Big Hypocrisy

From “Supporters, critics of Massachusetts marijuana question offer dueling arguments”:

‘What this is really about is commercializing big marijuana in Massachusetts’: Roman Catholic bishops, physician group opposed to marijuana legalization

My comment there:

There is no concrete (so credible) evidence proving cannabis prohibition works literally at all.

Critically notice (and always publicly expose) how opponents of cannabis (and other drug) legality ignore that fact “to protect the children”.

“We the people” do not even have a drug-free prison system, but we are supposed to empower thugs on both sides of the thin blue line to the tune of billions of taxpayer dollars annually (for the entire war on [some] drugs), so they can continue their demonstration of horrendous mass rights infringement with Supreme Court support absurdly via the Commerce Clause.

Alcohol Prohibition (apparently also with a religious thrust) required a federal constitutional amendment, and even then, common sense should publicly conclude that nobody ever had authority to take a glass of wine out of the hands of someone harmlessly enjoying it with their meal clearly via the unalienable right to liberty (clearly judicially enforced via the ninth amendment stating, “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people”).

Prohibitionists cite that about 60% of Americans use alcohol, while only about 10% use illicit drugs — so (in their mind) prohibition works.

However, follow the money and (in some important sense, more critically) education. By way of entertainment, our society constantly encourages the drinking of alcohol. Protagonists even use (and sometimes even abuse) alcohol without serious consequences. Ads during sporting events constantly prop up the encouraging of beer consumption. At least in my experience, there has never been a formal educational approach to teaching alcohol risks.

In short, the sustained popular message is cool people use and abuse (e.g. get dangerously drunk on) alcohol, so obviously the use/abuse rate would be consequently high.

Education (as dictated by money) is the real problem here.

Moreover, drug laws have been “weakened” many times over the past few decades, but there has been no change in usage rates, which means prohibition is not the cause of low usage rates for illicit drugs (market saturation hypothetically is, but brevity demands that I avoid elaborating upon that conclusion here).

Ending Certain Drug Prohibition (if you will) due to its horrible failure is not the same as educating the masses to unhealthily consume drugs.

Drug abuse is a health issue that can only be addressed by an educational issue in terms of abuse prevention. The Information Age must righteously give way to the Education/Entertainment Age for that prevention to become effective.

Rampant price fixing is occurring in our medical industry (what should be illegal, but not due to politicized lawful immunity), so the hypocrisy is on them to raise concerns over “big marijuana”. Anti-competition is the main (if not sole) problem in economic circles. Regulations serve as political gateways to ensure unethical favoritism that secures market dominance regardless of product quality, and that is the real concern here — while people continue to be fooled into thinking regulation automatically equals safety (i.e. no concern over loopholes, bribery, competence, and anything else questioning such flagrant and widespread rights infringement to facilitate law abuse — the worst form of abuse due to its mainly broad scope of destruction, and the form of abuse that our nation was supposedly established to primarily oppose).

Someone very close to me has a state license to use medical cannabis for Alzheimer’s disease. The result has been thankfully stunning. At a relatively low cost, she never complains about side effects, is constantly active (walking about four miles daily), and is mildly using (i.e. vaporizing a psychologically steady strain such as Cheese) the only drug that not only brilliantly manages the symptoms of AD, but also apparently presses against the disease itself (a struggle that I witness daily, as she remains stable, if not slightly improving, on the mental front).

Big pharma and big religion serves the true leader of our nation — hypocrisy.

Unfortunately for them, the money (and common sense) are shifting against the demonstrably failed (and ironically illegal) prohibition mindset.

Maybe if our society could dethrone hypocrisy, less people would have their lives crushed to the horrible degree compelling them to abuse drugs (or anything else).

I am an honest freak (or reasonably responsibly balanced "misfit", if you prefer) of an artist working and resting to best carefully contribute towards helping society. Too many people abuse reasoning (e.g. 'partial truth = whole truth' scam), while I exercise reason to explore and express whole truth without any conflict-of-interest -- all within a sometimes offbeat style of psychedelic artistry.

Tagged with: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Respect Cannabis

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

my pEarthly and earthly self blended together via the energy of the reality "There are some things so serious you have to laugh at them." – Niels Bohr

Feel free to join us in seamlessly riding our boundless community waves.

Fun through serious, my carefully formed results are honest and usually offer a freshly unique view.

Follow Spirit Wave Journal on
Thank You
Thank you for your undeniably necessary role for (and as part of) my beloved 3Fs (family, friends, and fans).
Help Needed

Helping raise awareness and any other constructive way to participate in our growing community is equally appreciated.

Legal Disclaimer

Spirit Wave (“entertainer” herein) disclaims that entertainer only publicly posts content (“entertainment” herein) for entertainment purposes only. You (the reader of this sentence) agree to the fullest extent permissible by law that entertainer is not liable for any damage. Moreover, entertainer never advocates breaking the law, so any expression involving drug use is addressed solely to anyone capable of lawfully engaging in that use.

%d bloggers like this: