Talk About Sending Mixed Smoke Signals

Talk About Sending Mixed Smoke Signals
Posted by CN Staff on April 01, 2007 at 11:52:34 PT
By Susan Swartz, The Press Democrat
Source: Press Democrat
California -- You have to wonder what those judges themselves were smoking. I refer to the federal court of appeals that ruled a sick mother of two from Oakland cannot use medical marijuana. Even though what she's doing is legal under California law and even though her doctors say smoking marijuana is the only thing that motivates her to eat and deal with the pain from scoliosis, a brain tumor and endometriosis, the court says Angel Raich is a criminal in the eyes of the federal government.
The government stands firm that marijuana is an illegal controlled substance with no medical value. The federal government doesn't buy the argument that gravely ill people have the right to use marijuana when legal drugs have failed.The government says there's no scientific proof that ingesting or inhaling marijuana makes a difference to sick people. This is, of course, the same government that picks and chooses the scientific arguments it likes - global warming being highly exaggerated and stem cell research a plot to kill babies.This federal government would tell sick people to just pray and take a pill. This government believes if teenagers and other suggestible Americans ever saw Raich using marijuana, they, too, might want to acquire scoliosis, a brain tumor and endometriosis so they could get high and eat brownies.Meanwhile, the tobacco industry has been out looking for young women to sicken.There's no lack of scientific proof that smoking tobacco can lead to lung cancer, heart disease, stroke, emphysema and other miseries. But it's still legal to grow and sell the stuff, even though finding a legal place to puff is becoming harder all the time.Because the tobacco industry is being squeezed - not unlike someone with scoliosis, emphysema and a brain tumor must feel every day of her life - the R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. has come up with a new cigarette for women called Camel No. 9.Clever marketing makes Camel No. 9 sound more like a fashion accessory than a cancer stick. The name suggests a connection to perfume - Chanel No. 19 - or that kicky song "Love Potion No. 9." The cigarettes come in a sexy package of basic black with fuchsia touches - a chic combo that begs for champagne bubbles. And the taste is touted as "light and luscious," not unlike a diet dessert.Advertised in fashion magazines, Camel No. 9 is being promoted at "Girls Night Out" events at nightclubs. Lest anyone accuse them of going after teenagers, the Camel people insist no one under 21 is allowed in their parties where the "girls" get goody bags, massages, drinks, hairstyles and free smokes, of course. Think of it as a cough-'til-you-drop night.The tobacco industry has been hit hard by a drop in female smokers in recent years. Maybe women finally got the message that lung cancer kills more women than breast cancer. Or maybe they realized that those little smoking lines you get around your mouth never disappear.So of course there's a desperate push to win the girls back. In a business story on the new cigarette, Wall Street analysts praised R.J. Reynolds for its successful marketing strategy.Now a British study has come out with a list of the most dangerous substances. Heroin is first. Tobacco is ninth. Marijuana is 11th.I wonder how many sick people who are dying because they or someone close to them smoked tobacco now use marijuana to lessen their pain. They, if no one else, see the absurdity of a society where pushing a drug that kills is business but using a drug that helps you live is a crime. Source: Press Democrat, The (Santa Rosa, CA)Author: Susan Swartz, The Press DemocratPublished: Sunday, April 1, 2007Copyright: 2007 The Press DemocratContact: letters pressdemo.comWebsite: Articles & Web Site:Angel Justice Woman Loses Appeal on MJ as Medication Says U.S. Can Ban Medical Marijuana 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help

Comment #5 posted by mayan on April 02, 2007 at 16:20:40 PT
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by rafael on April 02, 2007 at 15:23:16 PT
comment #2
Alcohol placed in 5th.The top 4 were:
1st - Heroin.
2nd - Cocaine.
3rd - Barbiturates.
4th - ´Street´ methadone.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by switchback on April 02, 2007 at 10:31:43 PT:
Not only is tobacco legal for use, but also certain derived opiates such as morphine and vicodin. How can our government so easily legalize these highly addictive drugs without the enormous scrutiny that marijuana is afforded? The answer is simple; money. Large pharmeceutical firms (which contribute large amounts of money to campaigns) make millions off of our purchase of their man-made drugs. They are not about to allow their profits slip to a cure-all drug that can be produced by the average consumer. Our government is on the corporations' side and without remorse quells our voices by turning a deaf ear. Every study done on marijuana has proven beyond a doubt that cannabis' health benefits far outweigh cannabis' bad effects. Many man-made drugs today have side effects that may prove serious or even deadly to your health. Marijuana could never be deadly and even cures the side effects of these drugs that are considered "safer than" cannabis. The government lies to us at every turn and still we eat out of their hand.....
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by mayan on April 02, 2007 at 00:42:41 PT
Mixed Smoke Signals
Now a British study has come out with a list of the most dangerous substances. Heroin is first. Tobacco is ninth. Marijuana is 11th.Cannabis shouldn't even be on that list. I wonder where alcohol placed? There was a NASCAR race on earlier and I noticed all of the cars with beer and whiskey brands on them. Nothing goes together like fast cars and alcoholic beverages! Just what kind of a message that sends to the children?!?Cannabis prohibition sends the message that corporate profits and government control outweigh a human being's right to live and pursue liberty and happiness. We are dealing with murderers. THE WAY OUT IS THE WAY IN...The curious tale of the 'other' WTC tower: O Donnell Lambasted for Opinions: Media Matters Ignores Right Wing Attacks on Rosie O'Donnell: O'Donnell breaks open 9/11 on network TV: 911 Almost Certainly A 'Monstrous Series Of Lies': SPIKED SEPT. 11 BLOCKBUSTER: Third Stage:'s visit White House:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by FoM on April 01, 2007 at 19:20:39 PT
Court Rejects Constitutional Right To Marijuana
But judges said patients still can try to use medical necessity as a defense if they are criminally prosecuted.By Amy Lynn Sorrel, AMNews StaffApril 9, 2007Federal judges have found that physician-approved use of medical cannabis to save a patient's life is not a constitutionally protected right. But proponents say the decision does not disturb certain protections already in place for patients and doctors.Angel McClary Raich sued the government in 2002 seeking relief from the federal ban on medicinal use of the drug. She argued the law violates her fundamental right to preserve her life. The 41-year-old California woman has an inoperable brain tumor, scoliosis, a life-threatening wasting syndrome and other debilitating ailments. Raich argued cannabis essentially keeps her alive by stimulating her appetite and relieving her pain. Conventional medications have been ineffective or caused intolerable side effects, court records state.The case returned to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals after the U.S. Supreme Court in 2005 ruled the government has the right to arrest patients for using cannabis, in spite of state laws that allow it for medical purposes. The high court sent the case back, allowing Raich to make her case again, this time using the personal constitutional rights argument.In a March ruling, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court concurred with the Supreme Court and said that, in spite of her condition, Raich was not immune to possible federal criminal prosecution."We agree with Raich that medical and conventional wisdom that recognizes the use of marijuana for medical purposes is gaining traction in the law," the court stated. "But that legal recognition has not yet reached the point where a conclusion can be drawn that the right to use medical marijuana is 'fundamental' and 'implicit in the concept of ordered liberty.' "
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment