the US started it all — and religious motivation is the root cause. i guess we should be glad that at least drug users are not being lit on fire.

0  0

http://www.cedro-uva.org/lib/cohen.church.html

0  0

No, its not a religious war and never has been as is perfectly illustrated with China today. What motivates it in China? The State is God and government knows best. One group of people wanting to use government to have power over and control another group of people. Power, as I said.

Sure, they used to use religion to control “other” groups of people, but now they use government. That is the root of this Brian, one group trying to control another group, regardless of an excuse like religion.

Tobacco Nazis are doing the exact same thing and it is not rooted in religion either. The State owns you and if you smoke you harm yourself and the state so its bad.

This isn’t a religious war at all. We can get them on our side to fight the State. China bans drugs and religion to help us better see who we are fighting. Liberal statists that want ever more government power.

0  0

thus, the basis of prohibition remains the fear of eternal damnation whether or not any individual crusader of today fully comprehends that fact. while i agree with you in toto that the primary reason this is all WRONG is that it is an unforgivable usurpation of individual rights, we must be clear about why it happened in the first place. that “why” is clearly fear of eternal damnation.

certainly what drives people to continue supporting prohibition in our current day and age is not always driven by religious belief on an individual basis. indeed, i would surmise that most people today who continue supporting prohibition do so mostly due to a simple lack of knowledge — which can be “cured.” meanwhile, the chorus of screaming harpies dominating the debate from the prohibitionist side over the past several decades do remain primarily motivated by religion.

hi rick steeb — fentanyl is already available by prescription, as are cocaine and methamphetamine. thus, when we approach the scenario of legalized availability of recreational intoxicants, we would be well advised to delineate how something is intended to be used in order to create coherent legal structures within which these things can be effectively regulated.

i honestly do not ever see the development of a market in recreational fentanyl. however, there clearly would be a market for recreational opium products. if opium is available for recreation, my assessment is that the vast majority of people who are attracted to the effects of opiates would use opium rather than doing something like taking vicodin to catch a buzz as they do in the current regime of “illegal” opium and “legal by prescription” vicodin, morphine and fentanyl.

we cannot allow ourselves to succumb to baseless fears about heroin being sold to children in vending machines — that scenario is prohibitionist fear mongering with precious little basis in reality.

0  0

0  0

Howard’s on top of things at Citizens Opposing Prohibition. Check it out.

I’ve also offered him an opportunity to guest post here, but I think he’s too busy with the new site.

0  0

Prohibition is chaos and those who profit from mayhem and social disorder are given the keys to the chaos-mobile. But in a regulated market… there is a friendly checker (who is making a tax-paying wage and who spends his/her wages in the community) willing to take my cash or card for that 6 pack of Fat Tire and a pouch of American Spirit tobacco. And this is all done in public! No mayhem, no back alleys…

And if I want to grow some ganja or some poppies why not? Now if I want to grow acres of poppies… why not? Why DON’T we grow our own poppies here? Considering how much pot in a year the tens of millions of us potheads consume, there is employment there, there would be derivative businesses that spring up to meet the specific needs of those who would farm our herb, our poppies.

heck, we’ve got farmers in the Dakotas doing civil disobedience with hemp seeds – and he’s no hippie. But this war has hurt our farmers too… if we grew hemp again our timber industry would be healthier… the list goes on….

But it won’t matter, if Big Bro’ wins.If you don’t think the Wash DC-Pharma-Wall St-military-industrial-corporate-incarceration complex (Big Bro’) isn’t poised to lock our asses down… ya ain’t payin’ attention.

And thanks, once again, to LEAP for their work… they are on point with their message – End Prohibition (again).

It’s a simple one.

And what’s the word with Howard W? He’s been quiet for awhile… ez…?

0  0

0  0

“this is not about pot — it’s about human rights. we all have the absolute right to do with ourselves as we wish — and no one has the right to punish you for doing so.

we have all the facts to counter every argument posed by the prohibs — we just need to remember not to act like them.

get your shit together and we can actually win. keep playing games about which drugs are “okay” and which are not and we continue riding the merry-go-round from hell.”

0  0

Was Lisa Madigan motivated by religon when she argued a drug dog sniff isn’t a search? What does that have to do with religion? How about Barack Obama’s efforts to outlaw the ephedra plant, is that religiously motivated? Nope.

Modern liberals don’t believe in individual rights, they believe in collective rights. If the collective doesn’t want cannabis or whatever, then the collective will outlaw it. THAT is what we are fighting. Government power over individual rights. We are fighting to get our individual rights back from the collective mindset that liberals have used to get the religious on their side in this war.

Ms. Taylor illustrated perfectly my comments a few days ago about religious people leaving their “conservative” principles behind to join the liberal, collective mindset when it comes to drugs. “In this instance, the majority rules.” This shows pretty clearly that liberals have gotten the religious folks to join their collective side of the drug war.

Do modern liberals lock us in cages because of religion? No, they do it for “the children”. You see it in most of their policy proposals. Individual rights must be taken by government and given to the collective, “for the children”. Now, “for the children” is really code for the government employees and unions and their pensions and benefits. Follow the money.

Do we need religion on our side? Yes, we do. As long as we’re operating under collective rules, we need a majority along with the politicians in power. Will we automatically win if religion admits defeat? Nope, the war will just begin then. Then we have to fight the unions and entrenched bureaucrats who provide the most campaign cash to keep politicians in favor of prohibition. State of Illinois prime example. For the past 20 years I bet, the biggest campaign donors to BOTH parties have been unions that include huge numbers of government employees. The money is NOT coming from churches, especially to the Democrats with complete control of the state.

This is NOT a religious war. This is a war for individual rights against collective rights. Which is perfectly illustrated by the fact that so many liberals are willing to legalize cannabis but not other drugs. IF they believed in individual rights instead of collective rights, they would automatically see the need to legalize all drugs. Is it because of religion they think cannabis is ok but LSD is not? Nope, its because of collective rights, protecting children, government union jobs, and the simple belief that government knows best what individuals should be able to.

Mr. Steeb, what is the sound reason for locking a human being in a cage that possesses Fentanyl without a prescription? Protecting them from themselves?

Brian, do you think Mr. Steeb here is religiously motivated, or liberally motivated by the notion that government needs to protect people from themselves and government knows best?

No personal offenses intended.

0  0