The biggest obstacles to medical marijuana are Obama and the progressives on the Supreme Court

However, even though Raich’s medical marijuana never crossed state lines, and was never sold for money, the United States Supreme court still ruled that Raich’s medical marijuana constituted “interstate commerce.” This ruling, which took place in 2005, is called Gonzales v. Raich. The precedent cited for this ruling is the 1942 case Wickard v. Filburn. Other than the fact that one case was about wheat and the other was about medical marijuana, the two cases are identical.

Thus, the 2005 ruling against medical marijuana is based on policies which were enacted and supported by progressives during the New Deal.

And if we look at how the different Supreme Court justices sided in the 2005 ruling, this becomes even more clear. In the 2005 ruling, every progressive justice on the Supreme court – every one of them, without exception – voted against medical marijuana. They did this – not because they have anything against medical marijuana per se – but instead, because they did not want to overturn Wickard v. Filburn.

So who were the dissenters in the 2005 medical marijuana ruling? The dissenters – those who supported states’ rights on the issue of medical marijuana – were justices O’Connor, Rehnquist, and Thomas.

Imagine that – all the progressives on the court ruled against medical marijuana, while three conservative justices voted in favor of it. Of course it wasn’t the medical marijuana per se that they were ruling on – instead, it was the states’ right to make their own decision on medical marijuana that they were truly ruling on.

The following are from the Raich decision.

The case comes down to the claim that a locally cultivated product that is used domestically rather than sold on the open market is not subject to federal regulation. Given the CSA’s findings and the undisputed magnitude of the commercial market for marijuana, Wickard and its progeny foreclose that claim.

-J. Stevens, opinion of the Court. ____________________________________________________________

Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.

-J. Scalia, concurring.

________________________________________________________

If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.

-J. Thomas, dissenting

The following are from the Raich decision.

-J. Stevens, opinion of the Court. ____________________________________________________________

Where necessary to make a regulation of interstate commerce effective, Congress may regulate even those intrastate activities that do not themselves substantially affect interstate commerce.

-J. Scalia, concurring.

________________________________________________________

If Congress can regulate this under the Commerce Clause, then it can regulate virtually anything–and the Federal Government is no longer one of limited and enumerated powers.

-J. Thomas, dissenting

I have a sister, 57-years old and on disability due to drug addictions. She uses medical marijuana (possesses a license) to fight nausea due to taking morphine. She is continuously stoned on our tax dollars and has been since 2009. She is borderline schizo and has been using marijuana since the age of 13.

The problem of marijuana, as I see it, is it is a gateway substance. We already have enough problems with alcohol. We don't need to worsen the situation with legalizing even more powerful mind-altering substances.

I lived in Spain when that nation decriminalized the personal use of marijuana in 1982. The result was a crime wave as small children broke into homes and vehicles to steal items that could be fenced. They wanted money to buy marijuana.

As for marijuana itself, the evidence keeps piling up that it makes a person crazy. Remember the flick, Reefer Madness. LOL...who knew?

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2005559,00.html

http://www.livescience.com/...marijuana-worsens-schizophrenia.html

http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/07/08/marijuana-may-trigger-schizophrenia/2568.html

I have a personal cost in all this, and it isn't my sister, who made choices, the consequences she painfully lives with now. It is the son she abandoned to follow drugs. My nephew was abandoned by his parents who drifted into a life of sex, drugs and rock-and-roll. Yeah, they were both musicians. This kid tried twice to kill himself at age 7. This was horrifying to witness. I finally got custody when he was 9 and today he is fighting alcoholism, but I believe he will win that fight.

The price for legalization of such substances is too terrible to imagine. It robs the soul of free will and makes an individual unable to make rational decisions.

The problem of marijuana, as I see it, is it is a gateway substance.

Studies by the RAND Corporation, and by economist Steven Pudney of the University of Leicester, have deflated the "gateway theory."

We already have enough problems with alcohol. We don't need to worsen the situation

Do you support improving the situation by banning the drug alcohol? If not, why not?

Decriminalization for personal use leaves drug prices hyperinflated, since selling remains a crime; what's needed to lower drug prices and the consequent crime is legalization of production and sale.

(ALso, note that the 14 U.S. states that have decriminalized the personal use of marijuana have not experienced crime waves as a result.)

As for marijuana itself, the evidence keeps piling up that it makes a person crazy. Remember the flick, Reefer Madness. LOL...who knew?

http://www.schizophrenia.com/prevention/streetdrugs.html

Correlation is not causation - another likely explanation for this linkage is that the sort of person who is inclined to use drugs is the same sort of person who is predisposed to later schizophrenia.

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2005559,00.html

Thanks for the evidence disproving your claim:

"But here's the conundrum: while marijuana went from being a secret shared by a small community of hepcats and beatniks in the 1940s and '50s to a rite of passage for some 70% of youth by the turn of the century, rates of schizophrenia in the U.S. have remained flat, or possibly declined. [...]

"One explanation may be that the two factors are coincidental, not causal: perhaps people who have a genetic susceptibility to schizophrenia also happen to especially enjoy marijuana. [...] researchers still aren't seeing increases in the overall schizophrenia rate or decreases in the average age of onset.

"[...] when the researchers controlled for other factors known to influence schizophrenia risk, including gender, education and socioeconomic status, the association between disease onset and marijuana disappeared."

http://www.livescience.com/10700-marijuana-worsens-schizophrenia.html

"Marijuana gives people with schizophrenia a quick rush but worsens their psychotic symptoms within a few hours, a new study reveals."

No support there for your claim that "it makes a person crazy."

http://psychcentral.com/news/2008/07/08/marijuana-may-trigger-schizophrenia/2568.html

"The use of marijuana in individuals with schizophrenia appears to worsen this deficit in GABA synthesis."

No support there for your claim that "it makes a person crazy."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.