Medical Marijuana

"Why is marijuana against the law? It grows naturally upon our planet. Doesn't the idea of making nature against the law seem to you a bit... unatural?"

~Bill Hicks~

Today's topic: MEDICAL MARIJUANA!

Who Bill Hicks is, I have no idea. His name just happen to be attached to the quote.

Ok, so, we all know the question: Should marijuana be or not be legal for medical purposes?

Personally, I have said "no" for quite a while. But, when I got to thinking about it, I think "why not?" For the longest I feared the slippery slope of what legalizing it for med reasons would bring. Then I got to thinking, "What slippery slope? The one where lots of people do it... like they do now?" (For the record, I do NOT smoke pot.)

We all know that at one point in time alcohol was illegal in the USA. But, do you realize that it WAS LEGAL for use in medicine? I didn't realize that until I did a college research paper on prohibition. You can find the info in the book "How Dry We Were."

But seriously, if a person is in serious pain and doctors can verify that m/j can help ease that pain, who am I to say they can't have it? After all, if I'm hurting that bad, I don't care what it is, hook me up!

(These girls are in obvious pain and in need of .... well, SOMETHING)

Slippery slopes: what about doctors who give prescriptions to those NOT in need, either by not giving a proper exam or just because someone spotted them some cash or for a friend, etc. Ok, yer gonna have that no matter what. They do it for oxycontin, valiums, etc. I understand, don't add something else to the list. But, would you rather it come from a clean government authorized pharmacy or a street punk? After all these years, it is established that people will do it anyway. But, that leads away into legalizing for recreation. The medicinal reasons, it can be gotten from a clean place.

Now, along that line, I can give you a more exact reason WHY it has NOT been approved regardless of doc's claims that it would be beneficial. The reason: The USFDA. According to the guidelines of the FDA, all medicines must be manufactored synthetically. That is why you can get a docs book for home remedies that tell about herbs and what-not that actually DO work. And the stories of meds from grandma that still work. They always have. Only, a doc can't prescribe it because it's not man-made.

This is where greedy, capitalistic pharmaceutical companies cash in. After all, thousands upon thousands know how to grow m/j in your own neighborhood. Merck Medco and Glaxo would have a hard time competing with the guy on the corner. So, they can manufactor meds that have cannibis included, but it can't be pure cannibis. To make it "legal" it has to be diluted.... of course, it won't be diluted with drano like some twisted hood might do. Then again... who knows?

(Almost reminds me of the Dreamworks logo: "SKG")

Now, according to "Penn and Teller's: BS, the war on drugs," there is not one recorded fatality directly linked to m/j, as opposed to the thousand per year linked to tobacco and alcohol. I have not verified that myself, that's according to their own study. But with that thought in mind, one might mention pot smokers and driving.

I'm not too qualified to speak on that, but, according to people I have talked to, some have said they would rather meet a pot smoker on the road than a drunk. On the flip side, pot smokers I have talked to said they'd prefer to drive high than drunk. Their reason and the other's were basically the same, they're too paranoid to drive recklessly, therefore they drive slow and careful.

Now, I have heard of a car accident where pot smokers and people in the other car were killed because the smokers were driving too slow. It was on an interstate and we all know from passing "granny" that slow driving on the I/S can get people killed. But, still the concern with people smoking and driving; what of the many prescription meds out there that say, "Do not drive or operate machinery while taking this drug?" There's no difference, really. People will take the meds given to them and do what they want when they want. So what do we do- outlaw meds that include that warning label?

So, I have yet to come up with a real reason not to allow it. My previous stance was somewhere along the line of, "Well.. it's just bad. It's wrong." Birth defects? Mmm... yeah, maybe. That's why I'd bet a doc wouldn't give a prescription to a preg woman. Lung cancer? Well, I tell ya what, if I'm smokin pot to ease the pain of cancer, I'm really not gonna worry to much about getting lung cancer from my medicine.

On that thought, it would be rather ironic to get a pot-prescription to ease the suffering of lung cancer. Just keep the snacks handy.

Also, did you ever notice that a lot of men get beer bellies from drinking? Also, did you ever notice that pot smokers (who have the munchies) are normally thin people? Explain that one to me. As much as Shaggy eats.....

(Skinny muncher)

Well, I'll conclude with that. I suppose we'll just have to wait and see what happens next. I noticed a headline today that said California was suspending it's med. m/j program because of the Supreme Court. Apparently it's been tough on Cali have a state law that violates Fed drug law. I can't help but wonder what made them suspend the program. Did the feds threaten to cut highway funding like they did the states that didn't want to raise the drinking age to 21? Perhaps. After all, cuttin Cali's highway funding would hurt bad since they are losing tax money from those darn ecology-minded drivers buying hybrids. (That only makes sense to those who are aware that funding comes from taxes when you buy gas. Owning hybrid means buying less gas, therefore fed hiway funding is crucial.)

Today's History:

July 8, 1776. The Liberty Bell, only rang on special occasions, was tolled this day in 1776 for the first public reading of the Declaration of Independence.