http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1154AP_Scotus_Religious_Tea.html?source=mypi

You anti-drug fucks might slow us down, but eventually all historically used (natural) drugs will be legal to produce and use by "single member religions" aka "all individuals".

2/21/2006 1:42:23 PM

what is a 'natural' drug?

2/21/2006 1:50:20 PM

yea seriously... everything comes from nature

2/21/2006 1:57:10 PM

natural = no lab? not synthetic?

2/21/2006 1:58:53 PM

so, cocaine and heroine are natural drugs

2/21/2006 2:04:46 PM

why stop at the lab

if you cure your marijuana, then its not natural anymore

2/21/2006 2:04:48 PM

there wont ever be any single member religions, so start growing out your dreadlocks

2/21/2006 2:17:08 PM

Quote :

"what is a 'natural' drug?"

Quote :

"yea seriously... everything comes from nature."

"Natural" is a term that makes a common distinction that most people who use the term make, and a few anthropocentric douche-bags like yourself claim is an imaginary distinction, CAUSE LIKE, EVERYTHING ON EARTH IS NATURAL BECAUSE, LIKE, IT MUST HAVE COME FROM NATURE AT SOME POINT, RIGHT? I'M SO SMART I CAN IGNORE THE DISTINCTION THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO USE THE TERM HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH AND THAT WAY I CAN ARGUE AGAINST THEM LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH OR OTHER STUPID GOD FOLLOWERS THAT SWEAR THAT GOD WOULD NEVER LET ANYTHING BAD HAPPEN AND GOD KNOWS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN AND THE FUTURE HAS ALREADY BEEN WRITTEN BY GOD SO NOTHING WE DO CAN POSSIBLY HURT THE BIG PICTURE AND NOTHING WE DO IS UNNATURAL BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS A PART OF GOD'S PLAN SO WE CAN MAKE CRYSTAL METH AND HYDROGENATED FAT AND STYROFOAM AND NUCLEAR WASTE AND WE CAN JUST FLOAT THAT SHIT DOWN THE RIVER AND IT'S NO BIG DEAL BECAUSE I'M GOING TO HEAVEN BECAUSE MY GOD SAYS I CAN! OMG I'M SO COOL. I JUST PROVED THAT ANYONE THAT USES THE TERM UNNATURAL IS WRONG. THAT WORD SHOULDN'T EXIST BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS NATURAL. EVERYONE THROUGHOUT TIME THAT HAS USED THAT WORD WAS WRONG, BUT I'M RIGHT.

stfu.

I would still stand behind my statement omitting the word natural.





Ayahuasca




Banisteriopsis Caapi




DMT




If religion and g0vt are separate, why should a new religion be ineligible for the same religious freedom rights as a historically based religion?

What the fewest number of members that would constitute a legally recognized religion?
Ten?
Fifty?
Is there a law that dictates this?

2/21/2006 2:23:34 PM

Wow - I think this is a good ruling, but how does it jive with the peyote case, which said that a religious group still has to abide by generally applicable laws, and does not have an exemption if the generally applicable law just happens to impinge upon their worship.

I believe that the peyote case should be overruled, but I doubt that is what happened here.

2/21/2006 2:36:36 PM

Quote :

" Is there a law that dictates this?"

im pretty sure there is, but i dont know what the number is

2/21/2006 2:38:37 PM

the difference between hempster and everyone else is that we know abusing drugs is BAD. everyone abuses drugs. but YOU seem to think that people are better for it.

drug use is going to happen but it shouldnt be celebrated.

2/21/2006 2:43:44 PM

Quote :

"I'M SO SMART I CAN IGNORE THE DISTINCTION THAT THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE WHO USE THE TERM HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH AND THAT WAY I CAN ARGUE AGAINST THEM LIKE RUSH LIMBAUGH OR OTHER STUPID GOD FOLLOWERS THAT SWEAR THAT GOD WOULD NEVER LET ANYTHING BAD HAPPEN AND GOD KNOWS WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN AND THE FUTURE HAS ALREADY BEEN WRITTEN BY GOD SO NOTHING WE DO CAN POSSIBLY HURT THE BIG PICTURE AND NOTHING WE DO IS UNNATURAL BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS A PART OF GOD'S PLAN SO WE CAN MAKE CRYSTAL METH AND HYDROGENATED FAT AND STYROFOAM AND NUCLEAR WASTE AND WE CAN JUST FLOAT THAT SHIT DOWN THE RIVER AND IT'S NO BIG DEAL BECAUSE I'M GOING TO HEAVEN BECAUSE MY GOD SAYS I CAN! OMG I'M SO COOL. I JUST PROVED THAT ANYONE THAT USES THE TERM UNNATURAL IS WRONG. THAT WORD SHOULDN'T EXIST BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS NATURAL. EVERYONE THROUGHOUT TIME THAT HAS USED THAT WORD WAS WRONG, BUT I'M RIGHT."

WTF are you even talking about at this point?

2/21/2006 2:46:26 PM

he's getting paranoid, its the drugs

2/21/2006 2:47:15 PM

yea i'm pretty sure that transition from lowercase to all caps was about the time his meth hit kicked in

2/21/2006 2:50:05 PM

I've used yage. Don't know if I'll do it again.

2/21/2006 2:52:08 PM

Quote :

"the difference between hempster and everyone else is that we know abusing drugs is BAD. everyone abuses drugs. but YOU seem to think that people are better for it. drug use is going to happen but it shouldnt be celebrated."

Drug use ≠ Drug Abuse

You know that, right?

I mean, you aren't saying that these individuals in particular are abusing drugs when they drink that tea to talk to god, are you?

Are you abusing drugs when you drink regular coffee with sugar?

Perhaps a definition of terms would be helpful....


Why do you think that I don't know that abusing drugs is bad?
Why do you think that I think people are better for abusing drugs?
Is there anything besides your warped sense of logic to explain why you think these things?
Or are you just trolling?

I think people are better for using drugs responsibly, no matter what the drug is.
Drug abuse is irresponsible.

2/21/2006 3:01:04 PM

Quote :

"Why do you think that I don't know that abusing drugs is bad?"

becuase it is obvious.

2/21/2006 3:08:21 PM

just click user info

2/21/2006 3:11:01 PM

Quote :

"they drink that tea to talk to god"

sorry it just sounds too funny to let it go by without quoting again

Quote :

"Drug abuse is irresponsible."

caps-lock abuse is irresponsible

[Edited on February 21, 2006 at 3:18 PM. Reason : s]

2/21/2006 3:18:15 PM

its no worse than scientology

2/21/2006 3:19:05 PM

I was wondering how they'd rule on this one (yes, I've been following the case). I have to admit, I'm pleasantly surprised.

BTW - the article calls it "hoasca" tea, but you might know of it as "ayahuasca."

How much of the drug is required to be in possession to be considered illegal in the first place? It occurs naturally in every living human body.

2/21/2006 3:19:44 PM

Quote :

"there wont ever be any single member religions, so start growing out your dreadlocks"

Never say never won't ever....

Quote :

"im pretty sure there is [a law that dictates the fewest number of members that would constitute a legally recognized religion], but i dont know what the number is"

Can you find a reference to that law, if it does exist?

Quote :

"becuase it is obvious."

Well, if "why you think I don't know that abusing drugs is bad" is so obvious, why not just answer the question?

Quote :

"just click user info"

Are you implying that my marijuana advocacy somehow suggests that I don't know abusing drugs is bad?
If so, could you explain how?

Quote :

"sorry ["they drink that tea to talk to god"] just sounds too funny to let it go by without quoting again"

If I may ask, what's sounds so funny about it?
Are you making fun of someone's faith? (It's OK if you are--I do it all the time...)

Quote :

"How much of the drug is required to be in possession to be considered illegal in the first place? It occurs naturally in every living human body."

Ironic, huh?

2/21/2006 4:23:51 PM

religion has traditionally provided some room for substance use

the Catholic church gives alcohol to minors
but through transubstantiation it is no longer considered a drug

2/21/2006 4:24:06 PM

finally a religion that is worth joining. lol j/k

2/21/2006 4:31:53 PM

Quote :

"the Catholic church gives alcohol to minors but through transubstantiation it is no longer considered a drug"

haha, interesting point.

So is it underage drinking or cannibalism?

2/21/2006 5:37:48 PM

Blood drinking =/ Cannabalism

However, the other half of the Eucharist qualifies as cannabalism.

2/21/2006 6:00:17 PM

5-MeO-DMT =/= DMT.

You could state your case much more convincingly if you refrained from slamming somebody with every post.

And why do you put a limit of religion/naturally occuring on what will be legalized?

"but eventually all historically used (natural) drugs will be legal to produce and use by 'single member religions' aka 'all individuals'"

An informed, competent individual should have the right to ingest any substance he wants to, as long as it doesn't endanger the safety of others. This includes DMT, bleach, synthetic hypnotics, anything.

2/21/2006 6:57:53 PM

Regarding forming a new religion, from someone's correspondence with the Peyote Way Church. Edited as I saw fit.

"Dear -:
As you must know it is legal to grow - as
long as you don't know its spiritual benefits.
Regardless, you have already written to me a pretty
good testimony. I would like to suggest that you take
the Declaration of Religious Belief that you will find
on our website and doctor it up according to your own
testimony and beliefs, sign it in front of a notary
and register it at your local courthouse. Another
option, which is a little more risky, is this:It takes
only three people to incorporate a religion. File a
Declaration of Intent to start a church with two
allies and start incorporation proceedings. This is a
larger investment on your part and may be more than
you have in mind. It costs about $1,000. these days to
incorporate, but it is harder for the government to
argue with a corporate entity--difficult but not
impossible...most people opt for plan A. Thanks."

The Declaration of Religious Belief seems very weak, and I doubt it would hold any water in court.
http://www.peyoteway.org/peyoteway/declaration_of_religious%20Belief.htm

2/21/2006 7:10:48 PM

Quote :

"You could state your case much more convincingly if you refrained from slamming somebody with every post."

True, but an even better idea would be to state my case somewhere that actually matters, instead of TWW SoapBox. This place is full of trolls, bigots, and assholes. Not much gets done here....

Quote :

"why do you put a limit of religion/naturally occurring on what will be legalized?"

I was trying to limit the conversation in this thread to the recent ruling. You are new, so you don't know from my previous posts that I am rather libertarian. (small "l" libertarian) The idea of religious freedom is interesting to me, and I feel that it holds potential for an even greater realization of individual liberty in our political system. (Like what just you just posted about the Peyote Way Church.....)

Quote :

"An informed, competent individual should have the right to ingest any substance he wants to, as long as it doesn't endanger the safety of others [or infringe on their right to the same]. This includes DMT, bleach, synthetic hypnotics, anything."

I agree 100%.



[Edited on February 21, 2006 at 7:15 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2006 7:13:49 PM

Ok, cool.

I remember a similar ruling for peyote from the 90s, where after years of court battles, the DEA/local police department was ordered to return the buttons to the church. They refused to do so, but I don't know what came of it. Fucking animals probably let the plants die. Wonder what will happen in this case.

Another interesting case I read last year:
http://www.klfy.com/Global/story.asp?S=2971873

I found out they were both members of the Santo Daime church. I looked up the names just now to see what ever came of it and found this from out in California:
http://www.co.sanmateo.ca.us/smc/department/home/0,,14095463_34411386_599321003,00.html

JANUARY 30
Warrant Arrest - - 1000 Block of Westridge: On 1/30/06, Luzia Krull and Hugo Arana were arrested on a no bail warrants issued by St. Landry Parish Sheriff's Office, Louisiana on "dangerous drug" charges. They were booked into the San Mateo County Jail and will await extradition on the charges.

I was thinking that they should be let off in light of the SCOTUS ruling, but unfortunatly they're probably going to be fucked by the 10 oz of weed. This is no time for being a martyr in Amerika.

2/21/2006 7:54:17 PM

Quote :

"Are you implying that my marijuana advocacy obsession somehow suggests that I don't know abusing drugs is bad?"

2/22/2006 1:39:38 PM

Quote :

"ou anti-drug fucks might slow us down, but eventually all historically used (natural) drugs will be legal to produce and use by "single member religions" aka "all individuals"."

Don't call me a fuck, hippie.

I know it's not going to happen simply because of the implication. If we can allow a group to break one law because their religion tells them to, it gets harder to prevent them from breaking any law for the same reason. We'll shut the door on this, no worries.

Besides, it wouldn't be inconceivable to take a certain interpretation of the First Ammendment:

Quote :

" Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

If some looney comes up with the Church of Crack, he'll have done it after all existing anti-drug laws were passed.

2/22/2006 3:44:05 PM

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/slippery-slope.html

2/22/2006 3:46:23 PM

OFF TOPIC:

So do you guys have any "conspiracy" theories about how certain illegal substances are making it into the states in the first place?

2/22/2006 3:57:40 PM

i suspect hispanics

2/22/2006 3:58:41 PM

^

2/22/2006 4:00:23 PM

Do you think there are "higher-ups" allowing it? Shit, not even higher-ups, it's awful easy to pay off an entire police department when you're raking in drug loot.

2/22/2006 4:02:22 PM

I've got one: the CIA/DIA. No, really. They've been into drug running for years. I have no idea how much, and I don't think they're the only ones involved in drug importation, but they're definitely involved in it.

[Edited on February 22, 2006 at 4:03 PM. Reason : ...]

2/22/2006 4:02:48 PM

^ Not to say that there would never have been a drug problem had it not been for the CIA/DEA.

2/22/2006 4:03:37 PM

Of course not. They just exploit/contribute to an already-existing problem; presumably to fund operations they don't want any record of.

For reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Dark_Alliance

[Edited on February 22, 2006 at 4:08 PM. Reason : that covers the CIA portion, i might've made the DIA up]

2/22/2006 4:06:59 PM

Quote :

"On December 10, 2004, he was found dead from gunshot wounds to the head. While acknowledging that the two fatal shots that had entered through the back of his head was unusual, coroner Robert Lyons determined that it was suicide. It subsequently became known that Webb had been suffering from clinical depression for many years."

omg

2/22/2006 4:24:26 PM

Quote :

"If some looney comes up with the Church of Crack, he'll have done it after all existing anti-drug laws were passed."

Or the church of robbin' niggas. Or the church of the nuclear arsenal of latter day saints.

2/22/2006 4:31:45 PM

or the church of gay marriage

2/22/2006 4:33:18 PM

Quote :

"So do you guys have any "conspiracy" theories about how certain illegal substances are making it into the states in the first place?"

The implication being that the g0vt is either involved or looking the other way?

The general theories I've commonly heard are that the g0vt prohibition on drugs isn't designed to protect people from themselves by eliminating the drugs and their use, but rather:

1) To create an atmosphere of mass non-compliance through which the g0vt may justify further invasions in the lives of citizens.

2) To provide a justification for the mixture of g0vt and the practice of medicine. The g0vt makes a shit ton of it's money through taxes on the "sales" of "intellectual property"--mostly pharmaceuticals, I think. The g0vt can't just have people being autonomous and self-sufficient with their health-maintenance and palliative care now can they? How could they generate tax revenue that way? Psychiatry also obviously fits in this one--it's really only a matter of degree that it's mixture with g0vt differs from genocide or eugenics.

(If there were a complete and total separation between psychiatry and g0vt, I wouldn't oppose it's practice as I do now.)

Quote :

"If we can allow a group to break one law because their religion tells them to, it gets harder to prevent them from breaking any law for the same reason"

Not if the libertarian principle still applies. I'm not defending religious clitoris mutilation.

Quote :

"Or the church of robbin' niggas. Or the church of the nuclear arsenal of latter day saints"

Like I said, that wouldn't happen because the libertarian principle would/should still apply.

Quote :

"or the church of gay marriage"

That's different than the other examples because gay marriage doesn't violate the libertarian principle. There's absolutely nothing wrong with a church of gay marriage--in fact, aren't there some now?

Quote :

"It takes only three people to incorporate a religion."

Great. I can work with that.




[Edited on February 22, 2006 at 4:37 PM. Reason : ]

2/22/2006 4:34:11 PM

A pastor in Asheville recently announced that he would no longer legally marry anybody until the state legalized gay marriage. He'll still perform the religion ceremony for anybody, though.

2/22/2006 4:35:04 PM

Quote :

"On December 10, 2004, he was found dead from gunshot wounds to the head. While acknowledging that the two fatal shots that had entered through the back of his head was unusual, coroner Robert Lyons determined that it was suicide. It subsequently became known that Webb had been suffering from clinical depression for many years."

Reminds me of Lethal Weapon. Mr. Joshua, how can you be involved in this?!?!?

2/22/2006 4:47:57 PM

Really, though. How the fuck can you commit suicide by shooting yourself TWICE in the back of the head?

Hope those fuckers don't shoot the messenger.

[Edited on February 22, 2006 at 4:56 PM. Reason : ]

2/22/2006 4:56:22 PM

2/22/2006 5:19:55 PM

That motherfucker has been on the losing end of a few barfights...

2/22/2006 5:20:36 PM

Lethal Weapon really is the greatest Christmas movie of all time. Take that, Wlfpk4Life!

(Die Hard's a good X-mas flick too.)

2/22/2006 5:32:46 PM