background image

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Marijuana - not the evil that Dupont said it was?

It saddens me that people still buy into the government lies that this plant is a schedule 1 narcotic.  It is absolutely laughable to think that this plant provides *no* medical use.  Only a buffoon locked away in an isolation pit still believes this.  It has never been proven that Marijuana has any physical dependence properties.  At least nothing to the extent of caffeine or nicotine.

Lesser of two evils?

The true evil in this drug war is that people are killing people and animals in a feudal attempt to stop the growing and sale of plants.  It is evil squared when good intentions are enforced at gun point.  Morality belongs to the individual and not society as a whole.  Argue that as you will, however the reality is that morals do not belong to a fictional group as long as any individual in the group does not accept the moral as legitimate.

Life Greater than morals

I argue that human life is greater than protecting people from their vices.

The valedictorian and president of my high school class was high regularly.  Obviously a terrible drug.  The arguments against recreational marijuana use are being proven as nonsense everyday.  Will long term high utilization cause issues?  Well what being smoked would not?  How about vaporized use?  No one knows yet as this is too new of a utilization method.  I guess the American Indians were fools for using the substance to relax and focus - clearly the congresses of the 1930's and beyond are smarter than any people who ever existed before.

Nothing to excess

Me?  I believe in a simple principle - nothing to excess.  Nearly everything on this earth has a benefit for us and too much use of it will have a negative effect on us, however studies of the marijuana drug are proving that you cannot kill yourself with it from overdose and the long term effects are not what Dupont and their buddies sold to congress in the 1930's.


To see where the real problem lies it makes more sense to follow the motives of the people who fought it and not the droves of people who climb on board.  Dupont wanted to push their synthetic ropes and make oil based plastics the winner.  To do that they had to 'prove' that there were too many things to fear from the most abundant and fastest growing plant on earth so they could push their inferior products on the public which produce more pollution, have killed more people, and ruined more lives than cannabis abuse ever has.

Lethal force - the only power government has

I can never agree that LETHAL FORCE is acceptable to possibly prevent a few people from using a substance I think is bad.  Anyone who thinks that way needs to reconsider priorities.  Human life is greater than protecting people from their vices.


If you feel that it should be illegal to keep people from using it, then I propose you consider that it is your emotions that make you feel this way.  Then realize that feelings are over-riding your logic.  Educate and warn?  Yes.  Illegalize and kill to "prevent"?  Is it working?  The evidence shows the war is lost and innocents are paying for it by loss of life, family, and money.  How is this preventing the problems that you have experienced?   It is merely shifting the evil from abuser and abuser's family suffering to government inflicted suffering.  No net gain there.


Let's all not forget about the myriad of law enforcement officials that abuse their authority to plant drugs on people solely to meet quotas or to punish people they want taken down.  Why give the government such an evil tool?  The "land of the free" imprisons more people per capita than any other nation on earth... all over a war on plants.

Property confiscation without a trial - just another right trampled by the war on drugs.  Another right taken away without congress ever voting on a bill about it.  Instead confiscation and seizure laws passed as riders on "If you don't vote for this bill you hate puppies" legislation.

Planes are confiscated without ever finding drugs just because the DEA thinks it might have smuggled something once.  What a racket.

Biblical Interpretation

Furthermore, I think of this verse when it is argued we should use prohibition:

"Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times, some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and  commanding to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. If thou put the brethren in remembrance of these things, thou shalt be a good minister of Jesus Christ, nourished up in the words of faith and of good doctrine, whereupon thou hast attained. (Paul: 1 Timothy 4:1-6)"

"Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; that which cometh out of the mouth defileth a man." (Mat. 15:11) and similar in Mark 7:15.

For these alone I cannot understand why a Christian would ever be pro-prohibition.  Enforcement of morality is not following Christ.  Morality is achieved out of a voluntary relationship with God and can never be forced by men on men.  Even God Himself refused to enforce morality on us.  Who are we to stand up in righteous indignation and propose we know better than the Almighty?

Isn't it more important to keep that person alive and together with their family to give them time to come to the Lord than to push them away and use the force of man to punish or kill them for their vice?  Morality at gun point is evil and this is attested to by God repeatedly in the bible.  What did He say about casting stones at a woman for "adultery" or for not providing aid on the Sabbath?

If you do not oppose the sword being used to enforce morality then you are condoning it.  You may as well pick up the gun yourself and go join the fight for you are just as guilty as the aggressors you are permitting to do the deeds for you that you argue you support because you agree that drugs are "bad."


We humans are horrible at administering justice and we should limit it only to the times that a persons life, property, or liberty are being infringed on by another and stop with preemptive meddling.

No comments: