Marijuana Legality

Marijuana Legality

For centuries the marijuana plant has been used in medicinal and spiritual journeys. As old as human writing there have been accounts of the use of the marijuana plant in cultural activities. People around the globe have used the plant as part of cultural rites of passage, as an aid to meditation or purely recreationally as a social stimulant.

Within every culture there are differences however. In every part of the world religion was used as a tool to explain things that science could not, and religion's view on mind-altering substances like marijuana, alcohol and mushrooms has traditional been negative. Early western religious leaders looked skeptically on people in an inebriated state, perhaps thinking that they were possessed. This might explain the inherent distrust of any mind-altering substance; early science was too primitive to explain the inebriated state so religious leader's denounced users as demon possessed. In the west especially, where religion was not so much of a spiritual nature but a kind of penance were substances seen as evil. Unlike other, more primitive religions of the world, where its practitioners wanted to elevate the soul to communicate with God, western Christianity seemed to want to make every person live as plainly as possible. It taught that suffering was a good thing and if the common person questioned why they were told by their religious leaders that it was because that was how God wanted it to be. Its easy to see now how the modern western world developed its bias against substances.

Today in the United States and most parts of the western world (like Britain, Canada, and France) marijuana is illegal to possess or distribute (although in Canada possession has been decriminalized). Penalties in the United States for possessing marijuana differ from state to state but are generally severe: a hefty fine at the least to several months or even years in prison, depending on the amount of marijuana found. Some states have legalized marijuana for medicinal purposes: relief of chronic pain and post-traumatic stress. It has been shown in every study that the large majority of the American population (around 70 percent always) agrees with marijuana use for medicinal purposes. However, federal law in many cases clashes with state law when government officials do raids on houses of known medicinal marijuana users that have been sanctioned by the state. In every case federal law supersedes that of the state law and the patient is fined or imprisoned and the marijuana, usually no more than a few plants for personal use, is taken from the patient. Arguments abound over the legality of this. Should federal law supersede state law? Those true to the founding fathers ideals of the sovereign state say no, while federalists say yes, that the government should have the power to restrict state laws. The arguments on both sides are long and equally compelling.

The largest general argument over the legality of marijuana in general is that it is harmful to the consumer. Those against legalizing marijuana state that smoking the leaf causes cancer and memory loss, and sometimes impotency in males. Those pro-legalization are loud in their disagreement. Yes smoking the marijuana leaf will eventually cause health problems down the road, but what tests have been done show that the effects are on par with tobacco smoking; heart and lung problems mostly. In fact ALL smoking causes these problems, because of the carcinogens in inhaled smoke. Tobacco has even been shown to cause more health problems because of additives in the leaf, put there to preserve freshness and taste mostly. For the other statements against marijuana (memory loss and impotency) the first has yet to be proven and the second is a proven myth.

The next largest arguments against the legalization of marijuana are that it is a gateway drug (one leading to other drugs such as cocaine and heroine) and that since smoking in general is harmful, why should it be done at all? Pro-legalization argues that it has never been proven as a gateway drug, and asks the public to consider this. There have been no studies of marijuana smoking leading to harder drugs, and that statement is based on opinion. As for the health issues inherent in inhaling smoke into the lungs, is it the government's job to watch over our bodies? Should the government watch over us as if we were children, telling what is ok for us to do to ourselves? If marijuana smoking was an endangerment to other's lives this would be another issue (one finding its roots in the very roots of what the purpose of a government is, and what its duties are), but it is far less of an endangerment to others than tobacco and alcohol. Second hand smoke from marijuana is nearly a myth; the leaf of the marijuana plant is generally dry and emits very little smoke and of course, the purpose smoking the plant is let as little smoke escape as possible to achieve an inebriated state. Otherwise, the effects are like that of tobacco, and presumably less dangerous than tobacco smoke. As to the effects of alcohol versus marijuana, there is no comparison. Most claims by anti-legalization are that when one is in an inebriated state with marijuana it is