SweetTea

I just had a very interesting conversation with a friend of mine.... She's a pothead. Plain and simple. Not a cancer patient, no medical reason at all. She just likes to get high. She gave me some insight into the rationale behind the "I want to get high" argument that I'd really like to share. Any person who says they do not use some mechanism to relieve stress and "forget the world" either lives a charmed life or is a liar. Some people go to the movies. Some people take a hot shower. Some people pray. Some people have a glass of wine. Some people smoke cigarettes. And some people smoke pot. The fact of the matter is that the legal precedents set in this country do not support marijuana prohibition of any kind, beginning with the constitutional repeal of the prohibition ammendment and the creation of the tobacco "lobby". The two enormous health liabilities of Alcohol and tobacco are both legal for recreational use. Marijuana has never been shown to have anywhere EVEN CLOSE to the negative health effects that either of these two drugs have. Both alcohol and tobacco are addictive. Marijuana is not. Marijuana has been used safely in every culture around the world and has been documented as a psychoactive substance since before the time of Jesus. Still, NOT ONE confirmed death attributed to marijuana use, excluding allergic reactions, which can happen with ANY substance (like for example, pine..... should pine trees be illegal?). And any substance has the potential for psychological addiction (like.... oh lets see.... FOOD.... We are, by the way, the most overweight nation on earth.... perhaps the right wing fanatics will wage a war on food next). How can the people of this nation justify the exclusion of a SAFER alternative method of relaxation, when each year the leading causes of death in this country are alcohol, tobabcco, and weight related causes? Simple.... we can't. From a strictly biblical point of view, it's hard to say what God would want, and I think that's something everyone has to take up with Him on a personal level.... But LEGALLY, MEDICALLY and SOCIALLY, it makes absolutely no sense whatsoever on any level. -Tea

You know.... I thought it was especially nice when he appealed to our young people to join the service and help in the war effort "For the sake of freedom and democracy." around the world.... Or something like that. I smell a draft coming when he invades Iran. And he WILL. Make no mistake. He WILL, no matter what he has to do to get it done. He wants Iran worse than he wanted Iraq, but he knows he won't be able to use his "shock and awe" tactics..... But don't worry.... I have faith that our president will again do the WRONG thing and make us pay for it. -Tea

Des.... That paraphrased quote is by Winston Churchill. I think reaching out to moderate church members is a GREAT idea. In my church, for example, there are ALOT of people who hold liberal political views, fundementalist religious views, and manage somehow to reconcile that rift in their own minds and hearts. The trick is whether someone who is less moderate in their approach can understand and embrace that concept. I think progressives are in a MUCH better place to do that than fundies. I also believe that the "6 days" story was meant as a metaphor..... Imagine if God had told Moses all about evolution, microbiology, and the "big boom", and THEN imagine if Moses had written what REALLY happened. Do you REALLY think those ancient people would have taken Creation and God's brilliance seriously, or would they think Moses a babbling idiot talking about things that don't exist. See my point? I think it's possible to believe in the fundemental moral messages in the bible without taking every word literally. Another good example of this are the leviticus laws. Most of them are public health directives for a time when modern sanitation, anti-biotics, vaccines, etc. were not available to the general public. Think of it as I giant wellness plan. Chiropractors and dieticians, as well as many doctors in the mainstream medicine community emphasise preventative medicine and wellness as the BEST way to ensure good health and long life. Therefore, it seems obvious to me that kosher foods, skin inspections, laws about sexual uncleanliness..... All of those a prevenative for any number of major health problems, which the lack of medicine made almost impossible to treat after the fact. Now in a day and age of modern medicine, x-rays, MRIs, transplants, modern cooking technology.... Well, the laws are somewhat obsolete, but what we CAN derive from those laws is that God has always protected His people, even when they did not understand what He was protecting them from. If we can open this kind of dialogue.... Discussions of scriptural interpretation, perhaps we can discover even more common ground spiritually. And that's where the bridge between moderates and progressives can open up. It worked in the Jewish community, when orthodox rabbis started studing holy texts with Reform Jews. What emerged was a fantastic resurgence of a Jewish sect founded firmly on the mysticism of Judaism.... Perhaps you've heard of it.... Kabbala. Kabbala has brought many people into the folds of Judaism, including Madonna and Britney Spears.... I'm sure that's been just HORRIBLE for the faith. -Tea

The following is just an opinion..... I think George Bush runs parallel to Hitler in too many ways for me to be comfortable. I'm sure that has NOTHING to do with the fact that I'm watching a documentary about Nazi Germany, but I can't help noticing as they describe the social downfall of the German people and their absolute belief that what they saw on the news and what their government told them was the truth. Sounds eerily simaler to the lack of coverage in our press over the last 4 years (since 9/11) for any dissent at all. Anyway, regardless of that, perhaps I didn't word that last bit quite right. I define patriotism as a love for one's country, and a willingness to die for it if necessary. In my lifetime, American has never been a place I can be proud of. But I love it. My family came over on the Mayflower. Men from my family have fought in every war this country has ever participated in. Our nation has accomplished some of the most impressive and amazing achievements, and our society has done in 200 years what most societies spent millenia figuring out (democracy, abolition of slavery, women's sufferage, etc). I love my nation because I know its potential. I also love democracy (too bad we don't really HAVE one in the United States, or at least not one that is free and fair and that actually works), and I believe that dissent is vital to democracy. So I feel it is my patriotic duty to stand up and disaggree with the establishment if necessary..... If I don't exercise that right, I may lose it. That's really what I mean by patriotism. The willingness to stand up for what's right, even in the face of adversity, to protect the integrity of my nation, and to ensure that the progress my forefathers (and even my parents) made is not undone. -Tea

OK.... See, I think there are some serious problems with the way the progressive movement handles this issue, but I think I differ from everyone else here when I say that I do not believe that the progressive movement has been aggressive or plain enough in its message to affect any real change in the perception of Christianity in the United States. First of all.... In every faith, there are ALWAYS people who get it wrong. In Christianity, there have been alot of people who have gotten it wrong. In Islam, there are the strict fundementalists of THAT faith who declare Jihad on all "infidels", or unbelievers. There are many pagans I know who are manipulating their faith for the wrong reasons. We have to recognise that sometimes people just get it WRONG. And when we recognize that someone has it wrong.... Not that they hold the "wrong" faith, but when they harm others through their misinterpretation (deliberate or not) of the teachings of their religion.... I believe it is my responsibility to point that hypocrisy out in no uncertain terms. When there is no distinction between what is right and what is wrong because we want to accept everyone's beliefs, there is a serious problem. I don't propose that we become more fundementalist in our approach..... Just that we define exactly what it is we stand for, because right now it's guite fuzzy. Perhaps the reason a dialogue hasn't opened is because right-wing fundies are having such a fantastic job WINNING! They don't NEED to talk to us. No amount of nicey nicey talk is going to fix that. It's time to draw a line in the sand. I for one am very very tired of being called "immoral" and "unpatriotic" because of my progressive ideas. It makes me want to stand up and say "NO! That's WRONG! I love God, and my country, and THAT is why I hold both the Constitution AND the Bible close to my heart, and that is why I can not let you tear down my beautiful faith or question my love for my country any more, ever again!"..... maybe that's what we finally need to do. We have followed Christ's message.... we have turned the other cheek at every attack, we have prayed for those who would hurt us, we have been patient and kind and gracious. While we were doing all of those admirable things, we were ignoring one very important responsibility that we have as Christians.... Which is to protect and preserve the sacred message of Christ, and to assure that it never is used irresponsibly or to promote personal gains, but instead, the Word should be used ONLY TO GLORIFY GOD. So yes.... We almost got it right. But, as my father says, "almost only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades." And now we're on damage control. I live 45 minutes from Liberty University. It's less than 50 miles to Jerry Falwell's house from my apartment. All these people hear is THAT message..... It doesn't matter if you're Baptist, Presbeterian, Methodist, Lutheran.... Maybe you could get away from it if you went to an African Methodist Episcopal church or the "liberal" episcopal church across town.... But THAT is all these people know. It's not enough to "give up" on the fundies - Unless you want to just "forget" about an entire region of the United States and a socio-economic class as well. It's not an effort to "convert" them or change their belief system in any way. It's an effort to show them that their actions (and the actions promoted by their "leaders") are inconsistent with the values of Christianity, and probes them to ask WHY they are acting in a way that directly contradicts their beliefs. The catch is that you're not changing their beliefs or their values.... You're just asking them to think about them and start standing up for them. To me, that shows the utmost respect for personal beliefs and values, while holding people accountable for sinful behavior, and without infringing on anyone's civil liberties, as well.... But you can't beat around the bush about it. You've got to be direct, real, earnest, passionate.... It requires an unflinching belief that what you are saying is true..... And it requires the abiblity to say what you mean and mean what you say.... Something that the "all-encompassing" views of the progressive movement have failed to be able to do. I believe that if we accept people's beliefs, we have to accept also the basic moral code by which they, by profession of that faith, commit themselves to. So if I accept that a person is a hard line fundie Christian, and that due to their religious persuasion they were strongly against homosexual marriage or, perhaps, abortion, I expect that they would NEVER support pre-emptive war, or cuts to medicare, or environmental rape, or suppression of free speech, or the death penalty..... And I'll hold them to it. That's what Christianity teaches. So THAT is what I expect, and THAT is what I will continue to fight for until this country doesn't have its Christianity on backwards anymore. -Tea

Which works very well in areas where there are natural food markets and a large enough progressive community to support something like that. You must be from California or possibly the Pacific Northwest. That's just a guess. I'm from the mountains of Southwest Virginia. There's a different culture here. Progressive Christians don't have organised churches here. Even the Unitarian Universalists have only a VERY small foothold here. There is no UCC. I attend an evangelical United Methodist Church. It is the most liberal church in my town. You would call it fundie-filled hell. There are no natural food co-ops here.... We have Kroger and Winn-Dixie, and the ever popular Wal-Mart Supercenter. We have a few coffee shops where artists and free thinkers gather, but it's very fake and cliche. Really, being progressive here means being independant, and allying with those few other progressives you can find. I have lived in the most liberal city in the country (Washington, DC), and one of the most fundementalist (Atlanta), and I can tell you, the majority of the south is a whole different world than that of the Pacific coast or the New England states. I live in a literal battlefield. There are currently not enough progressive Christians in this area to fund even a newsletter, much less a website, TV show, or advertising campaign. But THIS is where the message needs to be heard. That's why I propose infiltrating THEIR programming.... Maybe not the 700 Club or anything THAT extreme.... But something on a national scale. Something that conservatives watch. And that way, the communities that have large progressive populations can share their resources with those (like mine) who have so few. Perhaps if there were a national alternative to shows like the 700 Club.... But it would still be up to the affiliates to pick it up..... I dunno.... It's a tough problem. -Tea

I aggree with the idea that the actual state of homosexuality is not immoral, because how can love be immoral? But I do believe that sexual immorality is wrong. This means sex without love, sex that is medically or emotionally dangerous, and sex that involves children or other family members. This is an interesting point, because I DO believe that anal sex is immoral, for the medical reasons aforementioned. However, I believe that in a real, true, loving relationship (gay OR straight), sex is secondary to the spiritual bond that two people share. So I do believe that two gay men in a loving, committed relationship can glorify God with their love for one another, as long as they treat their bodies as temples, as we are called to do in the Bible, and refrain from engaging in risky sexual behavior (like anal sex and sex with multiple partners), thus avoiding "sexual immorality" and therefore, sin. There's a disturbing double standard in this country.... Lesbianism is far more accepted than male homosexuality. I think that this is because we come from a patriarchal society which has largely associated women with sex and fertility, and any exploitation of that association is not only accepted, but encouraged. But are there any biblical or spiritual grounds on which to build this double standard? To tackle this from a biblical perspective, it's hard to say whether oral sex is included as sexual immorality, but most lesbians I know (and I know a bunch) use vibrators and other sex toys with their partners. There are subtle references to sex with inanimate objects in Leviticus, and my definition of "sexual immorality" includes risky sexual behavior.... Like say.... Putting an electrical foreign object into your genitals..... Again.... This is something that even straight women do (just as straight men engage in anal sex with women), so again, none can really criticize this behavior on strictly (non-biblical) ethical grounds. I have several gay Christian friends. They are wonderful people, and powerfully devoted to Jesus. I don't believe for one second that they are doomed to eternal hell or that God hates them OR their lifestyles, as they are possibly the most stable, devout, passionate Christians I know. But they hold themselves to the same standard that every Christian should. They live moral lives and do not perform lewd acts on one another. They just praise God for the gift of love that He chose to bestow on them, no matter whether the vessel of that love has a ###### or a vagina. They refuse to squander a gift that many of us never have a chance to enjoy. Do I think that's evil? Of course not! How could it be? -Tea

I'm not sure what to do about it either, but I did read a GREAT essay on the subject. No Longer A Christian talks about what we can do on an individual basis to reconcile our beliefs with an increasingly radical "Christian" majority. I think it's worth a read for anyone interested in the corruption of Christian Ideals. I think it's possible that in THIS country, we can reverse this trend, but it requires that the progressive community really get organized and put out a clear, coherent statement about what we believe. We need to get our vocal leaders, like Dr. Spong, for example, on the 700 Club countering the lies and hatred, going head to head with right-wing pundits disguised as men of God. It seems pretty obvious to me that this wierd "fundie" movement has only gained real popular support in this country very recently.... In fact, my father says that when he was in college, no one in the "establishment" would have seriously acknowledged ANY movement that was so exclusive, racist, sexist, and counter-progressive. And my father grew up in rural South Carolina and went to College at Greensboro College, in Greensboro, NC.... A private, United Methodist school. But the collective conciousness of our country has slowly shifted right (for various reasons..... but that's a whole other thread), and now, the radical views of the right don't seem quite so radical anymore, and the more moderate and logical (and constitutional) ideology of the progressive movement is getting lost in the shuffle. You see, ever since Jesus was crucified, there have ALWAYS been people who wanted to manipulate Jesus' power over our hearts and minds for their own gains. There have always (since before King James, the fabulous jerk who made sure the English Bible suited his purposes politically) been people who would like to turn Christianity backwards. It's been going on literally since the beginning of the Christian faith. So naturally, this age should be no different than any other. I think what's important is that each individual hold on to their own precious beliefs, and that we ensure that progressive Christian communities continue to thrive. We need to give our testimonies to those who show interest in learning about Jesus. But ABOVE ALL ELSE..... We must be absolutely sure that we do not behave as hypocrites, and we must embrace different opinions and ideas. We must be careful not to become an exclusive club, but also that we do not stray from our values in order to include others. This is a dangerous tightrope to walk, but we have to do it, I'm afraid. If we're going to get the message out there, we have to be louder, more compelling, and more persistent than the "false prophets". Are we up to it? Who knows. -Tea

I dislike the feeling of being drunk. I guess, when I found the substances that really "spoke" to me, I craved the "superman" feeling that speed could give, and I loathed the sloppy, out-of-control feeling the being drunk gave me. So I guess I chose not to drink originaly because I was abusing drugs, and I was doing it to get a desired effect. The drugs that didn't give me that effect got eliminated from my "diet" pretty quickly. As for marijuana, I liked it when I used it, and I do believe that it is possibly the most effective treatment I have ever used for my bi-polar disorder, however it is illegal, and I don't like jail, so.... Anyway, I knew I needed to fix the part of me that NEEDED the drugs, and I think that's the answer to the whole drug war problem. That's where Jesus came in. When I first started using drugs (cocaine was first, not pot), I had tried every psychological treatment in the book. My drug abuse came through literal depeartion. I'd try anything if I thought it would make me feel better. Well, anything except prayer. I had turned my back on the church years earlier, partially to rebel against my father (an evangelical minister), and partially because the idea that my gay friends and my friends who were not Christian were going to hell totally made me sick. Christianity had too many rules. What I came to understand through 6 years of heavy drug abuse and repression of my emotions, was that Jesus doesn't represent rules and limits, but freedom and infinite possibilities. I came to understand that Christianity is beautiful and abundant and that the BEST part of it was that I could have my own personal relationship with Jesus..... and it could be all mine.... No one else had to believe exactly what I believed, because Jesus and I had different experiences together.... A different relationship. Once I figured that out, I was able to figure my life out and get my head on straight. If we want to start fighting a war on drugs that will be effective and result in fewer "casualties", the first thing that needs to happen is we need to change our battle strategy. We are fighting the wrong enemy. We need to stop fighting addicts and start fighting addiction. We need to provide treatment on demand. In my area, the great citizens of my county have voted to prohibit a drug rehabilitation center in our community. That's not right. If it were a hospital, the community would have jumped for joy, because hospitals are good.... They provide jobs, revenue, and help sick people. But if it's a rehab or a mental health facility..... "Not in MY backyard!". So we need to stop this social stigma and start HELPING these people, and that includes alcoholics and chronic over-eaters and compulsive gamblers and, yes, even the nymphomaniacs, who ALL display symptoms of the same disease. Then, we need to stop calling addiction a social problem and start looking for effective treatments. We need to release the addicts who have been imprisoned for being sick, and we need to teach them how to live productive lives with this incurable disease. And we need to stop promoting the double standard that somehow marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, and heroin have something in common, because they couldn't BE more different, and the people who use (and abuse) them often have many different issues, which our prison system largely ignores. We need to start giving the public ACCURATE information about the effects of drugs, because I guaruntee you.... Kids are NOT getting accurate information in schools, and lying to our children ensures that they will forever doubt our warnings when it counts. This means suburban houswives should be able to say what the letters MDMA stand for (methylenedioxymethamphetamine) and what drug they represent (ecstacy) and how it affects the brain (stimulates neurotransmitters and floods the brain with seratonin, endorphins, and dopamine, depleting reserves of "happiness" hormones). That way, when their kids come home late, these super-moms will have some idea what to look for if they suspect that their children are using drugs, and they can open an intelligent dialog. Because THAT'S where the drug war needs to be fought. In our homes. And we need to fight the disease and the ignorance, not the substances or the people. We need to put progressive Christianity and other progressive faiths to work in helping these people discover God again, and God will help them discover themselves. -Tea

I can't speak for the "other" neo-hippies , but I enjoy a big juicy steak as much as the next guy. I do, however, feel that alcohol is an infinitely more dangerous drug than marijuana when used socially and/or recreationally. I personally feel that alcohol is horrible for me (with the exception of red wine, which is heart healthy), and I choose not to drink it. Ever. For any reason. If I did use recreational drugs, you'd never find me in a bar or cocktail lounge.... I'd be sitting in a friend's living room with a few joints. If my children want to experiment with recreational drug use, I'd rather they smoke pot than drink alcohol from a purely medical (and for that matter, social) standpoint any day. I've researched this pretty thoroughly, and the adverse effects of marijuana use are miniscule when compared to those of alcohol. But the legal ramifications stop me short of encouraging young people to smoke pot rather than drinking (if they MUST use drugs.... That's a key point.... I don't believe in sex education that only teaches abstinence, so I don't believe in drug education that only teaches abstinence, either.). Perhaps I'll feel differently as I get older, but at this point, unless the science behind the research changes, I feel that pot is safer and generally less inebriating than alcohol. Perhaps THAT'S the neo-hippie argument, although the whole "vegan" think kinda creeps me out, to be honest. -Tea

Oh, I don't argue the ADD thing.... I think ADD and pot are a generally bad cocktail..... except in really severe cases where violent behavioral tendancies may be a problem (as in the case of a good friend's brother), but I totally aggree that pot is not for everyone. My disaggreement comes with laws that take the right to decide what IS right for me away from me and put it into the hands of the government. I'm not a libertarian, for sure, but I have always believed fundementally in the right to make decisions about my own health and body. To me, marijuana laws fly in the face of my core values. At some point, we have to say enough is enough.... I don't suggest that heroin or crack or meth should be legal, or that we should have absolute freedom to do whatever we want to, but I feel there should be a real medical, legal, moral, or social reason for restriction that I haven't seen in the case of marijuana. I believe that the drug war as a whole is like fighting a war on cancer by declaring cancer illegal and imprisoning cancer patients for not telling us where they got the cancer. I just think it's outrageous. I think the whole entire system needs to be overhauled in a really big way. But the marijuana laws, in particular, are the most likely to change in my lifetime. And that will start a national dialog about the drug war in its entirety. I hope. Gives new meaning to the phrase "gateway drug". -Tea

I think the issue isn't necessarily whether we personally believe that use/abuse/misuse of a drug is right or wrong, but rather whether we believe the government should make that distinction. I am (admittedly) pretty "left-wing" on this issue, simply because I would have LOVED to have access to marijuana while I was detoxing off of meth (for paranoia and tremors) and again when my drug abuse treatment prevented me from taking my anti-anxiety/sleeping pills because they could become habit forming. I also know many people my own age who frequently use marijuana (on a daily basis), and lead happy, productive, fulfilling lives in loving relationships and rewarding careers. In fact.... I know plenty of people my parents' age who have done the same for most of their lives. I also voice concern about the motivation of some to use drugs. I am personally not a big fan of most ADD treatments, for example, because I think amphetamines and their derivatives (like methamphetamine) are extremely dangerous and have an extremely high potential for abuse (as a recovering speed addict, I can speak from experience.... Ritalin and drugs like it are abused just as frequently as any other). That doesn't mean I think those drugs should be illegal. But one thing is REALLY bugging me. There is absolutely no definitive proof indicating that marijuana adversley affects reaction time. It does not slow down thought process, and is therefore not categorized as a sedative, just as it is not classified as a hallucinogen or stimulant, even though it displays traits of both. You'll find studies that categorize it very generally into one of those categories, but close inspection of those class definitions indicates that marijuana doesn't fit in any one of them an a completely bio-chemical front. Not only do we not have an accurate test to show whether a person is actually under the influence of marijuana or not, but, there is really no conclusive proof that marijuana adversely affects the ability to drive in any way. Granted, studies in this field are few and far between, because since the middle of the 20th century studies about the long term affects of marijuana have been heavily restricted in this country. But part of the problem is that people have been brought up on inaccurate government propaganda, and have grown lazy in informing themselves about real facts. The human brain is very complex, and the reaction it has to drugs can be vastly different from person to person. To observe that it seems like things slow down when one is high and deduce from that observation that marijuana slows down reaction time might seem like a safe assumption to make, however it's far from scientific and hardly a responsible way to research such an important issue. Try Erowid for great info about all kinds of drugs. But the info is real. There are clinical studies as well as individual accounts from personal experience. This is one site that exposes some things that are false about our collective "drug knowledge", but also they have no qualms warning about the dangers of drugs. I find it to be an informative, unbiased site. -Tea

Lolly..... I see the irony. Absolutely. And that's the point I'm trying to make. I'd bet most of the people on here would think I was a "stoner kid" if they met me... I'm 24 years old, I have a tounge ring and tattoos.... Nevermind that's I've been through in the past 5 years what most people don't go through in 3 lifetimes, or that I'm a devoted Christian..... No one sees that. What they also don't see is the depression I fight with every day. You can't tell a person is bi-polar by looking at them. Maybe these "stoner kids" are like me.... with serious medical problems.... but the stigma surrounding mental illness has thus far prevented them from getting professional help. Or maybe the bi-polar surfer made a informed, responsible decision to avoid adverse side effects of prescription medications in favor of a safer, no-habit forming alternative. Good for him. I will aggree that crimes committed or criminal negligence caused by being under the influence of any substance should carry a higher sentance, but simple possession and cultivation and intoxication should not be criminal offenses at all. Most states have statutes allowing additional penalty for "aggervating circumstances" in most crimes and cases, and I think the fact that those laws are already in place would make the transition very easy, and the DUI laws already include a whole array of drugs. In short, my answer is this..... Do I think you can be liberal and personally against the recreational use (or abuse) of drugs? Yes. Do I think you can be liberal and believe that the government has a right to decide what you put into your body, REGARDLESS what it is or why you take it? No. But that's only my opinion. -Tea

I think that there are valid arguments on both sides, although, I'm afraid that the examples you cited about other types of drug abuse only solidifies the argument that a sweeping law against some use while permitting other use would be as ineffective as the current law prohibiting ALL use. It's simply not the government's job to determine what we put into our bodies, but here in America, we expect our government to force us to make good choices about our own health. Jesus tells us that we are always responsible for our behavior. Repeatedly we are reminded that even those who do not know the law will be judged by the law. In the previously cited scripture, Jesus tells us that we can't blame spiritual "uncleanliness" on external sources. Is it not safe to derive from that statement that even those who are "impaired" are expected to be mindful of their behavior as well? Addiction is a disease. It is one of many that I personally suffer from. The irresponsible and seemingly inconsiderate traits displayed by your brother are classic symptoms of addiction, which has been proven time and time again to be a disease on its own, and NOT a symptom of marijuana use. Thankfully, your brother is not physically addicted to a more dangerous substance. Since addiction is a disease, it is treatable, but only if everyone (including the addict) recognizes what it is, and the argument of "at least I'm not doing hard drugs" is a classic defense mechansim for addicts who live in denial because they use prescription drugs or food or gambling or alcohol or any one of a host of other triggers. The disease must be treated, and taking away the trigger only brings about substitution, which can lead to infinitely more dangerous behavior. A drug war that punishes people for the posession of the safest of drugs (including, apparently, Aleve and celebrex) is like a war against AIDS that punishes patients for the posession of AZT, because the treatment has some adverse affects. It just doesn't make sense, and history has shown that we can't effectively enforce "prescription" laws for marijuana any easier than we can enforce the archaic laws that are in place now. Practicality in this matter could save lives and give a HUGE boost to the economy and agriculture sectors, while cutting our prison population in half. I have my own very sad stories about drug abuse.... How I was homeless for 6 months strung out on meth.... Or how I developed bi-polar disorder after habitual ecstacy use..... Or how my boyfriend's mother has been prescribed to xanax for so long she can barely remember her name..... Or how I met my boyfriend doing community service at a mission. But MY life experience doesn't apply to everyone, and it's not my place to try to force others to learn lessons that I learned through hours of prayer and painful reflection. Likewise, there may be people in the world who could truly benefit from the ability to make their own decisions about physical and mental health and wellness, and they should not be held back because of people (like myself) who have a disease that prevents them from making those responsible choices. I would personally not benefit from marijuana legalization. Because I am an addict, my treatment requires that I remain free of all mood or mind altering substances, aside from the medication I take for my bi-polar disorder. But for an addict's weakness to be cited as reason to prevent others from gaining access to what could be a miracle for them? Horrible. It's just night right. And no matter how long and hard I wrestle with my own experience and feelings on the matter, I simply can't find it in my heart to support the restriction of marijuana use on legal grounds, since alcohol and tobacco are BOTH legal and neither has any medicinal value at all. The legal precedents set forward in this country do not support the "protect the population" argument. -Tea