Comments about ‘Letter: No basis in science’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Feb. 25 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
River Dog
Salt Lake City, UT

Robert: Excellent letter. You're right on. Too bad those iin power are unable to see the truth in this.

JoeBlow
Far East USA, SC

I think most would agree that no marijuana use is better than marijuana use.

And most who use logic instead of emotion would conclude that the punishments for the end user in the war on drugs has gone over the top. Our prisons are full of people for drug use and possession crimes.

At a minimum, we should be looking at decriminalization of many drug offenses concerning marijuana.

Curmudgeon
Salt Lake City, UT

Increase tax revenue, create jobs, reduce law enforcement and incarceration expenses. Let people who are foolish enough to do it have their freedom, so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

Aren't these the same arguments used to promote legalized gambling?

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

When a society starts to debate whether a small amount of "dope" is harmless, that society has lost its way. Marijuana is a drug. Except for its limited use as a medicine, it is a drug that deadens those who take it. It is known as "dope" for a reason.

Over one-hundred years ago, the Lord gave us The Word of Wisdom which listed SOME of the things that were harmful to the body. It was "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints". Notice that it was given to spare the "weakest" people the despair of becoming addicted to tobacco, alcohol and coffee. Marijuana is a drug that weakens those who smoke it. If society cares about the "weakest", it will continue to ban marijuana.

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

"The criminalization of Americans who prefer marijuana to martinis has no basis in science."

I guess the science from the CDC showing MJ is three times as carcinogenic as tobacco does not exist??

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Your logic is based on martinis (meaning alcohol) having no harmful effects. I don't agree that martinis have no harmful affect. How many domestic violence cases each day are fueled by alcohol abuse? How many deaths each year on our highways from driving under the influence of alcohol? How many jobs and families lost because the employee is addicted to alcohol?

Now... you use the false-assumption that alcohol is harmless to rationalize expanding the use of other drugs?

Not a logical case to me (based on a false assumption).

===

I realize both can be harmful. So expanding one just because the other is legal... is not compelling logic.

By that logic.... we should make arsenic legal. It has some medicinal properties when used in minute doses.

No... just because alcohol is legal (something I realize does much harm)... doesn't rationalize making marijuana legal (which will also do much harm).

Making something we know is harmful legal, just because we know something else that is also harmful is legal... is not a strong argument for legalizing marijuana.

There is another argument that makes more sense. I'll wait to see if anybody brings it up.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

Words of wisdom doesn't mention Marijuana, but it does mention red meat, which is gladly ignored by your fellow members it's more about moderation in ALL things including the diet coke epidemic among members, but it's easier to spot a sinner smoking or drinking right?

This plant has been used for over 5,000 years along side beer, the testing phase is complete already.

Marijuana is proving to cure certain cancers so the CDC is using old data, check with a country that allows scientific testing still, like Israel.

It was simple ignorance that this was made illegal to begin with and the same ignorance and religious force that is trying to keep it illegal.

Happy Valley Heretic
Orem, UT

I see the usual Conservatives for more and larger Government are ready to use government to further their religious tenets by law.

How about some science as the article suggests, instead of moral and religious arguments against freedom...again.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

The Word of Wsdom also states:

The use of ALL herbs..in prudence.

IT also says Hot drinks are not to be used.

And meat is only to be used sparingly, in times of cold or famine.

Do you live ALL of the Word of Wisdom,
or just the parts you would like to see banned?

FT
salt lake city, UT

@ Mike Richards
You write, "Over one-hundred years ago, the Lord gave us The Word of Wisdom which listed SOME of the things that were harmful to the body. It was "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints". Notice that it was given to spare the "weakest" people the despair of becoming addicted to tobacco, alcohol and coffee. Marijuana is a drug that weakens those who smoke it. If society cares about the "weakest", it will continue to ban marijuana."
Our constitution seperates church from state. Your religon's word of wisdom is meaningless in this debate.

slcdenizen
t-ville, UT

Walking through the ailes of the grocery store, I declined far more products than I purchased. Why? Many reasons, including those used in the arguments against marijuana use and legalization. Do I crusade against those who purchase products I decline myself? No, because I have basic respect for those with whom I share proximity and am not pretentious enough to assume that I know what's best for lives that are not my own and of whose circumstances I have little knowledge. The drug war has objectively failed on all fronts - NOTHING resembling the goals of our drug war have come to fruition. The true conservative stance is to recognize failures, legalize, tax, and allocate the funds toward endeavors aimed at alleviating the underlying reasons behind destructive drug use. This would create an overall positive benefit for society. It would also elevate our moral standing abroad.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

@Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Over one-hundred years ago, the Lord gave us The Word of Wisdom which listed SOME of the things that were harmful to the body. It was "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints". Notice that it was given to spare the "weakest" people the despair of becoming addicted to tobacco, alcohol and coffee. Marijuana is a drug that weakens those who smoke it. If society cares about the "weakest", it will continue to ban marijuana.

7:53 a.m. Feb. 25, 2014

==========

I suppose you are in favor of Sharia Laws, the abolishment of our Constituional Democratic Republic, and are now prosoing a Theocracy based on God's word?

Mike, Can't you see that this is the very kernel of why we do not agree.

My testimony is just as strong as yours.
My love of Country is jsut as strong as yours.

I Love a Free Country and allow others choice using their Free Agency,
while you evoke Religous dogma and apply a Mormon spin to all Laws of the Land -- which I oppose.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Reading the headline I thought this would be another article about Global Warming.

There is at least as much consensus that marijuana is bad for your health and for society, as there is that Global Warming is gonna gitcha.

Smoking marijuana is at least as bad for your lungs as smoking tobacco, and worse than the air during an inversion (which seems to get most people REALLY riled up). So why do the people who think the inversion's going to kill their lungs have no problem with smoking marijuana?

Makes no sense...

Grover
Salt Lake City, UT

Lost: Let's see: twenty cigarettes in a pack and the average addicted smoker has a habit between a pack and two packs a day. How many pot smokers have more than a single joint or two a day? Now apply those numbers to the CDC findings.

2 Bit: Smoking pot is a choice whereas breathing the air around us is not. See the difference? Guess you have no one in your family with a respiratory disease.

airnaut
Everett, 00

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

So why do the people who think the inversion's going to kill their lungs have no problem with smoking marijuana?

Makes no sense...

11:12 a.m. Feb. 25, 2014

========

Because when that 1 person decides to smoke marijuana, it only effects that 1 person.

But,
the pollution you put out during the inversion effects all 1.5 Million of us.

There -- Does that make more sense for you?

You should be free to do whatever you want,
UNLESS
the actions you chosse impact those around you.

That's the rules of a free society.

Locke
Rexburg, ID

If marijuana and martinis are equally bad, perhaps logic dictates that BOTH should be banned.

Just sayin'. The default position doesn't always have to lean toward legalizing. There are plenty of good reasons for prohibition, just as there are good reasons against it. But don't discount the arguments you don't agree with.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

How much poison is allowable? How much marihuana is acceptable before we, or our children or our grandchildren are affected?

Claim all you want for "freedom", but there is no freedom without accountability. If you want to use marihuana or want your children to have full access to marihuana, then please be good
enough to tell us why a "soul" has so little value and why you are willing to throw away "souls" so that you can feed your appetites and passions.

FT
salt lake city, UT

@ Mike Richards
You write, "Claim all you want for "freedom", but there is no freedom without accountability. If you want to use marihuana or want your children to have full access to marihuana, then please be good
enough to tell us why a "soul" has so little value and why you are willing to throw away "souls" so that you can feed your appetites and passions."

It's the same logic many Utahns use to justify all their boats, ATV's, 3 car garages when defending their reason to minimally support our public school system.

RedShirt
USS Enterprise, UT

In other words you want to get high on your marijuana.

Lets look at the side effects of getting high on weed.

According to a study reported by Breitbart, over the last 10 years there has been a 300%. See "Fatal Car Crashes by Marijuana Smokers up 300% over last decade".

What is the societal cost of INCREASING the number of fatal car crashes?

lost in DC
West Jordan, UT

HVH
please do not insult us by quoting something from a source you hold in disdain, or by trying to interpret LDS scripture that you clearly do not believe.

Grover,
so just because a stoner uses less MJ than a smoker uses tobacco makes the MJ less carcinogenic? Sorry, doesn't wash.

airnaut,
you have no grounds to speak concering the inversion, you live in Everett, WA. But by the logic you put forth, NO ONE who smokes weed can complain about the inversion, because they choose to damage their lungs with weed. You can do whatever you want as long as it doesn't impact those around you. OK, tell the victims of stoned driving that they were not impacted.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments