| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Psycho C
getting into high spirits
Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 5
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:40 pm Post subject: Think I found a FLAW? |
 |
|
The ULC States:
The Universal Life Church has only two tenets (beliefs/doctrine):
• to promote freedom of religion and
• to do that which is right.
It is the responsibility of the individual to determine what is right as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others and is within the law.
WITHIN THE LAW- SO if Cannibas is illegal- how can we use THC Ministry as a defense- seems like they contradict eachy other. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Pepper
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 528
Location: Earth
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
How is religious practice protected? Just like the the consecration of wine in a religious ceremony was permitted during alcohol prohibition. In another example, Congress created an exemption for the religious use of peyote by native Americans.
The right to practice religion is protected by law.
Last edited by Pepper on Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zero
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1579
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cannabis isnt illegal in Amsterdam.
We are all members of the THC minisry of Amsterdam.
_________________
www.shoutwire.com
www.spikedhumor.com
"I understand that fear is my friend, but not always. Never turn your back on fear. It should always be in front of you, like a thing that might have to be killed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Psycho C
getting into high spirits
Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Can you please post some articles or legal material on this Pepper? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zero
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1579
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
let me rephrase, even tho I live in Colorado, I am still a memeber of the thc ministry of Amsterdam, therefor, I have my right protected by our constitution to practice my religion anywhere I choose.
Except singapore, they will hang you there.
_________________
www.shoutwire.com
www.spikedhumor.com
"I understand that fear is my friend, but not always. Never turn your back on fear. It should always be in front of you, like a thing that might have to be killed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zero
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1579
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Psycho C wrote: |
| Can you please post some articles or legal material on this Pepper? |
Can you please introduce yourself before asking us to do shit for you?
God, some people are just rude.
and if you were perceptive, you could read the forums and find the material you are looking for there.'
_________________
www.shoutwire.com
www.spikedhumor.com
"I understand that fear is my friend, but not always. Never turn your back on fear. It should always be in front of you, like a thing that might have to be killed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pepper
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 30 Oct 2003
Posts: 528
Location: Earth
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zero
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1579
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Pepper : )
_________________
www.shoutwire.com
www.spikedhumor.com
"I understand that fear is my friend, but not always. Never turn your back on fear. It should always be in front of you, like a thing that might have to be killed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Psycho C
getting into high spirits
Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 5
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm rude? I'm just trying to get Educated:
*Education
*Empowerment
*Practical spirituality
Read this
http://www.drugtext.org/library/articles/mazur01.htm
Mainly II-D III C, D and E and IV
Not only am I trying to get Educated i am also trying to Educate and start a discussion- no need for the name calling cause I am new. We are all equal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zero
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1579
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Psycho C wrote: |
| I'm rude? I'm just trying to get Educated |
well then, hang around for a bit and your questions will be answered.
an intro thread would be nice?
_________________
www.shoutwire.com
www.spikedhumor.com
"I understand that fear is my friend, but not always. Never turn your back on fear. It should always be in front of you, like a thing that might have to be killed." |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stokes
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1426
Location: PA
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 5:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pepper wrote: |
| http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1031/p02s02-usju.html |
Thanks, Pepper.
No wonder PsychoC didn't know about this case ... he probably wouldn't be caught dead reading the Christian Science Monitor.  Hope I'm not the only one who sees the irony in such an informative article coming from a source like this. 
Below is a link to a similar article written by the same guy in April of this year, it contains a quote that says "If the government prevails in their position, then RFRA will have been rendered meaningless in a stroke."
http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/0419/p03s02-usju.html?s=widep
_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Where love is, there God is also.
-Mahatma Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mystic Power
admin THC-Ministry YahooGroup
Joined: 23 Aug 2004
Posts: 3605
Location: Key West
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Psycho C
| Quote: |
| SO if Cannibas is illegal- how can we use THC Ministry as a defense- seems like they contradict eachy other. |
It is neither a flaw nor a contradiction. It is, in fact, the crux of the issue.
As Religious Practitioners of Cannabis Spirituality, it IS legal for us.
Take your time, poke around this site, both within the forums and beyond, and you'll discover a wealth of information beyond your imagination.
Follow Your Bliss,
Ben
_________________
"We are the Ones we have been waiting for."
~Hopi Elder ~
"In Lak'ech"
~ Ancient Mayan: "I am another YOU." ~ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tafari
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Posts: 338
Location: Oregon Coast
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 7:16 pm Post subject: Re: Think I found a FLAW? |
|
|
Not at all my friend, marijuana may be illegal to the main stream but if its at the core of your religious believes its protected under state and federal law. The UDV church is hopefully going to prove this at a higher level.
Peace; Tafari
| Psycho C wrote: |
The ULC States:
The Universal Life Church has only two tenets (beliefs/doctrine):
• to promote freedom of religion and
• to do that which is right.
It is the responsibility of the individual to determine what is right as long as it does not infringe on the rights of others and is within the law.
WITHIN THE LAW- SO if Cannibas is illegal- how can we use THC Ministry as a defense- seems like they contradict eachy other. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stokes
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1426
Location: PA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
More on UDV Church case.
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/410/hoascacase.shtml
| Quote: |
Feature: Supreme Court Hears Ayahuasca Religious Use Case -- Justices Skeptical of Government Arguments 11/4/05
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/410/hoascacase.shtml
The US Supreme Court Tuesday heard oral arguments in a case in which the federal government seeks to bar a small religious group from using its holy sacrament, a hallucinogenic tea known as ayahuasca (hoasca). The case highlights the clash between the spiritual mandate of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA), designed to insulate religious practices from federal government intrusion, and the drug war imperatives of the Controlled Substances Act. Because of its RFRA implications, it is the rare illegal drug case to have incited groups such as the Baptist Joint Commission on Religious Freedom and the National Association of Evangelicals to submit amicus briefs to the court.
Jurema rootbark, a component of ayahuasca tea
courtesy Erowid
The government has so far lost at every level in its six-year battle with the US branch of the Brazil-based church O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal (the Spiritual Center of the Union of the Vegetable, or UDV), a Santa Fe, New Mexico, grouping that imported ayahuasca from Brazil to use in its religious ceremonies. In May 1999, DEA agents seized a shipment of ayahuasca, only to be slapped a year-and-a-half later with a civil action by the church, which benefited from legal counsel paid for from the deep pockets of its leader, Seagram's whiskey fortune heir Jeffrey Bronfman.
A US district court judge ruled that under the RFRA, the federal government could not interfere with the UDV's ayahuasca use, and granted a preliminary injunction to that effect. That ruling was upheld last year by the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, and there matters would have rested had not the Bush administration been so fervent in its desire to quash any challenge to the CSA. But Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appealed that decision to the US Supreme Court.
If oral arguments Tuesday in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal were any indication, it does not appear that the federal government is going to fare any better before the highest court in the land. Deputy Solicitor General Edwin Kneedler, who argued the case for the government, found himself under sustained attack from the bench as he attempted to justify the government's absolutist approach. And while his attackers were many, only one of the nine justices, Anthony Kennedy, seemed sympathetic go Kneedler's argument.
The question before the court was whether the RFRA required the government to allow the use of an illicit drug for ritual purposes. No way, argued Kneedler, reprising the arguments put forth in the government's written brief. While the RFRA requires the federal government to show a "compelling interest" in prohibiting a religious practice, Kneedler argued that the mere listing of DMT, the psychoactive substance in ayahuasca, in the CSA's most restrictive schedule met the "compelling interest" requirement. "The congressional listing in and of itself is sufficient," he said, adding warnings that the sacrament could be diverted or prove harmful to users.
And in a hard-line, zero-tolerance argument indicative of the federal government's general approach to drug issues, Kneedler argued that ruling in favor of the UDV would give individual federal judges the power to grant exemptions from the CSA. To do so would "turn over to 700 district judges" the ability to undo Congress' "categorical judgment" that certain substances should be prohibited in all circumstances.
"But that's exactly what the Act [RFRA] does," retorted Justice David Souter. He wasn't the only one to challenge Kneedler on that point. Justice Sandra Day O'Connor pointed out that in enacting the RFRA Congress "did seem to indicate that the courts are supposed to examine each instance."
Justice Antonin Scalia also brushed aside Kneedler's argument that individual judges should not be able to move drugs off the CSA's most restrictive schedule. "RFRA overrides all that," Scalia said. "It says there can be an exception to all federal statutes where there is a religious objection and a court makes a finding there can be an exception."
Scalia should know. The RFRA was passed by Congress in 1993 in part to undo a 1990 Supreme Court decision allowing states to ban the tribal use of peyote. Scalia was the author of that decision. Referring back to Congress' move to enact an exemption for peyote, Scalia said: "This demonstrates you can make an exception without the sky falling."
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg also grilled Kneedler. Referring to the exemption for peyote use by the Native American Church, Ginsburg said the government had not shown its need for uniformity was compelling. "The two situations seem to be alike, peyote and this," Ginsburg said. "The problem of preferring one religious group over another arises once there is an exception."
Even Justice Stephen Breyer, who has proven fond of federal drug laws while on the court, worried about "a rather rough First Amendment problem" if the government allowed the Native American Church to use peyote, but barred other religious groups from using sacramental psychedelics.
And in one of his first appearances on the high court, new Chief Justice John Roberts joined the majority of his colleagues in skeptical questioning of the government's case. "We don't have to make a once-and-for-all determination, do we?" he asked. An exemption for the UDV's ayahuasca use could be reexamined if it turned out the drug was being diverted "or the membership of the church expands in a way that leads you to believe it is being abused."
Roberts also needled Kneedler into arguing that Congress could prohibit the church's use of ayahuasca even if each member consumed but one drop a year. "Your approach is totally categorical," Roberts told his former colleague. "If there were one group, in one year, and it gave each member one drop, and the practice were rigorously policed, your position would be the same."
Lead attorney for the UDV Nancy Hollander also came in for some tough questions, but the former head of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers had a much easier time than Kneedler. At one point, she was even assisted by Justice Scalia. When under pressure to explain why ayahuasca use was not banned by the United Nations drug conventions, Scalia interjected. "Statutes trump treaties," he said, so "if RFRA can trump a statute [like the Controlled Substances Act], it can trump a treaty."
Hitting the high points of her written brief, Hollander argued vigorously that if the law allowed for the use of peyote by one religious group, it must allow for similar use of ayahuasca by another. She also attacked the government's claims of the dangers of diversion or harm to UDV members from taking the sacrament. As for the international treaties, Hollander argued that while DMT is mentioned, ayahuasca is not, and that other nations that have signed the treaty do not regard it as covered.
The court will not issue a decision in the closely-watched case until sometime this winter, but the tenor of the oral arguments should leave the UDV feeling fairly confident. But concern over the case isn't limited to exotic tea drinkers and drug reformers eager to see any crack in the wall of the Controlled Substances Act. That's because the case is ultimately not about drugs but about religious freedom and the scope of the RFRA. If the drug laws are allowed to trump religious freedom, other laws could be applied in a manner that eroded that freedom, religious groups worry.
And that's why a number of them have filed briefs urging the Supreme Court to rule on the side of the UDV. "We don't question the government's interest in protecting against drug abuse," said K. Hollyn Hollman, general counsel for the Baptist Joint Committee. "We question whether it can show a compelling interest without taking into account the particular circumstances of the religious claimant. It is not enough for the government to say it has an interest in upholding its laws," she said. "RFRA requires it show a compelling interest in applying laws to particular religious conduct."
The Christian Science Church also urged the court to support the RFRA. Even more so than the Baptists, the Christian Scientists were eager to make clear they were not supporting drug use -- even for spiritual reasons. "Although The First Church of Christ, Scientist, supports the legal arguments made in this brief, neither the church nor the theology of Christian Science supports the use of drugs or any other material substances as an aid or pathway to spirituality or a greater understanding of God."
-- END -- |
_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Where love is, there God is also.
-Mahatma Gandhi
Last edited by Stokes on Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:54 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stokes
Cannabis Sacrament Minister
Joined: 28 Nov 2004
Posts: 1426
Location: PA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
..
_________________
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Where love is, there God is also.
-Mahatma Gandhi |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Public Forum
Members only forum
Members Group
| 
