[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Utopian Visionaries Who Won’t Leave People Alone

No - no - no Ain'T going To get away with iT

Pete Buttplug's Butt Plugger Trying to Turn Kids into Faggots

Mark Levin: I'm sick and tired of these attacks

Questioning the Big Bang

James Webb Data Contradicts the Big Bang

Pssst! Don't tell the creationists, but scientists don't have a clue how life began

A fine romance: how humans and chimps just couldn't let go

Early humans had sex with chimps

O’Keefe dons bulletproof vest to extract undercover journalist from NGO camp.

Biblical Contradictions (Alleged)

Catholic Church Praising Lucifer

Raising the Knife

One Of The HARDEST Videos I Had To Make..

Houthi rebels' attack severely damages a Belize-flagged ship in key strait leading to the Red Sea (British Ship)

Chinese Illegal Alien. I'm here for the moneuy

Red Tides Plague Gulf Beaches

Tucker Carlson calls out Nikki Haley, Ben Shapiro, and every other person calling for war:

{Are there 7 Deadly Sins?} I’ve heard people refer to the “7 Deadly Sins,” but I haven’t been able to find that sort of list in Scripture.

Abomination of Desolation | THEORY, BIBLE STUDY

Bible Help

Libertysflame Database Updated

Crush EVERYONE with the Alien Gambit!

Vladimir Putin tells Tucker Carlson US should stop arming Ukraine to end war

Putin hints Moscow and Washington in back-channel talks in revealing Tucker Carlson interview

Trump accuses Fulton County DA Fani Willis of lying in court response to Roman's motion

Mandatory anti-white racism at Disney.

Iceland Volcano Erupts For Third Time In 2 Months, State Of Emergency Declared

Tucker Carlson Interview with Vladamir Putin

How will Ar Mageddon / WW III End?

What on EARTH is going on in Acts 16:11? New Discovery!

2023 Hottest in over 120 Million Years

2024 and beyond in prophecy

Questions

This Speech Just Broke the Internet

This AMAZING Math Formula Will Teach You About God!

The GOSPEL of the ALIENS | Fallen Angels | Giants | Anunnaki

The IMAGE of the BEAST Revealed (REV 13) - WARNING: Not for Everyone

WEF Calls for AI to Replace Voters: ‘Why Do We Need Elections?’

The OCCULT Burger king EXPOSED

PANERA BREAD Antichrist message EXPOSED

The OCCULT Cheesecake Factory EXPOSED

Satanist And Witches Encounter The Cross

History and Beliefs of the Waldensians

Rome’s Persecution of the Bible

Evolutionists, You’ve Been Caught Lying About Fossils

Raw Streets of NYC Migrant Crisis that they don't show on Tv

Meet DarkBERT - AI Model Trained On DARK WEB

[NEW!] Jaw-dropping 666 Discovery Utterly Proves the King James Bible is God's Preserved Word

ALERT!!! THE MOST IMPORTANT INFORMATION WILL SOON BE POSTED HERE


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

politics and politicians
See other politics and politicians Articles

Title: "Why do Republicans Respect Marijuana Prohibition Like it Came From Moses?"
Source: Reason
URL Source: https://reason.com/blog/2016/07/20/ ... s-against-marijuana-prohibitio
Published: Jul 20, 2016
Author: Anthony L. Fisher
Post Date: 2016-07-21 09:08:33 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 6602
Comments: 76

Republicans Against Marijuana Prohibition

"Bad law needs to be dealt with, we don't need to follow it blindly," says 86-year-old Ann Lee, the founder and executive director of Republicans Against Marijuana Prohibition (RAMP). In an interview with Reason at a Cleveland hotel near the Republican National Convention (RNC), Lee adds, "The mystery to me is why Republicans respect this law like it came from Moses, and when you read how it came about in 1937 under FDR...why Republicans support that is beyond me."

Lee is a staunch pro-life social conservative who had her come-to-Jesus moment in when it came to marijuana prohibition after her son suffered a devastating accident in 1990. While recovering, he told his mother that unlike synthetic painkillers and other drugs, marijuana actually provided him physical relief. Lee, who grew up in Jim Crow-era Louisiana, says she grew up living under bad racist laws that needed to be changed. She argues that drug prohibition is the modern-day version of Jim Crow and also needs to be changed.

RAMP's treasurer Bonnie Lugo tells Reason that she was also a staunch drug warrior until she met Lee while running against her for a spot on Texas's Republican Executive Committee. Lugo's first impression of Lee was that "she was this crazy lady" advocating for drug legalization but that the "tenacious" Lee ultimately convinced her to do her own research on the subject. When Lugo learned about how much safer marijuana is than alcohol or cigarettes, combined with the fact that people's lives were being ruined in myriad ways because of its criminalization, she did a 180 on the issue. Lugo says, "Once you figure out that your government has lied to you, it's easy to figure out all the rest."

Lugo laments that too many of her fellow Republicans have bought into "60 years of indoctrination by our government that marijuana is a gateway drug, that it leads to harmful acts." Lee adds, "it's very hypocritical" of her fellow Republicans to be "pro-life and anti-medical marijuana." 

In trying to sell marijuana legalization to fellow RNC attendees—who are very much of pushing a "law and order" agenda this week—Lee says she is trying to convince her party cohort that they can be for law and order but need to "remember laws can be bad, too."

When asked if RAMP has any plans to advocate for the legalization of drugs other than marijuana, Lee says, "this is all I can say grace over. I can't handle anything else. But I know this issue." (1 image)

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-35) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#36. To: GrandIsland (#34)

"So Republicans must oppose everything Dums support and thereby let the Dums set the Republican platform? Good strategy, dipshit."

There isn't anything on the libtard platform that's worth supporting

So that's a yes to letting the Dims set the Pub platform. Thanks, dipshit.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-21   21:52:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: GrandIsland (#34)

libtard platform

What the HeLL is that?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-07-21   21:53:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: GrandIsland (#34)

For or against, dipshit?

"we must stay vigilant. The al-Qaeda core may be on the path to defeat, but the organization and its affiliates remain active in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere. For that reason, we are committed to an unrelenting pursuit of those who would kill Americans or threaten our homeland, our allies, our partners, and our interests around the world."

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-21   21:56:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: buckeroo (#37)

libtard platform

What the HeLL is that?

The manifesto you live by.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-07-21   21:56:09 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: ConservingFreedom (#13)

I know of no evidence that "many, many" marijuana users have had panic attacks so bad that they qualify as "harm".

Perhaps you should do some actual research into the actual effects of marijuana then.

Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president

no gnu taxes  posted on  2016-07-21   21:56:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: buckeroo (#37)

What the HeLL is that?

It means FireIsland needs his Depends changed.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-21   21:56:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: ConservingFreedom (#24) (Edited)

Here? theanalyticpapers.com/

Don't know anything about it. I can't even get into the site.

The reference is to the last chapter of a proposed political textbook on political psychology of twelve to fourteen hundred pages to be reviewed for possible publication. It analyzes the 2016 presidential campaign from several aspects, including electorate life styles, of which the recreational drug based life style is one.

The last two sentences in the book propose a question:

Question: What do you get when you send a hyena to college?

Answer: A politician.

rlk  posted on  2016-07-21   21:57:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: GrandIsland (#39)

What manifesto is that?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-07-21   21:57:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: no gnu taxes (#40)

Perhaps you should do some actual research

Sorry, not doing your homework for you ... YOU make a claim, YOU supply the research. Put up or shut up.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-21   21:58:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: ConservingFreedom (#38) (Edited)

"we must stay vigilant. The al-Qaeda core may be on the path to defeat, but the organization and its affiliates remain active in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and elsewhere. For that reason, we are committed to an unrelenting pursuit of those who would kill Americans or threaten our homeland, our allies, our partners, and our interests around the world."

And don't forget Iraq, Lybia, and Turkey which have become transformed into jihadist islamic caliphates.

rlk  posted on  2016-07-21   22:05:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: ConservingFreedom (#41)

It means FireIsland needs his Depends changed.

He can't even handle his bladder anymore than understanding that some of us acually believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-07-21   22:08:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: ConservingFreedom (#44)

All you have to do is a simple search on any search engine with the terms "marijuana" and "panic attacks." I would rather you see the evidence rather than claim I am giving you a biased point of view.

Obama has played at being a president while enjoying the perks … golf, insanely expensive vacations at tax-payer expense. He has ignored the responsibilities of the job; no plans, no budgets, no alternatives … just finger pointing; making him a complete failure as a president

no gnu taxes  posted on  2016-07-21   22:09:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: buckeroo (#46) (Edited)

some of us acually believe in life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness

You mean faggot bathrooms, open borders and heroin for children.

We aren't equal, suckhole... we never were.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-07-21   22:13:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: no gnu taxes (#47)

All you have to do is a simple search on any search engine with the terms "marijuana" and "panic attacks."

Sorry, not doing your homework for you no matter how easy you claim it will be ... YOU make a claim, YOU supply the research.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-21   22:15:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: GrandIsland (#48)

You mean faggot bathrooms, open borders and heroin for children.

You do all that besides walking chidren across the street while wearing a whistle and holding a STOP sign? Good grief, man, are you all there?

buckeroo  posted on  2016-07-21   22:15:41 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: ConservingFreedom (#31)

"No, you also claimed that marijuana was nonetheless not illegal."

Marijuana was legal with a tax stamp. The law was broken by not having a stamp, not because you had marijuana.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-22   9:42:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: buckeroo (#35)

"You only address a majority of any legislation (51%) probably signed by a politically powerful ally that was paid for by lobbyists. That means it is bad law."

The majority of states that passed medical marijuana laws did so exactly that way. You're saying those are bad laws?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-22   9:46:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: ConservingFreedom (#30)

"Which comparison doesn't make the more dangerous substance "the standard" contrary to your feeble straw man."

Alcohol and tobacco were the substances YOU cited for comparison to determine legality. This is totally different than the criteria set out in §811(c) of the Controlled Substances Act, thereby making it the new standard.

However ... if you're simply making a comparison but NOT advocating a legal change because of that comparison, then I retract my statement.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-22   9:58:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: misterwhite (#53)

Alcohol and tobacco were the substances YOU cited for comparison to determine legality.

I noted the article's statement about them, and in reply YOU propped up straw men about legality and standards.

if you're simply making a comparison but NOT advocating a legal change because of that comparison

I note that the law is out of whack by regulating the more harmful drugs while banning a less harmful drug; there's more than one way to resolve that.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-22   19:12:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: misterwhite (#52)

You're saying those are bad laws?

A bad law is a bad law is a bad law is a bad law.

buckeroo  posted on  2016-07-22   20:08:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: misterwhite (#51)

Marijuana was legal

federally

with a tax stamp.

the paperwork for which would expose one to prosecution under state marijuana laws

The law was broken by not having a stamp, not because you had marijuana.

The law was broken by having marijuana and no stamp.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-22   21:13:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: ConservingFreedom (#54)

"I note that the law is out of whack by regulating the more harmful drugs while banning a less harmful drug"

Ever occur to you that the illegality of a recreational drug may be determined by more than "harm"?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   9:58:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: ConservingFreedom (#56)

"The law was broken by having marijuana and no stamp."

The law is broken by having a car and speeding. Are you ticketed for having a car?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   10:01:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: ConservingFreedom (#54)

"I noted the article's statement about them, and in reply YOU propped up straw men about legality and standards."

No. I simply commented on their relative safety. You turned it into a legality issue.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   10:05:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: misterwhite (#57)

Ever occur to you that the illegality of a recreational drug may be determined by more than "harm"?

"Harm" is an argument often dragged out by anti-pot frothers, like the LFer whose still-unsubstantiated claims started this exchange - and even on those nanny-state terms the marijuana ban fails.

But what the hey, I'll play along: By what criteria is marijuana more worthy of banning than alcohol - and are any of those criteria the proper business of government?

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   10:11:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: misterwhite (#59)

I simply commented on their relative safety.

No, actually, you commented on absolute safety - "alcohol and cigarettes kill millions" - (without contesting the relative statement) and then in post #18 dragged in the straw man about "standards."

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   10:14:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: Deckard (#0)

Better question... why do hippy libtard assholes love weed so much?

Get high on life, losers.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-07-23   11:12:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: ConservingFreedom (#60)

"By what criteria is marijuana more worthy of banning than alcohol"

For the third time, §811(c) of the Controlled Substances Act spells it out.

"and are any of those criteria the proper business of government?"

Protecting the people from the interstate transportation of a dangerous substance? What do you think?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   11:26:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: ConservingFreedom (#61)

"No, actually, you commented on absolute safety - "alcohol and cigarettes kill millions"

I said, "Given that alcohol and cigarettes kill millions, saying a drug is safer than them is hardly a ringing endorsement."

I made a relative statement about safety, not legality.

"and then in post #18 dragged in the straw man about "standards."

Legal standards, yes. Because in post #16 you stated that marijuana should have "no greater legal restrictions" than alcohol and cigarettes. How is that NOT setting a new standard for legality?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   11:36:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: GrandIsland (#62)

"why do hippy libtard assholes love weed so much?"

Especially when they're the same people trying to ban cigarettes. Marijuana contains four times the tar and twice the carcinogens as tobacco.

Yet these yahoos say, "Marijuana good. Cigarettes bad."

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   11:48:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#66. To: misterwhite (#65)

"Marijuana good. Cigarettes bad."

Deaths Per Year

Alternate text if image doesn't load

“Truth is treason in the empire of lies.” - Ron Paul

"America is at that awkward stage. It's too late to work within the system, but too early to shoot the bastards."

Deckard  posted on  2016-07-23   12:28:27 ET  (1 image) Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#67. To: misterwhite (#63)

§811(c) of the Controlled Substances Act

(6) IS about harm; (8) is inapplicable to either drug; (2) and (3) are not even criteria; and (1), (4), (5), and (7) weigh more strongly against the more addictive drug, alcohol, than against the less addictive drug, marijuana. Even on your own terms, you lose.

Protecting the people from the interstate transportation of a dangerous substance? What do you think?

It's not about harm but it is about danger? To call you a hairsplitter is an insult to hairsplitters.

Danger or harm one inflicts on oneself is not the proper business of government.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   15:24:44 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#68. To: misterwhite (#64)

in post #16 you stated that marijuana should have "no greater legal restrictions" than alcohol and cigarettes. How is that NOT setting a new standard for legality?

Because it can be addressed by either of at least two quite different policy changes: legalizing (with regulation) marijuana; or banning alcohol and cigarettes.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   15:28:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#69. To: GrandIsland (#62)

Get high on life

That's as much an argument for banning alcohol (loved excessively by many) as for banning any other drug. Do you support banning alcohol?

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   15:29:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#70. To: ConservingFreedom (#68)

"Because it can be addressed by either of at least two quite different policy changes: legalizing (with regulation) marijuana; or banning alcohol and cigarettes."

How about a third option -- people could stop using marijuana?

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-23   16:17:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#71. To: misterwhite (#70)

How about a third option -- people could stop using marijuana?

Impossible. The sheep of today, more and more, need to live in SERVITUDE to something. That's why we continue to move LEFT as a society and our very own agenda posting trolls are the cause of our LEFT MOVING SOCIETY.

I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح

GrandIsland  posted on  2016-07-23   16:33:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#72. To: misterwhite (#70)

How about a third option -- people could stop using marijuana?

People could stop using alcohol and cigarettes - but none of these "could"s have anything to do with the law or its out-of-whackness in regulating the more harmful drugs while banning a less harmful drug.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-23   17:08:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#73. To: ConservingFreedom (#72)

"but none of these "could"s have anything to do with the law or its out-of-whackness in regulating the more harmful drugs while banning a less harmful drug."

Since you mentioned that banning cigarettes and alcohol was an option, I figured I could engage in fantasy also.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-24   9:32:36 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#74. To: misterwhite (#73)

Since you mentioned that banning cigarettes and alcohol was an option, I figured I could engage in fantasy also.

My hypothetical was relevant, yours was not - but I understand why you're desperately dragging red herrings across the trail.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-24   12:21:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#75. To: ConservingFreedom (#74)

"My hypothetical was relevant, yours was not"

Both were equally relevant and equally far-fetched. I see no reason to be serious while you're acting silly.

misterwhite  posted on  2016-07-24   12:25:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#76. To: misterwhite (#75)

Both were equally relevant

Wrong.

A government strong enough to impose your standards is strong enough to ban them.

ConservingFreedom  posted on  2016-07-24   12:26:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com