Prop 2 Utah

[Gameface]

While you and others may not have become addicted, I know of others who have.
There is a percentage of people that can, even though it is nowhere near as addictive as other substances.

https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/marijuana-addictive

That report basically says what I said but makes it sound more dramatic. It says symptoms of withdrawal usually last a week, sometimes up to two weeks and includes irritability, restlessness and trouble falling asleep.

You know what sometimes happens to people who stop using prescription opioids or stop extremely heavy drinking? They die.

Completely different types of "addiction" and like I said, I think smartphones are more addictive than MJ.

 

[Siro]

MJ does have a mild physical withdrawal symptom for me. It changes how I sleep. I remember like a hundred dreams each night. I didn't even know people had so many damn dreams every night. And my sleep feels lighter, and I feel like I only slept for a bit, despite being perfectly well rested. This lasts about a week.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

That report basically says what I said but makes it sound more dramatic. It says symptoms of withdrawal usually last a week, sometimes up to two weeks and includes irritability, restlessness and trouble falling asleep.

You know what sometimes happens to people who stop using prescription opioids or stop extremely heavy drinking? They die.

Completely different types of "addiction" and like I said, I think smartphones are more addictive than MJ.

I would agree that the physical symptoms of the addiction are much less dangerous, and happen less often. In my friends case it was not something he could overcome. Whether that was the physical side of the addiction or the mental side of it, he just couldn't break it. I don't know if it really matters which tbh. My point in saying this is that while not the majority, it can happen, and while not that "dramatic" for many it can be that "dramatic" for some.

I'm not trying to argue, I just think at times people blow off the possible addictive nature for some people as if it's not important because it's not a large portion of the user population. People should know it does and can happen.

I'm also not saying you are wrong.

 

[Gameface]

I would agree that the physical symptoms of the addiction are much less dangerous, and happen less often. In my friends case it was not something he could overcome. Whether that was the physical side of the addiction or the mental side of it, he just couldn't break it. I don't know if it really matters which tbh. My point in saying this is that while not the majority, it can happen, and while not that "dramatic" for many it can be that "dramatic" for some.

I'm not trying to argue, I just think at times people blow off the possible addictive nature for some people as if it's not important because it's not a large portion of the user population. People should know it does and can happen.

I'm also not saying you are wrong.

And I won't be the guy saying MJ has no harmful effects. For me it is harmful. I don't react well to being high on MJ. I get paranoid, and it's not (to me) comical or minor. I get very self-conscious and don't want to be around other people because I know that mentally I'm operating at 60% or less. So I get embarrassed if I have to talk to people. When I was in my late teens, early 20s I used MJ a lot and it put me on a worse trajectory in life. It is a motivation killer for me, an ambition killer. I used to do a lot of creative writing and wanted to be a writer or a lawyer. When I started using MJ a lot I completely stopped doing any creative writing. Any idea of putting in the work it would take to be a lawyer was silly at that point. So I think MJ can absolutely have massive negative effects. I also think that it has those effects and also has the even more massive negative effect of sending people to prison. We can and should do everything we can to minimize the negative effects of MJ, and in my opinion the best way to do that is first by decriminalizing it.

 

[oneye]

I’ve seen alcohol and prescription pain pills do far more damage to people I love than MJ. I have a drink every now and then but I’m not addicted to alcohol. I go months without having a drink. Some people are much more easy to begin to rely on things. Like was mentioned above, caffeine for me is something I cannot go without. I truly think of all the drugs out there, marijuana is by far one of the least dangerous and has far less ill affects. Also, those who want it, get it easily. If someone’s going to abuse it, it is not hard to get a hold of. Making those who actually need it criminals is just wrong. I truly hope Prop 2 passes.

 

[Jazz Spazz]

I appreciate hearing your comments and opinions.
I can't say I agree, but I appreciate hearing differing points of view and context of those opinions.
It does add to what I know, and gives color to my opinion.

Thank you

 

[LogGrad98]

I really do not understand the Church's opposition to medical marijuana. It makes no sense. Many many church members use prescription narcotics (both as intended and abused at time, as with any other population or group), which are orders of magnitude worse in every way than medical CBD or even THC can ever be, and they are full-temple-recommend-holder active Mormons. I would wager large amounts of money that every single member of the quorum of the 12 and the presidency have used some form of prescription narcotic in their lifetimes. The resistance to medical MJ is just stupid. There isn't even a basis in doctrine or scripture as can be claimed to justify the resistance to things like same-sex marriage. It is pointless obstructionism that is hurting people who need it and can benefit from it, and also add to the controversy around it that is curtailing serious scientific study. I can see putting out a proscription for members using it, or a warning to use only under a doctor's care, but full-on stopping it is ludicrous in the extreme and just makes them look bad and ill-informed. Doesn't the Church have enough reputation issues to contend with without adding something as nonsensical as this? Very disappointed.

 

[fishonjazz]

I really do not understand the Church's opposition to medical marijuana. It makes no sense. Many many church members use prescription narcotics (both as intended and abused at time, as with any other population or group), which are orders of magnitude worse in every way than medical CBD or even THC can ever be, and they are full-temple-recommend-holder active Mormons. I would wager large amounts of money that every single member of the quorum of the 12 and the presidency have used some form of prescription narcotic in their lifetimes. The resistance to medical MJ is just stupid. There isn't even a basis in doctrine or scripture as can be claimed to justify the resistance to things like same-sex marriage. It is pointless obstructionism that is hurting people who need it and can benefit from it, and also add to the controversy around it that is curtailing serious scientific study. I can see putting out a proscription for members using it, or a warning to use only under a doctor's care, but full-on stopping it is ludicrous in the extreme and just makes them look bad and ill-informed. Doesn't the Church have enough reputation issues to contend with without adding something as nonsensical as this? Very disappointed.

This.
Very very good post. I wish everyone would read it. Would love to hear someone try to justify why its ok to use a much worse thing like heroin (basically what most prescription pail killers are) but not ok to use something much healthier and mild and less addictive and natural like marijuana....... That also never ever kills anyone. (where as pain pills kill more people than guns and car accidents combined)

 

[YB85]

Here's a link that was sent out in the email.
https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/marijuana-analysis

I think some of those points are definitely worth being concerned about. Not all. But enough that I will likely vote no. I just wish there were a better medical marijuana bill to choose from.

Out of curiosity, how would you have voted before the statement?

I have someone VERY close to me who has used marijuana to alleviate the effects of chemotherapy and they said it was the one thing that helped get them through day to day, post-treatment. I have someone else VERY close to me who had a blood clot in their brain a few years ago and one of the residual effects is extreme anxiety and migraines. This person had never tried marijuana until about a year ago and since trying it, the anxiety is almost non-existent and the migraines don't last as long. These two stories from my experience are enough to make me vote yes on any medical issue. I would much rather have someone using medical marijuana to treat pain and depression/anxiety than to have being prescribed opioids and antidepressants. Then again, maybe if I had money invested in Big Pharm, I would also be against Proposition 2.

I have never tried it. When I was younger, the thought of smoking anything was enough of a turn off that it never appealed to me and now I have a job that involves random drug testing with zero tolerance so edibles and vaping are out of the question for me.

 

[colton]

I really do not understand the Church's opposition to medical marijuana.

Actually, one of the most interesting things about this to me is that the church specifically said in the announcement that marijuana when used for medical reasons and prescribed by a doctor, is NOT against church doctrine or policy. I had long assumed that would be the church's position, but have never actually seen it specifically stated before.

From https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/arti...alternative-utah-medical-marijuana-initiative
“The Church does not object to the medicinal use of marijuana, if doctor-prescribed, in dosage form, through a licensed pharmacy,” said Elder Jack N. Gerard of the Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

 

[Gameface]

Actually, one of the most interesting things about this to me is that the church specifically said in the announcement that marijuana when used for medical reasons and prescribed by a doctor, is NOT against church doctrine or policy. I had long assumed that would be the church's position, but have never actually seen it specifically stated before.

From https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/arti...alternative-utah-medical-marijuana-initiative
“The Church does not object to the medicinal use of marijuana, if doctor-prescribed, in dosage form, through a licensed pharmacy,” said Elder Jack N. Gerard of the Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints

"If doctor prescribed and sold through a licensed pharmacy" requires federal decriminalization. In other words, they don't support use for the foreseeable future.

 

[colton]

Out of curiosity, how would you have voted before the statement?

I think Utah definitely needs some sort of medical marijuana law. I don't know if this is the right one, and I think the comment by someone earlier in the thread that "it's ok to vote for it because the legislature will just change it anyway" is not a great way to approach these voter initiatives.

So the bottom line is that I hadn't decided. And I still haven't decided. The statement by the Church will definitely prompt me to do more research before voting, taking into account both the points brought up by the Church along with the rebuttal.