Marijuana-Infused Faith Challenges the Definition of Religion

p122654

Active Member
As a Religion, Marijuana-Infused Faith Pushes Commonly Held Limits

By MARK OPPENHEIMER
Published: July 19, 2013

Sixty-four-year old Roger Christie, a resident of Hawaii's Big Island, although most recently of Cell 104 at Honolulu Federal Detention Center, is a Religious Science practitioner, a minister of the Universal Life Church, ordained in the Church of the Universe (in Canada), an official of the Oklevueha Native American Church of Hilo, Hawaii, and the founder of the Hawai'i Cannabis THC Ministry.

As you might guess, it was the last of those spiritual vocations that landed him in prison.

In 2010, Mr. Christie, along with several co-defendants, was indicted on charges including conspiracy to manufacture and distribute marijuana. He does not dispute the facts of the case. He just believes that his operation – "a real 'street ministry' serving the needs of our neighbors from all walks of life," he told me, in an e-mail from prison, "busy six days a week," employing "three secretaries and a doorman" – was protected by the First Amendment.

On July 29, Mr. Christie's lawyer will argue in Hawaii federal court that his client should be allowed to present a religious-freedom defense at the eventual criminal trial. He will base his argument on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, passed by Congress in 1993, which requires the government to show a "compelling interest" whenever it "substantially burdens" a religious practice. In 2006, the Supreme Court relied on the act to permit a New Mexico church to use the hallucinogen hoasca, or ayahuasca, for sacramental purposes.
 
I would like to offer an alternative opinion for the Times to publish:

On July 19th, the NY Times published an opinion by Mark Oppenhiemer, “Marijuana-Infused Faith Challenges the Definition of Religion.” I am writing because his key assumptions deserve criticism, and an alternative perspective is needed.

First, the title of Oppenhiemer’s article, on the face of it, seemingly reflects a limited understanding of the reality and value of religious diversity. As William James pointed out over a century ago in his now classic, Varieties of Religious Experience, there is within the USA a broad range of practices to enhance spirituality. And more narrowly, it is not even historically novel to ingest things as sacraments to that end, such as alcohol within Jewish/Christian traditions, peyote within the Native American Church, and ayahuasca within some recently imported varieties of South American Christianity. Moreover, outside Christianity, cannabis has ancient ties to the religious traditions of India. In that tradition, the THC Ministry of Reverend Christie operated openly as an recognized entity for a decade on the main street of downtown Hilo, the county seat, in a part of Hawaii that largely does not much subscribe to prohibitionist ideas about cannabis. People migrated to North America for religious freedom, the First Amendment preserves that sacred tradition, Congress via RFRA reaffirmed it, plus the Supreme Court unanimously concurred; but the DEA wants to ignore all that, in the style of a modern-day imperialistic inquisition from a distant capitol. The THC Ministry is not really a challenge to the definition of Religion but to those who deny our Constitutional guarantees of freedom from an oppressive government.

Second, Oppenhiemer is concerned that including cannabis on a list of religious sacraments would be problematic by encouraging greater recreational use. This is also the core issue in the government’s “compelling interest” argument in this and earlier related cases before federal courts. However, the scientific evidence is clear, not in favor of the compelling interest argument, but against it. When people use alcohol within their religious tradition, they abuse it and other drugs less, not more, and the same holds true for what happens when religious followers incorporate peyote or ayahuasca into their faith tradition. In the dominate tradition of the West, followers of Christianity are instructed in extensive Biblical teaching to use alcohol with moderation but not abuse it (E.A. Wasson, Religion and Drink, 1917, now free online).

Christie’s emerging church or some form of it is potentially a great idea for advancing a more integrated society. Religions are a great socializing institution of mankind; it is where we often search to find shared values, consensus about how to best lead our lives, and how we pass this understanding on as a viable tradition. Society has an important interest in allowing religious diversity as we encounter new challenges. We need more not less of modern-day pioneers like Roger Christie, to explore and update older alternative paths of Christian (and other) spiritual traditions as we struggle with issues how to best integrate cannabis into a viable society. More broadly, for spiritual institutions to remain viable in a changing society, they must have considerable freedom to culturally explore their ties to the emerging broad range of spiritual enhancements: For more details, see csp.org and recent advances in the cognitive neuroscience of mindfulness. Now more than ever before, we need a diverse range of protected religious entities to have freedom to explore these matters, independent of undue burdens by the state. This is the time of increased deregulation of cannabis use, broad evidence-based acceptance of medicinal/nutraceutical effects of cannabis, and scientific recognition of natural cannabis (cannabinoids) within the body. The pro-social input of faith traditions is now much needed in how this plays out, similar to the Christian influence onself moderating of excessive alcohol use. In short, Roger Christie is on the cutting edge of where we actually must go.

Michael J. Kelley, D.Phil.
Pahoa, Hawaii

Love, Roger

@@@

Lover-Lover,

Aloha and good Saturday morning to thee! What a terrific reply to the NY Times article by Michael Kelly. Wow! :p God bless that good guy. : Thank you for re-posting his brilliant letter.
Paul J. von Hartmann
11:58 AM (3 hours ago)



to mark.e.oppenhe., me, rogerchristie

I appreciate that Mark Oppenheimer has initiated discussion of Reverend Roger and Share Christie's courageous exercise of logic and the First Amendment, to challenge rightful jurisdiction over "every herb bearing seed." Our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed" is the first test of religious freedom. Cannabis is far too valuable to be within the rightful jurisdiction of any court.

The point is, drugs don't make seeds. Herbs do. Once the legal distinction between drugs and herbs is established in federal court at Roger's trial, the jurisdiction of the court will have to honor the First Amendment. Ofcourse Reverend Roger's jury will have to nullify the illegal imprisonment of a peaceful citizen.

If Roger's case ever does go to trial, which I doubt will happen, I predict a unanimous "not-guilty" verdict. What juror in their right mind would convict a neighbor for figuring out how to stop the meth epidemic plaguing Hawaii and the mainland?

In my opinion, Mr. Oppenheimer's breakdown of a publicly awarded Ho'omaluhia Peacemaker's political rendering intoned triviality and pre-judgment. Perhaps it's what's required to be published at NYT. I trust it will serve to initiate a more mature and holistic, historical and science-based global assessment of hemp's true value. Roger's release is inevitable as the world recognizes how enormously right he has been about the role of Cannabis in achieving peace on Earth.

On March 16th, 2012, Cannabis was identified as a "strategic resource" available by "essential civilian demand" in Executive Order 13603. In the interest of "emergency preparedness" there is the necessity of accessing the one plant that might possibly be capable of reversing major atmospheric imbalance.

Cannabis is both unique and essential on every level of our existence, from conception to grave. Beginning at the cellular, synaptic levels cannabinoids and terpenes engage our endogenous cannabinoid system and other systems of our bodies, providing complete nutrition in the leaves and seeds.

With the death of half the boreal forests, biogenic, volatile aerosol terpenes produced by Cannabis are needed now more than ever."Monoterpenes" exuded by hemp can replace what has been logged away, mostly to make paper. The aerosols rise into the stratosphere where the monoterpenes nucleate cloud formation and refract solar UV-B, shielding the planet from the Sun.

The question to be answered at Roger's trial is, can mankind adapt our values back into proportionate respect fro a force of Nature much bigger than ourselves? Can we move forward to the polar shift in values that will determine everyone's children's futures?

Even this cursory look at Roger's & Shares heroic stand for everyone's religious freedom is capable of initiating the long-overdue "legitimate debate." Specifically, what most needs addressing in order to reclaim spiritual legitimacy on behalf of the world's oldest global culture, is distinguishing between herbs and drugs.

Cannabis religions predate written history. Roger's Ministry is far beyond legitimate. The Golden Rule is all that requires scrutiny in order for the majority to accept any religion, along with tolerance, a measure of joy and plenty of imagination. As Reverend Kimmel pointed out, for many people, Cannabis spirituality is a constantly evolving, individual religion. People share the faith, without having to join anything to benefit from their like-mindedness.

Roger is a cultural visionary who has spent more than a quarter of a century establishing his public sincerity, abiding by all laws, with due diligence and personal charm, achieving great strides in the healing of Hawai'i's hard drugs epidemic and economic addictions. The past three years in federal prison Reverend Roger Christie has endured honorably in righteous accord with his lifetime dedication walking the path of peace. A close, familial brother, I honor Reverend Roger as the real deal, because that's what he truly is. A more gentlemanly, generous, kind, helpful and sincere man of God I cannot imagine.

In regarding how ham-fisted Roger is being treated, can be seen the threat he poses to "drug war" profiteers occupying the justice system. No civil rights abuse has been spared in Roger's pretrial punishment, that the U.S. Constitution was written to prevent. By itself the dismissal of due process ought to invite immediate public attention and outrage. But here is much more at stake than the Constitutional integrity of economically corrupted American justice system.

As I explained to Mark when we spoke on the telephone, without Cannabis our chances for healing the Earth's atmosphere from solar UV-B radiation, in the short span of time we may have left to make a difference, is rapidly shrinking. Cannabis is the only crop that prevent human extinction from increasing UV-B. One growing season at a time is being lost forever.

Everyone's spiritual beliefs would benefit greatly from being more inclusive of global Cannabis spirituality and it's legitimate expression in agricultural economics. How can a truly "free market" exist under conditions of imposed agricultural prohibition? How long can an unaccountable, immoral economy dominate human social evolution?

It is not too long a stretch of time to recall the well-accounted historical benefit and influence of Cannabis. Historical precedent exists fro reintroduction of hemp before the feral hemp seeds ripen in the midwest. Any seeds from plants that survived last year's drought are the most precious seeds there are. Please feel welcome to visit Roger's website to hear what Roger has been teaching people for decades.

The Last Marijuana Trial

To understand more about why global broiling is the most proximate threat to human existence on Earth, and why Roger's trial is so pivotally important to global integrity, please visit the crowd fundraiser I've got going for "Cannabis vs. Climate Change" on Indiegogo.

'Cannabis vs. Climate Change' | Indiegogo

It would be great if the comprehensive revaluation of Cannabis as essential could be a globally funded effort by thousands of people. The California Cannabis Ministry is an individual, spiritually motivated process, encompassing every dimension of what it means to be human. There is no particular ritual or dogma except to treat others with the respect and kindness that you would expect to be treated with. Reintroduction of spiritually-mindful, naturally responsible agricultural to economics, out of love for our Mother planet, is the fundamental challenge, and inconvenient priority, of our time. Roger's trial is the fast-track to human survival.

Paul J. von Hartmann
Cannabis scholar

"Our freedom to farm "every herb bearing seed" is the first test of religious freedom."
California Cannabis Ministry

Between the Dreams Productions : projectpeace channel on You Tube
"Video documentation is the most time efficient and cost effective way of communicating a complex message."
Paul von Hartmann - YouTube


"Return to Reason" film trailer
"Drugs don't make seeds, herbs do.
You can make a drug from an herb, but you can't make an herb from a drug.
They are not the same thing."


"We have nothing to fear but the atmosphere itself."
July 4th, 2009 BlogTalkRadio Broadcast
projectpeace Online Radio by projectpeace | Blog Talk Radio


"What Now" KOWS FM radio interview
Extended interviews with accomplished thinkers, writers, artists, farmers and scientists addressing the global crisis, 11-15-10 Paul von Hartmann // On Cannabis the plant
What Now — Interviews addressing our global crisis


"The Fundamental Challenge of Our Time"
Translated into Dutch and adopted as the manifesto for the Cannabis College Amsterdam in 1998
The Fundamental Challenge of Our Time


Origins of the ministry: Project P.E.A.C.E. (Planet Ecology Advancing Conscious Economics)
"There is no money on a burned-out planet."
WebSpawner - Project P.E.A.C.E.


To find out about wheelchair accessible gardening systems,
and how you can receive a tax deduction
for supporting the work of the California Cannabis Ministry,
please contact Paul von Hartmann at (831) 588-5095
 
@@@

Lover-Lover,

Aloha to thee. The good news from yesterday's legal visit with Tommy is that Monday's hearing at 10:30 will be a little different from what we had expected. Instead of the full hearing with witnesses and evidence about whether or not we qualify for our religious defense at trial, the Judge will only be hearing whether or not she gets to decide about allowing our religious defense at trial.

It's apparently a complicated question that we've come to; no one has ever, yet, won what we're going for. We're very close to winning the argument. According to Tommy we're further ahead than anyone in history at this point, and we just might win the right to go to the jury with ALL of our religious evidence and witnesses. That would certainly help us to WIN since we have LOTS in our favor. Ideally, Professor Lauri would only testify for us at our trial. That's what we're hoping for.

This coming Monday Tommy and maybe Lynn will be arguing that all of our evidence and witnesses get to go directly to the jury during the trial. We hope the Judge agrees. If she agrees then zero religious motion hearing will be needed and we will be very happy. If she rejects our argument THEN we will re-schedule the hearing and ask Lauri to fly-in for what we thought was going to happen Monday. God, that's great!

Share Christie for Rodger Christie
 
@@@

Aloha to thee. Good news is that the status conference went pretty well. I'll explain this to you in more detail tomorrow but here is a quick summary. The Judge has said that she will be deciding the RFRA issue after an evidentiary hearing. But no matter how she rules she will allow us to present a religious defense at trial as to the element of intent to distribute. In other words, you will be able to present a religious defense at trial no matter how she rules on the RFRA motion. If she grants our RFRA motion then the case against you and Share would be dismissed. The other good news is that she s ruled as a matter of law that we have met the first prong of RFRA, and that the government now needs to prove at a hearing that this was the least restrictive means and that they had a compelling interest. This now means that the court has ruled as a matter of law that your religion was legitimate, that your belief was sincere, and that the government s action was a substantial burden on a legitimate exercise of religion. I believe this to be great news, and the ruling is a lot better than I thought it would be.

Stay positive and see you soon.

Share Christie for Rodger Christie
 
Back
Top Bottom