one doesn ot want to change their P.O.V for the other as to be seen as lossing.2. I admit that even I worry of terrorism and drugs. There need to be ways of controling medicines so that criminals are not profiting.environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: What if the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind? The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the ONLY

one in the right and everyone else is wrong. If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the "medicine" they need. Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is legal. I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical purposes. No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it? Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the border. I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to

the fact that I would never have a cigarette again. I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the law down and dance upon it. So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they expect these children to obey the law? I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand. Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they do. I just don't get it. Tom Administrator When

Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally) It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects, not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that can ease suffering. I'm from this planet, the rest of you are

not.Please go back to Mars or Venushttp://www.simplecomplexities.org/community/

Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze.

[Guest guest]

Tom why dont you tell a patriotic grandmother of 82 with cancer that

suffers daily to goto another country. This kind of logic is

redicilious, this ocuntry is ours, the voters passed the law, that is

it. Outside of state lines, where fed law applied then that's that.

The Supreme court can think as it wishes, in this issue it has no

authority over the voters. The voters are the most powerfull say there

is, the S.C collectively perhaps does not want to see its power of

position subsided by the true say in this country. THE PEOPLE, for

which it stands and which it is...

yay not nay..

>

> environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: What if

the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients

> when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as

> M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind?

>

> The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels

> out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and

> according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to

> suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the

> ONLY one in the right and everyone else is wrong.

>

> If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion

> with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the " medicine "

> they need.

>

> Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is

> legal.

>

> I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to

> pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where

> it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical

> purposes.

>

> No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it?

> Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in

> enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the

> border.

>

> I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you

> wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced

> to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to the fact that I

> would never have a cigarette again.

>

> I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to

> OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up

> obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the

> law down and dance upon it.

>

> So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right

> to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to

> have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that

> it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they

> expect these children to obey the law?

>

> I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand.

> Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they

> do. I just don't get it.

>

> Tom

> Administrator

>

>

>

> When Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally)

>

> It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering

> patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy

> such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects,

> not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that

> can ease suffering.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Tom why dont you tell a patriotic grandmother of 82 with cancer that

suffers daily to goto another country. This kind of logic is

redicilious, this ocuntry is ours, the voters passed the law, that is

it. Outside of state lines, where fed law applied then that's that.

The Supreme court can think as it wishes, in this issue it has no

authority over the voters. The voters are the most powerfull say there

is, the S.C collectively perhaps does not want to see its power of

position subsided by the true say in this country. THE PEOPLE, for

which it stands and which it is...

yay not nay..

>

> environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: What if

the MAJORITY of the opinion that say no to suffering patients

> when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy such as

> M.J.? Would that make it right in your mind?

>

> The fact is, as the Supreme Court has decided that Federal Law cancels

> out state's rights in this case. Therefore, according to LAW and

> according to the Supreme Court, if just ONE person says no to

> suffering patients in order to uphold the law, then that person is the

> ONLY one in the right and everyone else is wrong.

>

> If the law is wrong and dispassionate, then change the Constituion

> with an ammendment so that people can pass laws to get the " medicine "

> they need.

>

> Alternatively, people can simply emigrate to a country where pot is

> legal.

>

> I don't see a problem with this issue at all. If people want access to

> pot for medical purposes, then they should go to the countries where

> it's legal. There are plenty of countries where it's legal for medical

> purposes.

>

> No one is stopping anyone from emigrating, so why don't they do it?

> Inconvenience? Laziness? Or maybe its just that they aren't REALLY in

> enough pain to warrant the expense of moving overseas or over the

> border.

>

> I just don't get it. I know that if the Feds made tobacco illegal you

> wouldn't see me growing my own tobacco in the back yard. I'd be forced

> to give up smoking entirely and reconcile myself to the fact that I

> would never have a cigarette again.

>

> I would also do it to mentor children about how important it is to

> OBEY THE LAW. You cannot expect a generation of people to group up

> obeying the law when the elders that they respect the most throw the

> law down and dance upon it.

>

> So what is it with people that they so vehemently defend their right

> to use pot where it's illegal? Why do they feel that they ought to

> have exclusive rights to BREAK FEDERAL LAW? And why do they feel that

> it's their right to SET SUCH A POOR EXAMPLE FOR CHILDREN even as they

> expect these children to obey the law?

>

> I guess this is something that only ILLEGAL pot users will understand.

> Maybe you have to be high to have the sort of wooly thinking that they

> do. I just don't get it.

>

> Tom

> Administrator

>

>

>

> When Moralist Lack Compassion & Ethic (M.J Medicinally)

>

> It's when the minority of the opinion that say no to suffering

> patients when a doctor prescribes for patients a simple herbal remedy

> such as M.J. Sometimes other medicines can have great side effects,

> not to say M.J is not side-effect free, but for some a medicine that

> can ease suffering.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

My point, , is that if people want to make it legal and not

worry about getting caught and jailed, they need to do it on the

federal level.

At present, the FDA has not approved pot for medicinal use, so I

can't see using it for medicinal purposes.

Clinton was known to use smoke it, but he didn't inhale. Even so, he

must have some sort of appreciation for its medicinal value. Perhaps

he could be gotten as a spokesman for the pro-Pot political wing and

he and Al Gore could go one Saturday Night Live together (both with

beards this time) act like jackasses on the show like Gore did the

first time he was on, and start a pro-Pot campaign.

It says here...

http://cannabisstatistics.com/

" A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of 8th

graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

Clearly these kids use it for medicinal value and would follow behind

Clinton and Gore. I believe that if these kids wrote Congress en-

masse, Congress, out of concern for seeing that these kids have their

medicine, would pass a law making pot legal.

As long as we walk under the banner " Make Pot Legal For the Children "

passing legislation in US Congress wouldn't be an issue.

When attmpeting to pass such legislation, they could gloss over

statistics like this:

" Reaction time for motor skills, such as driving is reduced by 41%

after smoking 1 joint and is reduced 63% after smoking 2 joints. "

Of course, these kids wouldn't be driving. The ADULTS would. The only

time the KIDS would be in danger would be if an adult ran over them

while driving. For ADULTS, maybe we can pass laws to prevent people

from driving while being high, although I have my doubts. We already

have a lot of drunk driving laws and it hasn't stopped people from

driving drunk has it?

" There have been over 7,000 published scientific and medical studies

documenting the damage that marijuana poses. Not one study has shown

marijuana to be safe. "

But that's just a matter of opinion. Anyone who's smoked it knows it

perfectly safe.

" Data has shown that people high on marijuana show the same lack of

coordination on standard " drunk driver " tests as do people who have

had to much to drink. "

Yes, yes. More BS right.

" The daily use of 1 to 3 marijuana joints can produce the same lung

damage and potential cancer risk as smoking five times as many

cigarettes. "

Here is where Rainbow would take issue. He can't stand cigarettes and

blasts me for smoking them. But I guess he can do that because he

knows that the pot he smokes is home grown and safe.

" Marijuana is the second most common drug, after alcohol, present in

the blood stream of non-fatally and fatally injured persons. "

Yadda yadda yadda.

" Among teens 12 to 17, the average age of first trying marijuana was

14 years old. "

Again, the Pro-Pot-Party ought to try recruiting these kids. They are

young, they are vibrant, and they look up to adults with good moral

character such as the " 83 million Americans [that] admit to having

tried it. "

Sources: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937; Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Services Administration, Summary of Findings from the 2001 National

Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Rockville, MD: Department of Health

and Human Services, 2002), Table H.1, from the web at

http:://www.samhsa.gov/oas/NHSDA/2k1NHSDA/vol2/appendixh_1.htm, last

accessed Sept. 16, 2002.

The important thing is that these kids will have a thorough

understanding of what pot does for them medicinally. This is because

they start taking this medicine so young:

" A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of 8th

graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

It's good to know that adults who smoke pot mentor children in this

way and teach them how to use this medicine. Clearly, knowing the

following fact...

" Marijuana is a complex material containing 421 chemicals, 60 of

which are only found in marijuana "

....pot smoking adults are enthusiastic about seeing kids introduce

these chemicals medicines into their systems, even as many of them

eat their organizally grown food.

" 33.6% of students listed to have used marijuana in the last year and

20% were listed to have used in the last month. "

" 75% of drug-related criminal charges are connected to marijuana. "

" 65% of people arrested for marijuana related crimes are for simple

possession. "

" Approximately 50,000 Canadians are arrested each year for marijuana

related crimes. "

" 600,000 Canadians have a criminal record for simple possession of

marijuana. "

" Estimates put the value of the marijuana industry to the British

Columbia Economy at anywhere between $2 billion and $10 billion,

making it one of British Colombia's top three industries. "

Personally, I take the W. Bush point of view.

Bush, an admitted former cocaine user and recovered alcholic who

found God knows that addicts will make any excuse to make illegal

drugs legal and he knows that addicts don't give a damn about

children, or children's health or anything else that comes between

them and their drug of choice. In fact, they would rather run people

down with their cars while high than actually give up pot.

Bush could call for pot's complete and utter banning and destruction

and cause people to stop BS-ing themselves.

On the other hand, perhaps people could just admit the pot is

addictive, that being high on pot while driving is like driving

drunk, and that children are bound to get a hold of it if you leave

it lying around...etc.

But, as long as we have people that want to mentor children by

promoting kids getting high on it for medicinal purposes, and as long

as we have people who think they can safely drive drunk besides, I

guess we won't see that happen.

And besides, we are forgetting the miniscule segment of the

population that REALLY need it aren't we? We need to keep it legal

for them too.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

My point, , is that if people want to make it legal and not

worry about getting caught and jailed, they need to do it on the

federal level.

At present, the FDA has not approved pot for medicinal use, so I

can't see using it for medicinal purposes.

Clinton was known to use smoke it, but he didn't inhale. Even so, he

must have some sort of appreciation for its medicinal value. Perhaps

he could be gotten as a spokesman for the pro-Pot political wing and

he and Al Gore could go one Saturday Night Live together (both with

beards this time) act like jackasses on the show like Gore did the

first time he was on, and start a pro-Pot campaign.

It says here...

http://cannabisstatistics.com/

" A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of 8th

graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

Clearly these kids use it for medicinal value and would follow behind

Clinton and Gore. I believe that if these kids wrote Congress en-

masse, Congress, out of concern for seeing that these kids have their

medicine, would pass a law making pot legal.

As long as we walk under the banner " Make Pot Legal For the Children "

passing legislation in US Congress wouldn't be an issue.

When attmpeting to pass such legislation, they could gloss over

statistics like this:

" Reaction time for motor skills, such as driving is reduced by 41%

after smoking 1 joint and is reduced 63% after smoking 2 joints. "

Of course, these kids wouldn't be driving. The ADULTS would. The only

time the KIDS would be in danger would be if an adult ran over them

while driving. For ADULTS, maybe we can pass laws to prevent people

from driving while being high, although I have my doubts. We already

have a lot of drunk driving laws and it hasn't stopped people from

driving drunk has it?

" There have been over 7,000 published scientific and medical studies

documenting the damage that marijuana poses. Not one study has shown

marijuana to be safe. "

But that's just a matter of opinion. Anyone who's smoked it knows it

perfectly safe.

" Data has shown that people high on marijuana show the same lack of

coordination on standard " drunk driver " tests as do people who have

had to much to drink. "

Yes, yes. More BS right.

" The daily use of 1 to 3 marijuana joints can produce the same lung

damage and potential cancer risk as smoking five times as many

cigarettes. "

Here is where Rainbow would take issue. He can't stand cigarettes and

blasts me for smoking them. But I guess he can do that because he

knows that the pot he smokes is home grown and safe.

" Marijuana is the second most common drug, after alcohol, present in

the blood stream of non-fatally and fatally injured persons. "

Yadda yadda yadda.

" Among teens 12 to 17, the average age of first trying marijuana was

14 years old. "

Again, the Pro-Pot-Party ought to try recruiting these kids. They are

young, they are vibrant, and they look up to adults with good moral

character such as the " 83 million Americans [that] admit to having

tried it. "

Sources: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937; Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Services Administration, Summary of Findings from the 2001 National

Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Rockville, MD: Department of Health

and Human Services, 2002), Table H.1, from the web at

http:://www.samhsa.gov/oas/NHSDA/2k1NHSDA/vol2/appendixh_1.htm, last

accessed Sept. 16, 2002.

The important thing is that these kids will have a thorough

understanding of what pot does for them medicinally. This is because

they start taking this medicine so young:

" A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of 8th

graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

It's good to know that adults who smoke pot mentor children in this

way and teach them how to use this medicine. Clearly, knowing the

following fact...

" Marijuana is a complex material containing 421 chemicals, 60 of

which are only found in marijuana "

....pot smoking adults are enthusiastic about seeing kids introduce

these chemicals medicines into their systems, even as many of them

eat their organizally grown food.

" 33.6% of students listed to have used marijuana in the last year and

20% were listed to have used in the last month. "

" 75% of drug-related criminal charges are connected to marijuana. "

" 65% of people arrested for marijuana related crimes are for simple

possession. "

" Approximately 50,000 Canadians are arrested each year for marijuana

related crimes. "

" 600,000 Canadians have a criminal record for simple possession of

marijuana. "

" Estimates put the value of the marijuana industry to the British

Columbia Economy at anywhere between $2 billion and $10 billion,

making it one of British Colombia's top three industries. "

Personally, I take the W. Bush point of view.

Bush, an admitted former cocaine user and recovered alcholic who

found God knows that addicts will make any excuse to make illegal

drugs legal and he knows that addicts don't give a damn about

children, or children's health or anything else that comes between

them and their drug of choice. In fact, they would rather run people

down with their cars while high than actually give up pot.

Bush could call for pot's complete and utter banning and destruction

and cause people to stop BS-ing themselves.

On the other hand, perhaps people could just admit the pot is

addictive, that being high on pot while driving is like driving

drunk, and that children are bound to get a hold of it if you leave

it lying around...etc.

But, as long as we have people that want to mentor children by

promoting kids getting high on it for medicinal purposes, and as long

as we have people who think they can safely drive drunk besides, I

guess we won't see that happen.

And besides, we are forgetting the miniscule segment of the

population that REALLY need it aren't we? We need to keep it legal

for them too.

Tom

Administrator

[Guest guest]

FDA need not approve herbals like chamomile, but since approved by

the voters the FDA need not be the governing authority. I believe it

will eventually be approved and if not purely selfish of them.

You come form the feralist mentality, which is more controlistic and

anti-choice like yourself. I see why, but it is approved for med

purposes and helps people.

It helps people, thats a fact.

Your brining children into it is just propaganda in comparision. This

is an adult medication and anyone denying that is not of fact just

selfish politics trying to control patients and doctors, controlists.

>

> My point, , is that if people want to make it legal and not

> worry about getting caught and jailed, they need to do it on the

> federal level.

>

> At present, the FDA has not approved pot for medicinal use, so I

> can't see using it for medicinal purposes.

>

> Clinton was known to use smoke it, but he didn't inhale. Even so,

he

> must have some sort of appreciation for its medicinal value.

Perhaps

> he could be gotten as a spokesman for the pro-Pot political wing

and

> he and Al Gore could go one Saturday Night Live together (both with

> beards this time) act like jackasses on the show like Gore did the

> first time he was on, and start a pro-Pot campaign.

>

> It says here...

>

> http://cannabisstatistics.com/

>

> " A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of

8th

> graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

> are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

> marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

>

>

> Clearly these kids use it for medicinal value and would follow

behind

> Clinton and Gore. I believe that if these kids wrote Congress en-

> masse, Congress, out of concern for seeing that these kids have

their

> medicine, would pass a law making pot legal.

>

> As long as we walk under the banner " Make Pot Legal For the

Children "

> passing legislation in US Congress wouldn't be an issue.

>

> When attmpeting to pass such legislation, they could gloss over

> statistics like this:

>

>

> " Reaction time for motor skills, such as driving is reduced by 41%

> after smoking 1 joint and is reduced 63% after smoking 2 joints. "

>

>

> Of course, these kids wouldn't be driving. The ADULTS would. The

only

> time the KIDS would be in danger would be if an adult ran over them

> while driving. For ADULTS, maybe we can pass laws to prevent people

> from driving while being high, although I have my doubts. We

already

> have a lot of drunk driving laws and it hasn't stopped people from

> driving drunk has it?

>

>

> " There have been over 7,000 published scientific and medical

studies

> documenting the damage that marijuana poses. Not one study has

shown

> marijuana to be safe. "

>

>

> But that's just a matter of opinion. Anyone who's smoked it knows

it

> perfectly safe.

>

>

> " Data has shown that people high on marijuana show the same lack of

> coordination on standard " drunk driver " tests as do people who have

> had to much to drink. "

>

>

> Yes, yes. More BS right.

>

>

> " The daily use of 1 to 3 marijuana joints can produce the same lung

> damage and potential cancer risk as smoking five times as many

> cigarettes. "

>

>

> Here is where Rainbow would take issue. He can't stand cigarettes

and

> blasts me for smoking them. But I guess he can do that because he

> knows that the pot he smokes is home grown and safe.

>

>

> " Marijuana is the second most common drug, after alcohol, present

in

> the blood stream of non-fatally and fatally injured persons. "

>

>

> Yadda yadda yadda.

>

>

> " Among teens 12 to 17, the average age of first trying marijuana

was

> 14 years old. "

>

>

> Again, the Pro-Pot-Party ought to try recruiting these kids. They

are

> young, they are vibrant, and they look up to adults with good moral

> character such as the " 83 million Americans [that] admit to having

> tried it. "

>

> Sources: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937; Substance Abuse and Mental

Health

> Services Administration, Summary of Findings from the 2001 National

> Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Rockville, MD: Department of Health

> and Human Services, 2002), Table H.1, from the web at

> http:://www.samhsa.gov/oas/NHSDA/2k1NHSDA/vol2/appendixh_1.htm,

last

> accessed Sept. 16, 2002.

>

>

> The important thing is that these kids will have a thorough

> understanding of what pot does for them medicinally. This is

because

> they start taking this medicine so young:

>

>

> " A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of

8th

> graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21%

> are " current " users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried

> marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users. "

>

>

> It's good to know that adults who smoke pot mentor children in this

> way and teach them how to use this medicine. Clearly, knowing the

> following fact...

>

>

> " Marijuana is a complex material containing 421 chemicals, 60 of

> which are only found in marijuana "

>

>

> ...pot smoking adults are enthusiastic about seeing kids introduce

> these chemicals medicines into their systems, even as many of them

> eat their organizally grown food.

>

>

> " 33.6% of students listed to have used marijuana in the last year

and

> 20% were listed to have used in the last month. "

>

> " 75% of drug-related criminal charges are connected to marijuana. "

>

> " 65% of people arrested for marijuana related crimes are for simple

> possession. "

>

> " Approximately 50,000 Canadians are arrested each year for

marijuana

> related crimes. "

>

> " 600,000 Canadians have a criminal record for simple possession of

> marijuana. "

>

> " Estimates put the value of the marijuana industry to the British

> Columbia Economy at anywhere between $2 billion and $10 billion,

> making it one of British Colombia's top three industries. "

>

>

> Personally, I take the W. Bush point of view.

>

> Bush, an admitted former cocaine user and recovered alcholic who

> found God knows that addicts will make any excuse to make illegal

> drugs legal and he knows that addicts don't give a damn about

> children, or children's health or anything else that comes between

> them and their drug of choice. In fact, they would rather run

people

> down with their cars while high than actually give up pot.

>

> Bush could call for pot's complete and utter banning and

destruction

> and cause people to stop BS-ing themselves.

>

> On the other hand, perhaps people could just admit the pot is

> addictive, that being high on pot while driving is like driving

> drunk, and that children are bound to get a hold of it if you leave

> it lying around...etc.

>

> But, as long as we have people that want to mentor children by

> promoting kids getting high on it for medicinal purposes, and as

long

> as we have people who think they can safely drive drunk besides, I

> guess we won't see that happen.

>

>

> And besides, we are forgetting the miniscule segment of the

> population that REALLY need it aren't we? We need to keep it legal

> for them too.

>

>

> Tom

> Administrator

>

[Guest guest]

FDA need not approve herbals like chamomile, but since approved by the voters the FDA need not be the governing authority. I believe it will eventually be approved and if not purely selfish of them.You come form the federalist mentality, which is more controlistic and anti-choice like yourself. I see why, but it is approved for med purposes and helps people.It helps people, thats a fact.Your brining children into it is just propaganda in comparision. This is an adult medication and anyone denying that is not of fact just selfish politics trying to control patients and doctors, controlists. >> My point, , is that if people want to make it legal and not > worry about getting caught and jailed, they need to do it on the > federal level.> > At present, the FDA has not approved pot for medicinal use, so I > can't see using it for medicinal purposes. > > Clinton was known to use smoke it, but he didn't inhale. Even so, he > must have some sort of appreciation for its medicinal value. Perhaps > he could be gotten as a spokesman for the pro-Pot political wing and > he and Al Gore could go one Saturday Night Live together (both with > beards this time) act like jackasses on the show like Gore did the > first time he was on, and start a pro-Pot campaign. > > It says here...> > http://cannabisstatistics.com/ > > "A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23%

of 8th > graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21% > are "current" users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried > marijuana at least once, and about 24% were current users."> > > Clearly these kids use it for medicinal value and would follow behind > Clinton and Gore. I believe that if these kids wrote Congress en-> masse, Congress, out of concern for seeing that these kids have their > medicine, would pass a law making pot legal. > > As long as we walk under the banner "Make Pot Legal For the Children" > passing legislation in US Congress wouldn't be an issue. > > When attmpeting to pass such legislation, they could gloss over > statistics like this:> > > "Reaction time for motor skills, such as driving is reduced by 41% > after smoking 1 joint and is reduced 63% after smoking 2 joints."> >

> Of course, these kids wouldn't be driving. The ADULTS would. The only > time the KIDS would be in danger would be if an adult ran over them > while driving. For ADULTS, maybe we can pass laws to prevent people > from driving while being high, although I have my doubts. We already > have a lot of drunk driving laws and it hasn't stopped people from > driving drunk has it?> > > "There have been over 7,000 published scientific and medical studies > documenting the damage that marijuana poses. Not one study has shown > marijuana to be safe."> > > But that's just a matter of opinion. Anyone who's smoked it knows it > perfectly safe.> > > "Data has shown that people high on marijuana show the same lack of > coordination on standard "drunk driver" tests as do people who have > had to much to drink."> > > Yes,

yes. More BS right.> > > "The daily use of 1 to 3 marijuana joints can produce the same lung > damage and potential cancer risk as smoking five times as many > cigarettes."> > > Here is where Rainbow would take issue. He can't stand cigarettes and > blasts me for smoking them. But I guess he can do that because he > knows that the pot he smokes is home grown and safe. > > > "Marijuana is the second most common drug, after alcohol, present in > the blood stream of non-fatally and fatally injured persons."> > > Yadda yadda yadda.> > > "Among teens 12 to 17, the average age of first trying marijuana was > 14 years old."> > > Again, the Pro-Pot-Party ought to try recruiting these kids. They are > young, they are vibrant, and they look up to adults with good moral > character such as the "83

million Americans [that] admit to having > tried it."> > Sources: Marihuana Tax Act of 1937; Substance Abuse and Mental Health > Services Administration, Summary of Findings from the 2001 National > Household Survey on Drug Abuse (Rockville, MD: Department of Health > and Human Services, 2002), Table H.1, from the web at > http:://www.samhsa.gov/oas/NHSDA/2k1NHSDA/vol2/appendixh_1.htm, last > accessed Sept. 16, 2002. > > > The important thing is that these kids will have a thorough > understanding of what pot does for them medicinally. This is because > they start taking this medicine so young:> > > "A yearly survey of students in grades 8 to 12 shows that 23% of 8th > graders have tried marijuana at least once and by tenth grade, 21% > are "current" users. Among 12th graders, nearly 50% have tried > marijuana at least once, and about

24% were current users."> > > It's good to know that adults who smoke pot mentor children in this > way and teach them how to use this medicine. Clearly, knowing the > following fact...> > > "Marijuana is a complex material containing 421 chemicals, 60 of > which are only found in marijuana"> > > ...pot smoking adults are enthusiastic about seeing kids introduce > these chemicals medicines into their systems, even as many of them > eat their organizally grown food. > > > "33.6% of students listed to have used marijuana in the last year and > 20% were listed to have used in the last month."> > "75% of drug-related criminal charges are connected to marijuana."> > "65% of people arrested for marijuana related crimes are for simple > possession."> > "Approximately 50,000 Canadians are arrested each year for

marijuana > related crimes."> > "600,000 Canadians have a criminal record for simple possession of > marijuana."> > "Estimates put the value of the marijuana industry to the British > Columbia Economy at anywhere between $2 billion and $10 billion, > making it one of British Colombia's top three industries."> > > Personally, I take the W. Bush point of view.> > Bush, an admitted former cocaine user and recovered alcholic who > found God knows that addicts will make any excuse to make illegal > drugs legal and he knows that addicts don't give a damn about > children, or children's health or anything else that comes between > them and their drug of choice. In fact, they would rather run people > down with their cars while high than actually give up pot.> > Bush could call for pot's complete and utter banning and destruction

> and cause people to stop BS-ing themselves. > > On the other hand, perhaps people could just admit the pot is > addictive, that being high on pot while driving is like driving > drunk, and that children are bound to get a hold of it if you leave > it lying around...etc.> > But, as long as we have people that want to mentor children by > promoting kids getting high on it for medicinal purposes, and as long > as we have people who think they can safely drive drunk besides, I > guess we won't see that happen.> > > And besides, we are forgetting the miniscule segment of the > population that REALLY need it aren't we? We need to keep it legal > for them too.> > > Tom> Administrator>I'm from this planet, the rest of you are not.Please go back to Mars or Venushttp://www.simplecomplexities.org/community/

Use Photomail to share photos without annoying attachments.

[Guest guest]

" FDA need not approve herbals like chamomile, but since approved by

the voters the FDA need not be the governing authority. "

Recognize, please, that the voters who approved its legalization were

surely some of the 86 million Americans (representing 31% of the

population) who tried pot.

Are we to believe that these people who voted for pot legalization

for medicinal use are qualified physicians who can, without a doubt,

say that pot's medical value is a certainty?

Are we to believe that all the people who voted for it's legalization

have used it for medical purposes and can attest to it's success as a

medicine?

Are we to believe that even though the CDC and FDA (which have

conducted endless studies ad naseum at the urging of the pro-pot

movement) speak against the usgae of pot for any purpose whatsoever

that the people who voted for its legalization are more knowledgeable

than these government agencies?

The voters may have voted, but they are clearly clueless in light of

the findings of the medical community and the US Government studies

on pot. In order to be saved from themselves, their vote ought to be

overthrown, but since that isn't possible in this democracy, they can

indeed fight to make it legal, and I have no doubt that they will

manage this someday...provided they fight on the federal level.

" Your brining children into it is just propaganda in comparision. "

Statistics don't lie. How can it be propaganda when the children

themselves filled out the surveys that yielded the results I posted?

If pot is accessible in any way shape or form, children will get it.

" This is an adult medication and anyone denying that is not of fact

just selfish politics trying to control patients and doctors,

controlists. "

I agree that the compassionate thing to do is to give people

suffering something to alleviate their suffering. I just question why

it is people would elect to choose a drug with over 400 chemicals in

it which is additionally cancerous when smoked over something else

that has been tested and approved by the FDA.

Plenty of alternatives are there. Debbie, you will recall, died of a

very painful cancer, and was doped up on codiene and morphine when

she went.

The danger with this drug is the threat it poses to people who just

want to get high. Better to make it completely illegal so that 86

million people in the US should elect not try it a second time while

giving people who medicinally need comfort the comfort they need by

federally approved drugs.

Tom

Administration

[Guest guest]

Tom a tea can be made and it can be grown organixally. Many pharms are addictive and cuase other problems.Do you know what it is like to try to goto sleep with pain and not be able to sleep? Where other meds have not helped.Your worry becuase of the criminals wanting to just get a high should not disallow law obiding citizines to use it. Pharms are also misused and sold like dope by and to criminals. Same things..Statistics can be manipulated.. I stand in the right here, its for the greator good.environmental1st2003 <no_reply > wrote: "FDA need not approve herbals like chamomile, but since approved by the voters the FDA need not be the governing authority." Recognize, please, that the

voters who approved its legalization were surely some of the 86 million Americans (representing 31% of the population) who tried pot. Are we to believe that these people who voted for pot legalization for medicinal use are qualified physicians who can, without a doubt, say that pot's medical value is a certainty? Are we to believe that all the people who voted for it's legalization have used it for medical purposes and can attest to it's success as a medicine? Are we to believe that even though the CDC and FDA (which have conducted endless studies ad naseum at the urging of the pro-pot movement) speak against the usgae of pot for any purpose whatsoever that the people who voted for its legalization are more knowledgeable than these government agencies? The voters may have voted, but they are clearly clueless in light of the findings of the medical community and the US Government studies

on pot. In order to be saved from themselves, their vote ought to be overthrown, but since that isn't possible in this democracy, they can indeed fight to make it legal, and I have no doubt that they will manage this someday...provided they fight on the federal level. "Your brining children into it is just propaganda in comparision." Statistics don't lie. How can it be propaganda when the children themselves filled out the surveys that yielded the results I posted? If pot is accessible in any way shape or form, children will get it. "This is an adult medication and anyone denying that is not of fact just selfish politics trying to control patients and doctors, controlists." I agree that the compassionate thing to do is to give people suffering something to alleviate their suffering. I just question why it is people would elect to choose a drug with over 400 chemicals in it which is

additionally cancerous when smoked over something else that has been tested and approved by the FDA. Plenty of alternatives are there. Debbie, you will recall, died of a very painful cancer, and was doped up on codiene and morphine when she went. The danger with this drug is the threat it poses to people who just want to get high. Better to make it completely illegal so that 86 million people in the US should elect not try it a second time while giving people who medicinally need comfort the comfort they need by federally approved drugs. Tom Administration I'm from this planet, the rest of you are not.Please go back to Mars or Venushttp://www.simplecomplexities.org/community/

Relax. virus scanning helps detect nasty viruses!