Advocates Bring Legalization Battle To CA Ballot
function share_this(num) {
 tit=encodeURIComponent('Advocates Bring Legalization Battle To CA Ballot');
 site = new Array(5);
 return false;

Advocates Bring Legalization Battle To CA Ballot
Posted by CN Staff on September 25, 2014 at 05:25:59 PT
By Gloria Goodale,  Staff Writer 
Source: Christian Science Monitor
Los Angeles -- On Wednesday, the nation’s largest marijuana advocacy group, the Marijuana Policy Project, filed paperwork with the state of California to put a legalization initiative on the 2016 ballot. This follows a similar move in Arizona this week, adding to the growing number of states being targeted for a 2016 vote on recreational marijuana use. Supporters in Nevada announced a 2016 ballot target back in April.
Experts say this strategy is a focused effort to take advantage of higher voter turnout in presidential elections – in particular younger voters, who tend to support marijuana legalization efforts.The big question a couple of years ago was whether advocates would aim for November 2014 or November 2016, says Rob MacCoun, a Stanford University law professor who has studied the social impact of drug laws around the globe. The political case for 2016 – that the presidential election will bring more young voters to the polls – is particularly true if Hillary Clinton is on the ballot, he notes. Advocates have had to weigh this against the potential downside of more than two years of on-the-ground experience in states that already have legalized recreational marijuana use.“The risk is that by 2016, we will know more about the consequences of legalization in Colorado and Washington, so the debate will shift from abstractions to actual outcomes,” he says. Supporters run the very real risk that egregious events linked to marijuana use could sour public attitudes toward more widespread legal use.The strategy of skipping the 2014 elections also means that legalization advocates run the risk of losing momentum, says Professor MacCoun. Right now, the polls suggest that Californians favor legalization by a small margin, he says.“Opinions may be soft, and propositions tend to lose support as we approach Election Day,” he says.On the other hand, he points out that every passing year brings more and more members of a generation that grew up around more casual attitudes toward marijuana use, as children of baby boomers become eligible to vote.In every election, “a greater share of eligible voters come from birth cohorts with plenty of marijuana experience, and they tend to favor legalization,” he adds. Activists maintain that California will help tip the balance for their cause. “As the nation's largest state, California has been a national trendsetter in cannabis going back to 1972, when the world's first-ever marijuana initiative appeared on our ballot,” says Dale Gieringer from the California chapter of the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML).“In 1996, we approved the first-ever medical marijuana law, which has since been copied by 23 states,” he says via e-mail. During the 2014 election, voters in two states, Oregon and Alaska, will vote on whether to legalize recreational marijuana use, while the District of Columbia and more than a dozen Michigan cities will vote on measures that would decriminalize possession.Paul Armentano, deputy director for NORML, says, if those measures pass, it could give the issue momentum heading into 2016. “We expect that voters in various states in 2014 and again in 2016 will elect to replace America’s failed and unpopular policy of pot prohibition,” he said via e-mail.However, not all of recent history is on their side. In 2010, California voters defeated Proposition 19, which would have legalized certain low-level marijuana-related activities. And the prevailing political winds from Sacramento are running counter to legalization. Gov. Jerry Brown, for one, does not support legalization.As Governor Brown asked one interviewer recently, “How many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation?”Source: Christian Science Monitor (US)Author:  Gloria Goodale,  Staff Writer Published: September 24, 2014Copyright: 2014 The Christian Science Publishing SocietyContact: letters csmonitor.comWebsite: URL:   -- Cannabis Archives 
Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help 

Comment #11 posted by runruff on September 27, 2014 at 09:02:40 PT
What is truth, really?
Question: "What is Christian Gnosticism?" Answer: There is actually no such thing as Christian Gnosticism, because true Christianity and Gnosticism are mutually exclusive systems of belief. The principles of Gnosticism contradict what it means to be a Christian. Therefore, while some forms of Gnosticism may claim to be Christian, they are in fact decidedly non-Christian. Gnosticism was perhaps the most dangerous heresy that threatened the early church during the first three centuries. Influenced by such philosophers as Plato, Gnosticism is based on two false premises. First, it espouses a dualism regarding spirit and matter. Gnostics assert that matter is inherently evil and spirit is good. As a result of this presupposition, Gnostics believe anything done in the body, even the grossest sin, has no meaning because real life exists in the spirit realm only. Second, Gnostics claim to possess an elevated knowledge, a “higher truth” known only to a certain few. Gnosticism comes from the Greek word gnosis which means “to know.” Gnostics claim to possess a higher knowledge, not from the Bible, but acquired on some mystical higher plain of existence. Gnostics see themselves as a privileged class elevated above everybody else by their higher, deeper knowledge of God.Read more:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #10 posted by runruff on September 26, 2014 at 12:50:03 PT
Hi Gary!
Wow, to Know the truth is an awesome thing. How blessed you are! As a life long truth seeker, I envy you. Be in peace!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #9 posted by Garry Minor on September 26, 2014 at 12:40:39 PT:
runruff #2 Christians and science!
While you're correct about those at the Christian Science Monitor, you aren't correct about True Christians, Anointed Ones!"If Christians believed in science they would not have a religion."Not if you're a Gnostic, a True Christian!"Religion is faith based. Faith is believing in the unbelievable. Unreality."I don't have faith, I Know the Truth!"Science is fact based knowledge. How do they merge the two?"My Spirituality and religion is based upon Biblical, historical, scientific fact!
My Christ cures the cancers! Science proves it!
The jesus of this world, the antichrist, creates them!There are 250 shekels of Kaneh Bosm, Cannabis in the Holy Oil that God instructed Moses to prepare for anointing His priests, kings, prophets, and of course, His Anointed Ones, Christians! The title Christ/ Messiah simply means covered in Holy Oil, Anointed!If you know the Truth, the Truth will set you free!The leaves of the Tree are for the healing of nations!
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #8 posted by FoM on September 25, 2014 at 14:14:27 PT
Press Release From The Drug Policy Alliance
Attorney General Eric Holder to ResignAG Holder Made Unprecedented Efforts to Address Mass Incarceration and Failed Drug WarDPA Calls On President Obama to Appoint Replacement Who Will Follow Through on Crucial Criminal Justice ReformsAttorney General Eric Holder announced today that he will be resigning from office once a replacement is found. Drug policy and criminal justice reform advocates expressed disappointment he is leaving office, praising his leadership and calling on President Obama to nominate a replacement who will carry on Holder’s reform work.
 "Holder will go down in history as the Attorney General who began unwinding the war on drugs and steering our country away from mass incarceration,” said Bill Piper, director of national affairs for the Drug Policy Alliance. “President Obama should replace him with someone who is going to carry on that legacy of reform."Complete Press Release:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #7 posted by FoM on September 25, 2014 at 13:44:15 PT
Eric Holder Open To Idea of Rescheduling Marijuana
By Ricardo Baca, The Cannabist StaffOn the brink of giving up his post, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder appears to be more open than ever before to talk about the potential of rescheduling of marijuana.Marijuana is currently a Schedule I substance in the U.S. — along with heroin, LSD, ecstasy and other substances with “no medical use” — a designation activists have long fought and a serious roadblock for the legal marijuana industry in states that allow the sale of medical or recreational cannabis.And now Holder — who is in the news this morning regarding his recent resignation as attorney general — is saying that Americans should question themselves, using science as a guide, on rescheduling marijuana and its shared classification with heroin.“It’s certainly a question we need to ask ourselves, whether or not marijuana is as serious a drug as heroin, especially given what we’ve seen recently with regard to heroin — the progression of people, from using opioids to heroin use, the spread and the destruction that heroin has perpetrated all around our country,” Holder told Yahoo global news anchor Katie Couric. “And to see how, by contrast, what the impact is of marijuana use.“Now it can be destructive, if used in certain ways, but the question of whether or not they should be in the same category is something that we need to ask ourselves — and use science as the basis for making that determination.”Couric then asked Holder if marijuana should be federally decriminalized.“That is something for Congress to decide,” he said. “I think we’ve taken a look at the experiments that are going on in Colorado and Washington, and we’re going to see what happens there, and that’ll help inform us as to what we want to do on the federal level.”Some inside the marijuana reform movement took Holder’s words encouragingly.“It’s refreshing to hear these remarks from the attorney general, especially since the science couldn’t be any clearer that marijuana doesn’t meet the criteria for being classified as a Schedule I substance,” said Tom Angell, chairman of industry group Marijuana Majority. “Numerous studies confirm marijuana’s medical value, and if the administration is serious about taking an objective look at this issue, rescheduling is very achievable by the time this president leaves office. They can do this administratively without any further action from Congress.”URL:
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #6 posted by observer on September 25, 2014 at 11:58:14 PT
Yet More Milage from the Scary L- Word
Note: "Legalization", "Legalize", "Legalized", etc - used 11 times.Jail, prison, incarceration etc. - mentioned 0 times.Pot "legalization" is about not arresting and imprisoning people for using cannabis. The arrest and prison bit is the whole point of legalization.Why do you think the Christian Science Monitor chose to downplay the arrest/prison part (i.e., the most salient and important aspect of the proposed pot "legalization"), and chose to emphasize the "Legalization" word?Why might the Christian Science Monitor do that? Any ideas?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #5 posted by runruff on September 25, 2014 at 11:50:07 PT
Apples grow on trees, except those that grow...
on other trees! "Supporters run the very real risk that egregious events linked to marijuana use could sour public attitudes toward more widespread legal use."
on other trees!“a greater share of eligible voters come from birth cohorts with plenty of marijuana experience, and they tend to favor legalization,” he adds. He says that people who grew up with pot favor it but states where it is legal, people may not favor it? White man speak with forked tongue! Not the first time!One head, two tongues.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #4 posted by runruff on September 25, 2014 at 09:44:16 PT
"...abstractions to actual outcomes,” 
The "abstractions" are nothing but hyperbole and propaganda motivated by greed and politics!"Actual outcomes" have been demonstrated for more than five to ten thousand years. When I was a young man I was curious and actively searched for the truth in all things. I was a real pert!Today? I am a little tired and the truth is what it is. I am sure that me and Professor Mac Coun have had similar youthful enthusiasm for knowledge, but for one thing? It appears that the good professor has become an ex-pert.
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #3 posted by runruff on September 25, 2014 at 09:10:36 PT
Runruff asked:
How much beer can Texas drink and still be a great state?How many trough feeding jobs can the Brown family hold in just two generations?How many families is it ok to live in poverty while the psycho-hoarders in this country continue to thrive?Jerry's friends "liked" his remark on Facebook. The largest cash crop in California is cannabis. It has been so for many years. Is he trying to blame the state of his state on pot instead of poor leadership?These egg heads, with the scrambled brains, make these inflammatory statements without thinking them through. Plus he is advising his state based on antiquated reefer madness hyperbole that has been scientifically proven wrong decades ago. This is called a "Red Herring".It is obvious that Mr. Moonbeam has gone from whimsical to 
delusional. I wonder what pills he is on?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #2 posted by runruff on September 25, 2014 at 08:45:43 PT
Christian Science Monitor?
This is big misnomer.If Christians believed in science they would not have a religion.Religion is faith based. Faith is believing in the unbelievable. Unreality. Science is fact based knowledge. How do they merge the two?
[ Post Comment ]

Comment #1 posted by Oleg the Tumor on September 25, 2014 at 08:34:33 PT
The Business of Exclusion.
"As Governor Brown asked one interviewer recently, “How many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation?”"By Gov. Brown's logic, the greatness of a nation is measured in inverse proportion to how many of its people consume marijuana! At some mathematical juncture, when enough people use marijuana, we, as a nation, will lose our "greatness". Is this a fact?I would argue that Gov. Brown's opinion is not an informed opinion by any means.Our founding fathers were mostly "corned" on alcohol as they went about their daily business. They did okay. (They proclaimed that all men were created equal, and then apparently forgot that they were slave owners – but they can't really blame all that on the booze. Freedom calls yet.)Cannabis was never a problem in America until the industrial age. Gov. Brown's attempt to link "impairment" with cannabis is typical of those who claim to exhibit examples of "Leadership", yet can only display examples of "Sponsorship" instead.If your sponsors say, "An America with legalized cannabis cannot be great", then that is what you will dutifully repeat to everyone you see to keep that sponsorship flowing. But legalized cannabis means new INDUSTRIES, new JOBS and greater OPPORTUNITIES for everyone!GIVE BACK WHAT YOU TOOK FROM US ON AUGUST 2, 1937!FREE THE PRISONER OF SCHEDULE ONE!
[ Post Comment ]

Post Comment