PUBLIC VIEWPOINT: Vote No On Bill For Legalizing Marijuana
Posted: October 11, 2012 at 4:52 a.m.
I’ve read with interest the letters that extol the benefits, mostly anctedotal and not scientific, (of medical marijuana), but would like to tell the opposing viewpoint.
This story is only available from our archives.
Opinion, Pages 5 on 10/11/2012
(Advertisement)
Next Story »
COMMENTARY: ‘Some Assembly Required’ Not Easy
My wife doesn’t think I can drive. Or park. Or feed and dress myself (OK, I’ve got pictures from before our marriage; she might have me on the whole “feeding, dressing” thi... Read »
Comments
To report abuse or misuse of this area please hit the "Suggest Removal" link in the comment to alert our online managers. Please read our comment policy.
Hereare pro/con facts regarding abuse of medical marijuana:
http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/vi...
Eleanor Lock decries "anecdotal evidence" but she doesn't list her source of her image about "hopheads" lining up to get medical marijuana for their headaches.
Incidentally, some kinds of headaches can be incapacitating.
I know from personal observation that it is possible to abuse marijuana so that a person loses motivation.
I have also known several men who smoked grass because they could not otherwise stand their jobs or circumstances.
I'm sorry for the family situation described, but it is possible that the person had other psychological problems for which he vainly tried to get relief from smoking grass.
Many people with psychological problems "self-medicate" with alcohol or drugs, which often creates even bigger problems for them.
Some of the pharmaceutical drugs so widely prescribed for depression are also destructive to the taker.
Posted by: Coralie
October 11, 2012 at 1:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Original research on health benefits of MJ destroyed by Republicans:
"Corporate media coverage: AP and UPI news wires 2/29/00
A Spanish medical team’s study released in Madrid in February 2000 has shown that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the active chemical in marijuana, destroys tumors in lab rats. These findings, however, are not news to the U.S. government. A study in Virginia in 1974 yielded similar results but was suppressed by the DEA, and in 1983 the Reagan/Bush administration tried to persuade U.S. universities and researchers to destroy all cannabis research work done between 1966 and 1976, including compendiums in libraries.
.....
“I am aware of the existence of that research. In fact I have attempted many times to obtain the journal article on the original investigation by theses people, but it has proven impossible,” Guzman said. His response wasn’t surprising, considering that in 1983 the Reagan/Bush administration tried to persuade American universities and researchers to destroy all 1966/76 cannabis research work, including compendiums in libraries, reports Jack Herer. “We know that large amounts of information have since disappeared,” he says.
...
Drug Enforcement Agency officials shut down the Virginia study and all further cannabis research, according to Jack Herer, who reports on these events in his book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes. In 1976, President Gerald Ford put an end to all public cannabis research and granted exclusive research rights to major pharmaceutical companies.
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-st...
Your only defense is to vote YES on Issue #5.
Posted by: cdawg
October 11, 2012 at 4:05 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
>>Do we really need to add to them by legalizing a dangerous substance?
And WHO has proven marijuana "dangerous?"
Who has proven marijuana "harmful?"
List some sources.
Posted by: cdawg
October 11, 2012 at 4:07 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Eleanor lock's husband owns Lock Medical Equipment Sales and would probably lose money if people begin to use medical marijuana instead of traditional methods of health care. So this is more than an opinion and is actually an attempt to manipulate public opinion for personal benefit and monetary gain.
I'm sorry if you have had family members in difficult situations. But their lives only became a failure after you looked for something external to blame and stopped trying to help them.
Baseless statements about the evil of California are only believable by people that are looking for a devil to blame for their own problems. Meanwhile you are trying to keep actual sick people from getting a treatment that has been proven in unbiased studies to have substantial health benefits. If you are curious as to these claims, I suggest you start here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGjC4...
Posted by: RalphThurman
October 11, 2012 at 4:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I honestly believe that if there was no medical benefit to marijuana then the other states that have it would never have let it pass. Too many non-believers in eastern medicine ( botanical healing ) yet we take presciption pills that have such negative side effects that are much worse than the original ailment to start with. They do not test these on animals so every time you eat a prescription pill you are the test and if you get all itchy rashy and whatever else then they want you to discontinue and contact a medical proffessional ASAP .
Posted by: oldrustynut
October 11, 2012 at 5:14 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Dear Ms. Lock:
It would appear that your dear late brother was probably what those of the younger generation would describe as "a loser" to begin with. No drug caused (or would have cured) his navel gazing, lunacy, or any of your brother's other character defects.
Face facts, Ms. Lock - he had problems, and was unable to deal with same. The weed didn't cause those problems; more likely, those were a result of genetics, exacerbated the by way he was raised.
Madam, if your brother was unable to control his dope smoking, he suffered from nothing more than a defect in character. Ask any Republican - they'll tell you.
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 11, 2012 at 9:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
The legalization of "medical marijuana" could easily be used as segway for a hike in illegal drug dealing to include harder drugs. Perhaps we should focus more on the treatment of illness than on prohibiton, but at the same time deal harsher punishments for pushers of things like meth.
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 11, 2012 at 11:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Not to be a spelling Nazi, Tank, but the word is "segue" - I tend to agree (somewhat) with the rest of your post.
However, the same argument can be used to support the prohibition of anything that makes one feel better and also has any therapeutic use - including my Jack Daniel's. (As a footnote, "therapeutic" means "makes one feel better" - look it up, if you don't believe me.)
Perhaps we should decriminalize everything, and let God and Nature take their course with us. Only the worthy survive, right?
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 12, 2012 at 12:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Buck,
I prefer to imagine a problem riding around on a two wheel electronic scooter. Now imagine that person driving his Segway around while smoking a joint or chugging some bourbon.
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 12, 2012 at 7:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
MJ is not addictive as is tobacco and tobacco is legal. What's the problem?
Posted by: Oldearkie
October 13, 2012 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I'm not sure about that Oldarkie. And folks don't typically move from cigarettes to meth either.
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 13, 2012 at 6:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
To all of the above;
I have watched someone I deeply cared about die of cancer, it took about 18 months to kill her from the time it was discovered. Chemo, radiation, steroids, and many other pills, injections, surgeries, experiential meds and other barbaric treatments did nothing to cure or slow the cancer. The only thing that gave her any relief from the side effects of all this so called treatment was compounded marijauna in a capsul form. After only taking 2 pills she was able to sleep, eat, and stop throwing up constantly, it was amazing to see the benefits she got from these small amounts of marijauna.
No it did not cure her or have any effect on the cancer, but what it did do is give her some peace and comfort.
As the cancer progreesed nothing could help her other than keeping her unconscious with very strong drugs.
The point here is that for a time she was given relief and could feel a little normal because of marijauna.
Wouldn't that in itself be worth the medical use of this substance. Those of us who have any terrible illness should be able to use medical marijuana for relief, it's just the right thing to do.
To all the folks that are against this for what ever reason, talk to someone that has a terrible illness that could be helped or someone that has watched someone dying in pain that has been helped and you just might change your mind. You can't know unless you have been there, you should not have the right to prevent those in need the use of whatever to relieve their pain and suffering.
As for the religious groups who are actively working against this proposal, you are wrong to do so. Read your Bible again and pay attention to the parts that speak to mercy and kindness, caring for each other, and honoring the dead by caring for the living. It is easy to be against something when it doesn't effect you, well it has effected me and thousands of others that find themselves in thi stype of situation due to a terrible illness.
Vote for this so victims of illness and their families do not have to become criminals just to get some relief and comfort. No person should have to go through a terminal illness without the use of anything that will ease their pain and those around them should not have to stand by and watch them suffer when they know there is something out there that could help.
I would have done anything for this lady, I became a criminal for the first time in my life to help her and she had to become a criminal while she was dying just for a little comfort and peace. This is not right.
Posted by: brasnomell
October 14, 2012 at 4:34 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Ray,
I am sorry for your the pain your loved one experienced. Some have grown up around and seen the painful effects drugs have caused families though, especially whne people move from pot to meth. That is where some people are coming from when they are against this measure. It is not the people like your loved one, it is the folks that would use the measure as an opportunity to do things that would harm others.
V/r,
Tank
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 14, 2012 at 6:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
If we as a society were actually concerned about the terminally ill, we would concentrate on the legalization of assisted suicide, or euthanasia.
We seem to care more about ending the suffering of our pets than we do about stopping another human's pain. Let me tell you this: us humans just ain't worth all that much. I've had to put down several dogs who were much better people than any homo sapiens I've ever known.
I'd guess that most folk who support the legalization of marijuana for medical uses are also in favor of its legalization for all purposes. So, let's be honest about it, and quit using the "I have watched someone I deeply cared about die of cancer, it took about 18 months to kill her" emotional pleas.
You want to smoke the weed. I want to smoke the weed. Tank (probably) wants to smoke the weed. Try logic, rather than whining, to make the argument.
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 14, 2012 at 11:52 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Do many people move from pot to meth? Any stats on that? They appear to have opposite effects.
Posted by: Coralie
October 14, 2012 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Tankersley101--
Your stance conflates the use of medical marijuana-- the topic at hand-- with marijuana use in general. Yet it ignores the fact that there is an epidemic of prescription drug abuse, as well as the abuse of other drugs that are legal: alcohol and tobacco.
RE [marijuana is a gateway drug]
See http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2...
Even if marijuana were a gateway drug, that would be irrelevant to the issue of medical marijuana, which would be used by prescription and under the supervision of a doctor.
RE "And folks don't typically move from cigarettes to meth either."
There appears to be a strong correlation between smoking and drinking. Both present a danger to both the individual user and society at large, and each behavior enhances the effect of the other. Does this also bother you?
RE "It is not the people like your loved one, it is the folks that would use the measure as an opportunity to do things that would harm others."
Who are these people? Explain the danger. What things do marijuana users do that harm others?
Posted by: AlphaCat
October 14, 2012 at 4:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
>>he painful effects drugs have caused families though, especially whne people move from pot to meth. <
That's straight out of the Family Council's playbook.
Show us one credible study that demonstrates MJ is a gateway drug to more potent drugs.
As was pointed out to ASA! Hutchinson, alcohol is the gateway drug to all other drugs except tobacco. The U.S. still subsidizes the production of tobacco which has no useful economic benefit, only economic costs. Well, tobacco does have political benefits as the producers donate substantially to political races.
.
Posted by: cdawg
October 14, 2012 at 4:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
As usual, the folks who support legalizing weed would have us believe that there are medical benefits to the drug, even though the best that they can come up with is that it may help relieve pain for terminally ill patients. The claim is dubious at best, while anyone with any common sense would argue that legalizing Happy John will lead to an explosion in social costs as we have to deal with increased law enforcement and social programs to deal with the effects.
It is also typical that folks such as Turgid would advocate euthanasia, since that is another aspect of their version of "health care." No wonder they support Obamacare.
Posted by: IrishMensa
October 14, 2012 at 9:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
cdawg,
RE-
"That's straight out of the Family Council's playbook. "
That is straight out of real world experience in small town/rural America, buddy. My generation has seen countless numbers lost to meth. Guess what? They started with Mary Jane. And it ain't the stuff all the pot heads where smoking back in the day either. It has been genetically enhanced. I have no problem with sick people receiving something to make them comfortable, but there has to be something better, something that won't contribute to crime.
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 14, 2012 at 9:38 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
A society that denies a person a medication that can possibly help them in their fight to live has something wrong with it. I hope you never have to watch a loved one puking their guts up and wasting away from the effects of chemo or radiation therapy.
Medical marijuana can be regulated as well as any other medication. There will be abusers, just like any other medication.
Let those who are fighting for their life have every chance to live.
Posted by: Dexter
October 14, 2012 at 9:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Ah, good old IrishDensa--
I can't bring myself to say "IrishMensa" because his posts fail to indicate that he fails to meet the qualifications of that organization; in fact, he seems to have honored himself with the accolade:
"Offering a little background, a professor of an education class I took in college told us about a study of intelligence undertaken by a British researcher (who, as you can guess, was knighted) to rank the various nationalities. He found (shockingly) that the British were the most intelligent, followed by the Scots and Welsh, then the Germans, the Scandanavians [sic], the Dutch, the French, Spanish, Italians, Slavs, Poles, Asians, American Indians, Africans, and lastly, the Irish. Coming from a family with an Irish ancestry that produced a CPA, a Master's Degree graduate and a PhD., one would say that we were Irish MENSA. "
RE "As usual, the folks who support legalizing weed would have us believe that there are medical benefits to the drug"
Including, apparently, doctors and medical researchers:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/...
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/artic... a government-sponsored study that concludes, in part,
"The classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug as well as the continuing controversy as to whether or not cannabis is of medical value [59] are obstacles to medical progress in this area. Based on evidence currently available the Schedule I classification is not tenable; it is not accurate that cannabis has no medical value, or that information on safety is lacking. It is true cannabis has some abuse potential, but its profile more closely resembles drugs in Schedule III (where codeine and dronabinol are listed). The continuing conflict between scientific evidence and political ideology will hopefully be reconciled in a judicious manner [60, 61]."
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pd... Human/Clinical Studies on Page 5
http://www.ucsf.edu/news/2011/12/1107... cannabinoids in conjunction with opiates
RE "the best that they can come up with is that it may help relieve pain for terminally ill patients."
Are you saying that this doesn't have any value? According to studies, it works better in many cases than other types of painkillers that you apparently have no problem with-- even though there is an epidemic of prescription medication abuse. It allows them to stay cognizant of their environment and interact with others, which is good for the recovery process. Marijuana also alleviates nausea and stimulates appetite in many cases, allowing cancer patients to eat and maintain weight, which also is good for the recovery process.
[continued...]
Posted by: AlphaCat
October 14, 2012 at 11:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
[...continued]
RE "It is also typical that folks such as Turgid would advocate euthanasia"
It is also typical that people who so egregiously add Mensa to their monikers don't recognize snark when they see it. Perhaps if you repeat your anecdote in your online profile here, your screen name might be seen as snark instead of hubris. However, unless you spiff up the caliber of your posts, that probably won't happen.
RE "No wonder they support Obamacare."
Insofar as Obamacare leaves the private insurance industry, with its coverage review boards ("death panels") pretty much intact, there is some truth in that. Unfortunately, you are not aware of what makes it true. However, there are plenty of reasons to support Obamacare, even though it was watered down by input from Republicans and the insurance industry.
Thanks for driving by.
Posted by: AlphaCat
October 14, 2012 at 11:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Larry King's opinion:
http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos...
Posted by: fayfreethinker
October 15, 2012 at 12:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Yeah, FFT. All those gangs running booze really shoot up the town and push meth in high schools.
Posted by: Tankersley101
October 15, 2012 at 2:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Re Alcohol is a gateway to every drug except tobacco? Anyone who had ever gone out for drinks will tell you drinking is incredibly linked with tobacco. Contrary to the gateway drug idea, most people that drink regularly ONLY drink (and smoke tobacco). Most people that use marijuana ONLY use marijuana (and tobacco).
Yes people are more likely to try other stuff after pot, but that's only because of the amount of awful lies and disinformation that has been spread buy business owners (like Ms Lock's husband's medical supply store, or family council that gets its facts directly from a group that is benefiting).
Once you see the reality in the lies about marijuana, you are more likely to take the lies about other drugs "with a grain of salt."
However; nobody switches from pot to meth for the fun of it! They start doing meth because they hate their lives and don't want to remain conscious for most of it.
The problem with prescription pills is RAMPANT. How could medical marijuana, a much less potent or addictive substance, possibly make it ANY worse?
If it created any real problems I would give you some credit. But it only solves problems and helps hurting people live their lives.
Posted by: stophurtingus
October 15, 2012 at 3:15 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
The "war on drugs" is a business for some people:
The Dupont Company was one of the first to convince legislators to ban marijuana and hemp production in favor of their wood/chemical paper industry. This gave credence to the widespread propaganda against it.
Police in states like ours have been able to create business-minded operations where they basically rob drug dealers and threaten small time users to tell them who the bigger players are. Instead of stopping prescription trading, coke dealers, drunk drivers, abusers, etc... Local cops are ruining the peaceful lives of these good people only because it is more profitable than catching a murderer.
Re Medical benefits of marijuana? Despite many federally funded studies where the results were cut and molded to fit the answer they already decided on, drug companies have been working for almost 40 years to create marinol or other cannabis modeled pills for pain. This investment is proof on it's own that there is real benefit to be had from this plant. Why else would our government try so hard to make use of it?
Helping someone deal with the pain so they can live their life is the exact opposite of assisted suicide. However there are many real studies that marijuana has more benefits than just pain relief and includes possible cancer reversal and prevention (look up "Run From the Cure" on youtube).
War on Terror...
War on Cancer...
War on Drugs...
As soon as we declare war on something, we seem to lose the battle against it and instead turn it into some sort of profitable entity. If you want to continue an endless war then keep fighting. But if you want to make a positive change for humanity, start trying to understand the world around you from a greater perspective.
Posted by: stophurtingus
October 15, 2012 at 3:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
GenBuck
I hope you never have to go through this sort of thing, but if you do don't whine just such it up.
You are a mean spirited despicable person.
Posted by: brasnomell
October 15, 2012 at 4:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
As a native to North West Arkansas I have seen many cases of the so-called gateway problems. The problems are that they have used pot to soap box how tough they are going to be as sheriff, for prosecutors to get up and tell the people they'll send them to prison for years and for lawyers to lie and tell them they'll get them off on a plea deal. The thing is that they use youths and once they get them they will continue to build a career on the same youth. This is the gateway, to a career upon someone else's life. Pot, less harmful than drinking and more likely to get busted for driving too slow than fast. This war was lost a generation ago but they continue to feed the legal profession. I say legalize it and stop throwing lives away in the name of justice. There is no justice for the poor lives you step on in the name of the law. Make it legal, tax it and let lawyers find a real job.
Posted by: flatspots479
October 15, 2012 at 9:30 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Mean spirited and dispicable. Gen Buck, you sounded so nice to me.
Posted by: Moneymyst
October 16, 2012 at 2:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
stophurtingus says "As soon as we declare war on something, we seem to lose the battle against it and instead turn it into some sort of profitable entity."
Good point about ALL kinds of war.
+++
BTW, the forfeiture laws were an open invitation to police corruption.
Posted by: Coralie
October 16, 2012 at 3:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Dear RayNelson:
I have all the sympathy in the world for the terminally ill, and all the empathy in the world for their family members; I'm really sorry for your loss. I myself had to decide a couple of years ago to deny my mother a feeding tube, but rather to watch her die in hospice.
I sat with her through the nights at WRMC and watched her 87 years fade away into that good night. Mom and I did her passing with the use of carefully titrated doses of morphine and Jack Daniels - and we didn't commit any crimes while she was dying.
Ray, I (and more importantly, my mother) did in fact "such [sic] it up." Unlike you, neither of us did any whining - then or now. Marijuana wouldn't have helped her live any longer, or more productively.
Legalize the weed. Legalize assisted suicide and euthanasia, also. However - irrespective of what you want to legalize - stop using spurious emotions and name calling to advance your argument. Legalize those things because it's the right thing to do, and for that reason only.
You, Ray, are doing the whining here. Nobody much cares for whiners and other victims nowadays.
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 16, 2012 at 7:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Oh, and by the by - if it were legal to have done so, I'd have put Mom out of her misery myself. She asked me to, and I had to tell her "sorry, Mom, I can't do anything more than talk to the nurse about upping your morphine."
I reiterate - as a society, we're more humane to our pets than we are to our relatives. The old and dying need the option to go ahead and die - with or without the use of illegal drugs. I think Obamacare's death panels will address that - am I right on that, IrishMensa?
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 16, 2012 at 9:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Gen Buck
There are many things I could say about your opinions, but the News would take them down.
All I can say is, it's hard to argue with stupid.
I learned a long time ago not to argue with a republican, they just don't have the mental capacity to fully understand the full concept of any issue, and to try to do so is just a waste of my time.
You have to live with you and I feel sorry for anyone who has to put up with you on a daily basis. Gen you are a lost cause as you stated you drank Jack Daniels while your mother was dying because you decided she needed to die, So you took her feeding tube away from her. You must be so proud of yourself having the power of life and death over someone, bully for you. Why would you need to drink while your mother was in Hospice, were you feeling guilty, are you a drunk, did you want to make things easier for yourself. I am familiar with Hospice and booze isn't allowed in their facilities, so you must have sneaked you booze inside. You do not have the class or honer to call yourself General anything, you are nothing more than a ignoble, uncaring, poor excuse for a human being.
Gen, I have said all I am going to express about what I think of you, you just aren't worth any more of my time.
Posted by: brasnomell
October 17, 2012 at 7:09 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I would encourage everyone to read the Act and then ask themselves the question "Is the fear of allowing a plant really so great that I'm willing to deny sick people a viable alternative option?"
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com...
(Sorry about the ugly Google cache link, the Arkansas Sec. of State's link has spaces in the URL and NWA Online's commenting system doesn't like that)
Posted by: Nilatir
October 17, 2012 at 9:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
None of what anyone has to say about this issue, further, sways me. My mind had been made up a long time ago. Legalize it. Control it, similiarly to how we do with alcohol. There are proven medical uses for marijuana; not so much so for alcohol. Do I want alcohol prohibited because some people drink and drive, or drink too much and destroy their lives and bodies? No. There will always be addicts, and they'll always have a way to get at something that is harmful to them. The great majority of society are "normal drinkers" and alcohol is a very enjoyable substance when used sensibly. As for pot, I think we'd have a much less violent society if more people smoked pot than drank alcohol, based on my experiences with and being around both drugs, over my lifetime. Anyone can over medicate, with anything, even those good/nasty pharmaceutical drugs that often have gross side-effects.
Regarding gateway drugs, when in graduate school I did some literature research when taking a class about substance abuse. The *real* gateway drug is not marijuana, by the way. It's cigarettes--surprise! And the real gateway drug to IV drug usage is huffing. Yep. How much press does huffing get? Ask the young folks...the really young folks, the pre-teens. They know all about it. Do you know the signs? Would like to see more press about this, over marijuana. But be aware: you are never going to be able to make illegal all of the substances people use to huff. Like...gasoline, for starters. Try making that illegal.
And BTW, if we legalized marijuana, and taxed it, we could end the "War on Drugs" and probably pay off the national debt. I'd like to give it a try, anyway; beats taking away Social Security and health insurance for people. So I'll vote YES on this and hope it is one more stone paving the way to sanity in our drug policies.
Posted by: SPA
October 17, 2012 at 9:29 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Ray, Ray, Ray... again with the personal attacks.
Lose the emotion, and argue with your brain.
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 18, 2012 at 5:50 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
(And, incidentally, Ray - hospice wouldn't allow dope smoking in the room, either. That's because weed has exactly the same medicinal value as does Jack Daniel's. I know - I asked the nurses who brought Mom her morphine.)
Posted by: GenBuckTurgidson
October 18, 2012 at 6 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Go for it Gen wou have the liberals on the run,Go get 3em Gen, don't let up.
rout!!
Posted by: Moneymyst
October 18, 2012 at 8:12 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
"Asked the nurse who brought Mom her morphine.." What you are trying to say is that you don't know anything and have no basis for your argument.
It is sad how this newspaper only prints articles that show one side of the issue. They are willing to deceive us in order to achieve their own agenda. Hopefully people will see how childish and immature groups like Family Council or NWA Times really are, and lose faith completely in them ever providing something useful to society.
These poor cretins think that this is a campaign or a race, where they try to see if they can win their platform over ours. This is not a competition to see who can win, but to see who can do what is right. And NWA Times and Family council have completely missed that point as they seem to be only motivated by the dollar and not human wellness.
Claiming it has no benefits because of the FDA stance on it is completely erroneous. The FDA has put numerous prescriptions into general use only to find they are incredibly harmful with terrible side effects. These same drugs were not allowed in any other countries. They were only allowed here because it was helping the pharmaceutical industry. Therefore, the FDA has a terrible record with things they approve (conflicting with many other countries' standards). and is obviously business minded in its approving techniques.
The other argument made lately is that we are going against the Federal Government. Maybe this is an important process in changing federal legislation. It has already been done my many other states and counties, and they are still doing just as well, if not better than before.
We shouldn't be asking our government how we can fit into their plans. We should be making our government work for us and our needs. Whether or not it is legalized, it will continue to be used more and more because it is best and most natural pain reliever and with the fewest side effects.
In the end, it is just a plant. If you are stating that you won't allow a plant to grow here, then you are just trying to play God, instead of listening to what Jesus would compassionately do in the situation.
Posted by: runfromthecure
October 20, 2012 at 5:01 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Opinion piece in the ADG says it should only be allowed for life-threatening diseases. I don't see why.
One of the conditions there is evidence for marijuana benefit is glaucoma. That's not life-threatening, but blindness is serious enough.
Posted by: Coralie
October 21, 2012 at 4:35 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
OK Ok If a person wants to smoke joint, a coon tail, a cigar, a tampon, then that should be his business and not the governments. Regulated as to where is OK, not what. Can I control my own life? If I want an abortion then I will have one! Well now I am all worked up. I am a male, God discriminated against me, no appeals court.
Posted by: Moneymyst
October 21, 2012 at 6:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
I say we need to just legalize, tax the hell out of it and used the funds for healthcare programs.
Posted by: superdave10
October 23, 2012 at 1:54 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Or road projects for LadyLiberty
Posted by: Moneymyst
October 24, 2012 at 1:41 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
There is no *good* reason to be against this bill.
Those that have come out against it are either looking out for their own interests or are trying to force their beliefs on others.
Posted by: Nilatir
October 25, 2012 at 12:52 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Registration is required to make comments. Click here to LOGIN.
You can register for FREE to post comments and receive alerts.