T
The420Guy
Guest
Supporters of so-called "medical marijuana" have little to go on. They want
the government to approve the drug despite a lack of any credible science
and despite a lack of support from the Food and Drug Administration.
Now they want the U.S. Supreme Court to put its stamp of approval on
buyers' cooperatives that distribute the drug to people in need, arguing
that a medical necessity ought to outweigh federal laws. Judging by their
comments at a hearing this week, most of the justices don't appear to buy
the arguments. We hope that's the case.
Former federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey has called medical marijuana
"Cheech and Chong medicine." That's an apt description. While we sympathize
with people who are suffering with terminal illnesses and feel a joint is
the best way to relieve pain, the buyers' cooperatives are excellent tools
for distributing the drug for less noble causes, as well. Society has good
reason to be concerned about that.
So far, nine states have passed medical marijuana laws. Unfortunately, the
court's ruling, expected sometime in June, will not negate this. The case
at hand arose out of a Clinton administration lawsuit that specifically
targets the buyers' clubs. If the court rules against those clubs, people
in those states still would be free to grow and cultivate marijuana for
their own use, but at least the distribution method, which has the ability
to proliferate consumption, will be stopped.
It may be true that marijuana plants contain chemicals with medicinal
value, but credible science has yet to make that determination or to decide
on the best method of delivery. We cannot imagine a state approving the
distribution of any other drug that had not passed scrutiny. And we
certainly cannot imagine any other drug -- particularly one that was proven
to cause harm to its users, as marijuana does -- being legally distributed
by anyone other than a competent physician.
Marijuana is treated differently only because it has the support of a loyal
and vocal group of recreational and habitual users whose ultimate aim is to
be able to use their drug free from the fear of prosecution.
We will grant them this: medical science ought to determine whether
marijuana has any useful medicinal value, and then decide on an effective
delivery method that keeps users as free as possible from the harmful
side-effects. But the rush to legalize the smoking of marijuana and
liberalize its distribution ought to be seen clearly for what it is.
Newshawk: Cannabis News - marijuana, hemp, and cannabis news
Pubdate: Sun, 01 Apr 2001
Source: Deseret News (UT)
Copyright: 2001 Deseret News Publishing Corp.
Contact: letters@desnews.com
Website: Salt Lake City and Utah Breaking news, sports, entertainment and news headlines - Deseret News
Details: MapInc
Author: Kersten Swinyard, Deseret News Staff Writer
the government to approve the drug despite a lack of any credible science
and despite a lack of support from the Food and Drug Administration.
Now they want the U.S. Supreme Court to put its stamp of approval on
buyers' cooperatives that distribute the drug to people in need, arguing
that a medical necessity ought to outweigh federal laws. Judging by their
comments at a hearing this week, most of the justices don't appear to buy
the arguments. We hope that's the case.
Former federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey has called medical marijuana
"Cheech and Chong medicine." That's an apt description. While we sympathize
with people who are suffering with terminal illnesses and feel a joint is
the best way to relieve pain, the buyers' cooperatives are excellent tools
for distributing the drug for less noble causes, as well. Society has good
reason to be concerned about that.
So far, nine states have passed medical marijuana laws. Unfortunately, the
court's ruling, expected sometime in June, will not negate this. The case
at hand arose out of a Clinton administration lawsuit that specifically
targets the buyers' clubs. If the court rules against those clubs, people
in those states still would be free to grow and cultivate marijuana for
their own use, but at least the distribution method, which has the ability
to proliferate consumption, will be stopped.
It may be true that marijuana plants contain chemicals with medicinal
value, but credible science has yet to make that determination or to decide
on the best method of delivery. We cannot imagine a state approving the
distribution of any other drug that had not passed scrutiny. And we
certainly cannot imagine any other drug -- particularly one that was proven
to cause harm to its users, as marijuana does -- being legally distributed
by anyone other than a competent physician.
Marijuana is treated differently only because it has the support of a loyal
and vocal group of recreational and habitual users whose ultimate aim is to
be able to use their drug free from the fear of prosecution.
We will grant them this: medical science ought to determine whether
marijuana has any useful medicinal value, and then decide on an effective
delivery method that keeps users as free as possible from the harmful
side-effects. But the rush to legalize the smoking of marijuana and
liberalize its distribution ought to be seen clearly for what it is.
Newshawk: Cannabis News - marijuana, hemp, and cannabis news
Pubdate: Sun, 01 Apr 2001
Source: Deseret News (UT)
Copyright: 2001 Deseret News Publishing Corp.
Contact: letters@desnews.com
Website: Salt Lake City and Utah Breaking news, sports, entertainment and news headlines - Deseret News
Details: MapInc
Author: Kersten Swinyard, Deseret News Staff Writer
