Prop 2 Utah

[colton]

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

Or another way to view that is that the church supports federal decriminalization.

 

[Harambe]

Or another way to view that is that the church supports federal decriminalization.

ur maekin me dizzie, bro.

 

[Gameface]

Or another way to view that is that the church supports federal decriminalization.

Did they make any indication at all that they support federal decriminalization? Seems like the basic point was VOTE NO ON PROP 2.

 

[fishonjazz]

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.

Funny thing is that almost everyone who is anti marijuana/legalization in some form would feel the exact same way as you if they had people close to them (family) that used MJ for some health condition and it worked splendidly for them and greatly increased the happiness of their lives.

 

[fishonjazz]

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

Basically the church doesn't have a problem with medical marijuana they just have a problem with breaking the law of the US government right? Is that their stance on everything? Like if the federal government made it illegal to pray would the church suddenly want the followers to stop praying? (I know thats a far fetched hypothetical but still)

 

[babe]

So I haven't read all of this thread, and likely anything actually relevant has already been said.... but hey, I have a friend who is a "Pot Scholar" from Livermore, and the other day I actually had a discussion in Berkeley with a street dealer, and I have read some recent research on cannabinoid effects.

I have also personally talked with this prop's primary instigators and hardline opponents.

Used to be, we had a few really smart lawmakers who could solve society's problems legally.... well, they thought they could, anyway.

Once upon a time, a really perceptive and creative con artist could bedazzle the bone-weary axemen of the forested frontier.... who built homes with logs and cleared patches of forest so they could plant corn...…. with creative "revelations" from "God".

What is curious to me is that Joseph Smith could hatch one of the most accurate conspiracy theories of all time, denouncing the evil intents of merchants popularizing their products to the extent of making them cultural essentials no reasonable person could defend not using.

My "Pot Scholar" friend tells me that the laws legalizing marijuana are driving out the responsible growers and making good pot hard to find. The laws are written for the new big corporates who design the weed for market captivation along price competition lines. This Utah law will have the same effect. The cops will spend their time harassing the free herbal dreamers and the enforcement will make damn sure the corporates get the market.

Kirton McConkie is practically owned by the LDS Church, but they are responsible people who do a good job, and will do what is expected in the final analysis. I think the LDS leaders acted responsibly in farming their concerns out to KM.

I am working on a new revised "Word of Wisdom" that can leave private herbal practitioners free to wander what woods we have left, after all the fires and urbanization, and look for stuff to boil, extract, or play with, and make it deadly sin to buy corporate products.

 

[Gameface]

That's really interesting, babe. Haven't thought of it that way. Really gives me a new perspective on Prop 2.

 

[babe]

just browsing the Scientific American site, I found this.... marginally related.... ad about milkweed.....another natural medical wonder....

www.lostways.org/vsl/index_adw.php?r=802&r=4512&tid=main_med_adw_thelostways&gclid=EAIaIQobChMI4_vKgMKQ3QIVA9zACh3rFw-OEAEYASAAEgIhg_D_BwE&rx=1

@alt13 :another non-opioid pain killer

and.... oh, yah.... WofW theological principles, nor AMA medical cartels, really need to have the force of law. Leave US alone, Big Brother.

 

[babe]

That's really interesting, babe. Haven't thought of it that way. Really gives me a new perspective on Prop 2.

of course, my principles of logic would favor jailing people who want to make laws, as a nuisance to the community. The jailhouse cartel favors jailing harmless folks with no interest in bothering anyone, hence the pot laws and enforcement priorities.

 

[colton]

Did they make any indication at all that they support federal decriminalization? Seems like the basic point was VOTE NO ON PROP 2.

Well, from that same webpage I linked to was this:

“The Church joins a coalition of medical experts, public officials, and community stakeholders in calling for a safe and compassionate approach to providing medical marijuana to those in need,” said Elder Christensen. “Join us in a call to state elected officials to promptly work with medical experts, patients, and community leaders to find a solution that will work for all Utahns, without the harmful effects that will come to pass if Proposition 2 becomes law.”

So it seems pretty clear that the church supports medical marijuana now. The reasonable implication is that federal laws should be changed as well. Again, that seems pretty huge to me. (Even if they are against the specific implementation of Prop 2.)

 

[Engorged On Unborn Gore]

Then again, maybe if I had money invested in Big Pharm, I would also be against Proposition 2.

Perhaps the single most pertinent point of the thread. The Church’s $32 billion portfolio is on Mormon Wiki Leaks, and it shows that there is investment money on the table for the institution.

 

[mellow]

Its a slow month for Jazz news so I will test these waters.

I am undecided on prop 2, but I just started considering the issue this week. Someone close to me suffers with seizures. I don't think medical marijuana would help the condition, but I think I understand the emotions of families who it might help. and FYI-I support federal decriminalization but with strict dui type laws enforced by the states.

I like the discussion Prop 2 created, but I am initially reluctant to vote for it, primarily because it seems to me to be a poorly written law. It uses loose language and broad terms, I suppose that was intentional, which makes me skeptical of the whole lot.

Anyway, there has been growing support for medical Marijuana in the Utah Legislature, I think it could pass the Legislature this year. This because of, not in spite of, the statement from the folks down at 50 North temple. So whether Prop 2 is bad wording the Legislature has to fix, or a bad law the legislature repeals the legislature still has to be involved, so why not just step out of their way and let them decide it in February without Prop 2 being in the way?