|
|
| Push Made for Medicinal Pot |
|
Posted by FoM on March 15, 2002 at 10:53:03 PT By John Biemer, Associated Press Source: Washington Times 
A bipartisan group of lawmakers, including some cancer survivors, appealed to a House committee yesterday to legalize marijuana for people who are suffering from debilitating medical conditions. The bill, which has 53 co-sponsors in the 141-member House, would allow people with diseases such as cancer or AIDS to use marijuana at the recommendation of their physician. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene would issue registry identification cards for patients eligible to take the drug. Delegate David Brinkley, Frederick County Republican, told the House Judiciary Committee he underwent radiation treatment for lymphoma in 1989. Mr. Brinkley addressed concerns that legalizing marijuana for medical purposes would clash with federal law by saying it could have been a great relief to other patients he met who were undergoing chemotherapy, which caused great pain and trouble eating. "Some people don't have time to wait for Washington to stop screwing around," he said. Delegate Dana Dembrow, Montgomery County Democrat, said marijuana is currently legal for medical purposes in eight states, so "we're not plowing new ground here." The sponsor of the bill, Delegate Donald Murphy, Baltimore County Republican, said no medicinal-marijuana users have been prosecuted federally in those states. Mr. Murphy argued that smoking marijuana is preferable in some cases to taking dronabinol, a legal pill that contains the principal active ingredient in pot. Pills can be difficult to keep down for people with extreme nausea, he said, and the smoke acts faster. Larry Silberman, 50, of Rockville, said he decided to start smoking marijuana as he was undergoing chemotherapy for non-Hodgkins lymphoma. He said the marijuana helped stimulate his appetite while he was enduring extreme nausea and pain. "It was far better to risk arrest and imprisonment than to slowly waste away and die," he said. "I believe smoking during that chemotherapy allowed me to live." Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby, testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be opened." The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use." Sponsors contend the change in the law is needed to keep Maryland State Police, on the advice of anti-gun activist Attorney General J. Joseph Curran Jr., from confiscating firearms and enforcing gun-disqualification laws in a way that many lawmakers, including the House speaker and Senate president, say they never intended. It appears the measure would restore gun rights to Donald G. Arnold, a private investigator named Citizen of the Year by the state for his work to make southeast Baltimore neighborhoods safer. He had paid a small fine for a bar scuffle with another man in 1969. The state police and Mr. Curran are fighting Mr. Arnold in Baltimore County Circuit Court to deny renewal of his concealed-carry permit despite a state review board's twice ordering that it be reissued to him. * Staff writer Margie Hyslop contributed to this report. Source: Washington Times (DC) Related Articles & Web Sites: Marijuana Policy Project Medical Marijuana Information Links Medical-Pot Bill Bars Prosecution Medical Marijuana Urged A Plea To Legalize Medicinal Marijuana Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #9 posted by freedom fighter on March 16, 2002 at 00:52:26 PT |
| that 2001 U.S. Supreme Court, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use", too anecdotal? I hope so! ff [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #8 posted by Toker00 on March 15, 2002 at 18:12:44 PT |
| This e-mail is directed to Mr. Douglas Stiegler. Mr. Stiegler, would you mind elaborating about the "Door that should not be opened"? Could you please tell me what you fear about that door being opened? Also, I have been consuming Cannabis for over thirty years. I have above average health, for a tobacco smoker. I am a highly trained and skilled craftsman. I work with power tools that require, no, demand restpect by their user. I have operated every trade tool imaginable, and always with safety and succuss. I have my own business, and it is doing nicely, thank you. I attribute my stress-free life to Cannabis. It rescued me from a deveastating bout with alcoholism. And, when I can keep a steady supply of Cannabis, I don't smoke cigarettes. There are TWO good reasons to open the damn door, buddy. Cannabis IS rehabilitative. So, unless you can come up with some other excuse for not "opening the door", besides your hidden protection of Major Corporations from competition, and the continuity of the Drug War so the Legal System and Prison Complexes can continue their feeding at the government money trough, then don't bother answering my e-mail. However, if you think you have a legitimate reason for not "openning the door", and can back it up with 5,000 years of continuous tests that negate the 5,000 years of testing and experimentation done voluntarily by humans all over the planet, please feel free to try to convert me. Just a word of advice, Mr. Stiegler. Listen to the common man. There is more wisdom there, than in all the politicians and lawmakers,living and dead,combined. Listen closely to what the people are saying. Our voices are not very loud, just yet, but come election time, think very carefully about what the soft voice is telling you. Your job and your future will someday, soon, depend on it. Peace. Realize, then Legalize. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by The GCW on March 15, 2002 at 15:42:24 PT |
| True and genuine inward certainty does not in the least fear outward analysis, nor does truth resent honest criticism. You should never forget that intolerance is the mask covering up the entertainment of secret doubts as to the trueness of one's belief. No man is at any time disturbed by his neighbor's attitude when he has perfect confidence in the truth of that which he wholeheartedly believes. Courage is the confidence of thoroughgoing honesty about those things which one professes to believe. Sincere men are unafraid of the critical examination of their true convictions and noble ideals.
Urantia paper 146, page 1641, par. 4. http://www.urantia.org/papers/paper146.html [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #6 posted by idbsne1 on March 15, 2002 at 14:56:39 PT |
| I just had to send mine as well...lol.....I hope it does some good.... Taken from Webster's online dictionary: Main Entry: bigˇot Pronunciation: 'bi-g&t Function: noun Etymology: Middle French, hypocrite, bigot Date: 1661 : a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices - bigˇotˇed g&-t&d/ adjective - bigˇotˇedˇly adverb Main Entry: self-righˇteous Pronunciation: -'rI-ch&s Function: adjective Date: circa 1680 : convinced of one's own righteousness especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others : narrow-mindedly moralistic - self-righˇteousˇly adverb - self-righˇteousˇness noun Bottom of Form 1 'Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby, testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be opened." The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use."' Over 15 First World countries including: Canada, the UK, Holland, Germany, Jamaica, Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Australia, Switzerland, Luxembourg, and others have decriminalized marijuana, made it legal medically, or both. Do you think that THEY would do this without any scientific evidence? Or is more likely our Government is hiding the truth....conveniently? Please notice how EVERY piece of "evidence" from the Government OR the US MEDIA is from the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA). Also please notice the use of the word "MAY" in EVERY claim. This is called PROPAGANDA. And please, search the net for evidence NOT from these government institutions..... Sorry for the harsh words, but it took those words to bring ME out of the darkness YOU'RE in.....trust me...I'm a conservative Republican..... I hope he reads these emails.... idbsne1 [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by Dankhank on March 15, 2002 at 14:20:05 PT:
|
| Mr Stiegler and got his answering service 30 minutes before his common quitting time. I can only surmise that he got a few calls before I got through.
The woman I got at his answering service was surprised to know that he haddone that testimony saying that she thought he did "good" stuff for families. She then said that cannabis helps her to get along and urged me to leave a number for him to get back to me. All in all a more enjoyable call than expected. Peace to all who fight ... [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #4 posted by Jose Melendez on March 15, 2002 at 12:32:25 PT:
|
| Dear Douglas Stiegler, I read your comments about the safety of cannabis: >>> Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby, testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be opened." The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use." <<< Actually, you should know that cannabis has well-documented anti-microbial as well as anti-carcinogenic properties. The following list of links contains peer reviewed data and also includes the IOM study you reference, all of which refute your position as published. http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/ccu.pdf http://www.cannabis-med.org/science-international/JCANT.htm http://www.freedomtoexhale.com/drr.htm http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread10533.shtml http://www.nap.edu/html/marimed/ Here is some more information you should know about cannabis. Also, you might note that the very same politicians that pretend to be "tough on drugs" accept their largest campaign contributions from industries whose products verifiably kill 6 over million Americans each decade. Over 400,000 U.S. cigarette smokers die annually from nicotine, a drug that is chemically poison, as 2-3 drops on an open cut or wound can be fatal. The drug is delivered by a defective, dangerous delivery device (the filtered cigarette, originally marketed as safer, even though internal documents prove they knew otherwise - see www.ash.org) that actually increases the required amounts of carbon monoxide, benzene, benzopyrene and toluene required to consume the desired amounts of the drug. from: http://tobaccofreekids.org/reports/contributions/ >The tobacco industry has given more than $19 million in political >contributions to members of Congress, candidates for federal office, >national political parties and political action committees since 1997 >to thwart policies to protect the public health -- and votes in >Congress show a strong correlation between the amount members receive >and how they vote on tobacco-related issues. >For example, the senators who voted successfully in 1998 to kill the >McCain tobacco-control bill (the only comprehensive tobacco-control >legislation that Congress has ever voted on) received, on average, >nearly four times as much money from the tobacco industry in the two >years before their last election as the senators who supported the >bill ($17,902 vs. $4,810). Congress has actively looked the other way for this particular industry for over 50 years. In fact, the day that Big Tobacco industry executives perjured themselves in front of Congress in 1996, they were advised by a lawyer named Ken Starr. Apparently, perjury is Mr. Starr's specialty, since he subsequently spent 40 million dollars attempting to prosecute then sitting President Bill Clinton for perjury over private, personal matters. But no one has been prosecuted for the known false statements made by his clients about the addictive nature of cigarettes. Similarly, former "drug czar" Barry McCaffrey strenuously resisted efforts by the group Mothers Against Drunk Driving to force the Office of National Drug Control Policy to include anti-teen drinking ads in their anti-drug prgrams. Congress stepped in quickly, and conveniently prohibited ONDCP from spending any funds to advertise against alcohol, which verifiably kills 100,000 Americans annually, not to mention domestic violence and child abuse that is associated with that legal drug. Similar numbers exist for another billion dollar industry - prescription drugs kill 110,000 U.S. citizens every year. Meanwhile Budweiser, Paxil, Prozac and Zoloft spam the television airwaves, Zoloft notably displays a cartoon based description of how the drug works (nearly identically to marijuana) by blocking dopamine receptors, causing your brain to increase production of this natural high. Of course, those drugs are all known for side effects, including but not limited to liver damage, sleeplessness, irritabilty, even death. Recently, in between SuperBowl Budweiser and Pepsi commercials (caffeine, by the way costs about the same to produce as cocaine, only it is more dangerous and addictive - 10 grams is the adult fatal dose, and about 90 percent of the world uses the drug regularly) there was an ONDCP ad, suggesting that drug purchasers "might" fund terror. Yet several months prior, that White House appropriated 43 million dollars to the Taliban, on the pretense that they were prohibiting opium. The State Department's Rand Beers later admitted that the Afghans had simply taken advantage of supply and demand, stockpiling the drug and artificially increasing the value of the product. Philip Morris recently completed and published a study that shows that governments financially profit from people dying prematurely from smoking. Apparently, if you smoke cigarettes, you create tax revenues for years, then die early, without collecting pensions, social security or other burdens to government. So, by keeping marijuana illegal, we have built what I like to call a house of cards, those that would have smoked pot and lived 20 years longer either die from tobacco, or rot in jail. And - you guessed it - the prison industry is a multi-billion dollar industry that lobbies Congress to maintain the status quo on drugs. If I had to boil the war on marijuana down to a catchy phrase, it would probably be something like, "It's the hypocrisy, stupid." There is more, please feel free to email any questions or comments. Peace, Jose Melendez owner, Narcosoft.com technology with substance "We'd rather sell Cannabis." (202) 777-2644 x7545 - voicemail/fax See also: http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,169517,00.html http://home.epix.net/~jlferri/marijle.html http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/media/schaffer1.htm http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/History/whiteb1.htm [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on March 15, 2002 at 12:30:13 PT:
|
| Here's their email address: director@mdfamilies.org I'm sure Mr. Stiegler would be very happy to hear from you... [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #2 posted by kaptinemo on March 15, 2002 at 11:58:36 PT:
|
| Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby, testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be opened." The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use." here is their website: and here is their phone number...very courteously provided by them, no doubt never expecting what's about to land on their heads: (410) 922-1008 Perhaps we Marylanders should spend a few minutes educating Mr. Stiegler concerning the length, breadth, and depth of his ignorance? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by E_Johnson on March 15, 2002 at 11:51:07 PT |
| "It was far better to risk arrest and imprisonment than to slowly waste away and die," he said. "I believe smoking during that chemotherapy allowed me to live." Douglas Stiegler, executive director of the Family Protection Lobby, testified against the bill, saying it "opens a door that should not be opened." The science supporting marijuana's medicinal benefits was too anecdotal, he said, citing a 2001 U.S. Supreme Court case, which said it has "no currently accepted medical use." What an amazing juxtaposition of sentiments between citizens we have here. A man testifies that marijuana helped him live instead of die from the effects of his scientifically approved medical treatment, a treatment that is capable of killing the patient along with the cancer. And his brother-man listens to him and others just like him and still says that's a door that should not be opened. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |