Getting high for religious purposes
I know this decision will only affect a small number of people directly, but it's always good to see the expansion of liberties, regardless.
The US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that the US government cannot stop a small religious sect using hallucinogenic tea from Brazil that devotees says brings them closer to God.In a case which brought US anti-drugs laws into conflict with freedom of religion legislation, the government had argued that hoasca was a dangerous mind altering substance, which could be diverted to recreational users.
Comments
Ok, now pass around the ganga mon.
Posted by: rastaman | February 22, 2006 09:21 AM
This is bullshit as i am a ganja christian and persecution just sucks man.
Seriously, this is bullshit favoritism.
Posted by: ortho | February 22, 2006 03:05 PM
Isn't this consistent with the Courts previous stance on Peyote use by certain American Indian tribes in their religious rituals?
Ortho, if you can go to court and show that marijuana use is an integral part of a recognized religious ritual, and one long established to be a part of that religion's traditional ceremonies, you'll probably win your case.
Is that what was going on in all those church basements all these years?
I kinda feel left out.
Posted by: JMK | February 23, 2006 11:31 AM
...you'll probably win your case.
Maybe. But to ortho's point, it would probably be a mistake to expect too much consistency from our government, particularly on a matter such as this.
Posted by: BNJ | February 23, 2006 12:32 PM
I think that in general every citizen in the US should be subject to the same laws as everyone else. i think the double standard is not justified. Religious people have no more compelling reason to do (,or be allowed to) drugs than secular people. EVEN Native american religions.
Posted by: ortho | February 23, 2006 01:13 PM
There have always been "religious exceptions. Even special tax exemptions for legitimate religious institutions.
The 1st Amendment protects the "free exercise" of any & all recognized religions. Of course, the key word there is "recognized," as thousands of "phony churchs" set up as tax dodges have been struck down by a multitude of courts over the years.
You can't set up a faux religion either to avoid taxes or to do halucinogenic drugs.
Personally, I'd go the other way. We don't allow for instance, Hindus in America to burn their wives on their husband's funeral pyres, nor Muslims in America to commit "honor killings," or "female circumcisions" (genital mutilations), so why allow drug use either?
It sets a rather bizarre precedent.
Posted by: JMK | February 24, 2006 10:06 AM