On the issues: Exploiting compassion to legalize weed

Pain is a very complex neurological system that has much to do with perception as well as wiring (check out PAIN: The Gift Nobody Wants by Paul Brand, coauthored by Phillip Yancey). Given how much we have yet to learn about ascertaining whether someone who cannot express herself is in physical pain, or what to do about phantom pain (something my father could've told you can be excruciating), I'm not sure any law regarding "pain" is workable at this point in our understanding of the human system of physical pain perception. It's kind of up there with recovered memory–very fuzzy to base laws on it until brain science advances further.

You make an excellent point about self-medicating for emotional pain and spiritual anguish. We live in a society where most people haven't a clue how to manage physical or emotional pain, or the role spirituality can play in alleviating the most excruciating emotional pain. That said, if they do legalize marijuana, and I personally hope they do, I fervently hope that we have a MASSIVE education campaign about it. It's addictive. It's carcinogenic. It messes with your short-term memory and destroys your ambitions (talk to some creative artists about how frustrating it is to have a friend get addicted to pot and have to light up to motivate himself to do the laundry). The pro-pot folks ignore a lot of inconvenient facts. But I sure wouldn't deny it to a loved one in a perpetual state of nausea that can lead to clinical depression (so often the fallout of chronic pain that can't be managed and so often treated with drugs that can actually lead to suicide and suicide ideation).

i want to establish a law much like the DOMA…if pot does get leagalized we can only administer it in a pill, suppository, IV, IM or subQ, or maybe as inhalation therapy…but NOT as a reefer! Pot cigaretts are 7 times more injurous to the body than are regular cigarettes. Besides cancer doesn't make one nauseated CANCER TREATMENTS make people nauseated. Cancer is as easy to get over as any disease - but since it is big business Medical science wants to "manage" it rather than cure it. Almost any cancer is curable by diet or other simple, but intense treatments

There is absolutely no reason to keep weed illegal. None.

It is no more or less harmful than alcohol, and lacks the addictive properties of nicotine and narcotics.

I suppose conservatives are for smaller government unless it includes arresting, prosecuting, and incarcerating more people. And we wonder why we have so many people in prison compared to the rest of the civilized world.

Marijuana triggers the same pleasure centers as opiates do. To break a marijuana habit can be extremely difficult; again, talk to the people at the alternative health clinics who deal with this on a daily basis. Once you've tricked the brain using external substances, it is not easy to return it to typical functioning. This is why if marijuana is legalized, it would be a HUGE mistake not to do some serious educating of the public and the medical community. Addiction is a disease of the brain that requires a multi-pronged approach.

Are we responsible enough to say "yes" to legalizing marijuana and pay the price of education and treatment for marijuana addiction? Can we use it responsibly, given our irresponsible use of alcohol, OTCs, and prescription drugs? Can we tax it like crazy and use the money to fund addiction treatment and mental health care? I totally respect anyone who is pessimistic about that scenario even though I personally think the pros of legalization outweigh the cons (in part due to my strong desire to have American made quality hemp paper and omega-3 containing hemp oil for consumption).

Funny about that whole "addiction" thing. I know a few people who smoked up every day while they were in college and several more who did every once in a while. None had a problem quitting or drastically cutting back when it was time to grow up and join the real world.
On the other hand, one of my college friends became an alcoholic and, as far as I know, still lives in his parents' house and is unemployed - alcohol is quite addictive if you let it be.
Personally, I'd rather see people get their chemically-enhanced jollies from weed than from alcohol or presecription drugs.

I love the Internet because the info that you have at your finger tips is great like what I just learned about Mr. Steve Hickey. It saddens me to see that we have red neck people such as Steve Hickey running in our state!! I was diagnosed with cancer a few months ago and I thank God for the cannabis plant that he put on this earth! It allows me the quality of life that every voter in South Dakota deserves. I am a Sioux Falls native that happens to own several business in SF and employ 235 people and most live in district 9 we will not be voting any red necks like Steve in.

Justin - really? calling me a red neck? That's a first and it undermines and compromises anything else you say. Which, by the way, is not much as you have contributed no counter points to any of my reasons why legalizing marijuana is not good for society - except, that it may make you personally feel better. Laws need to be good for society not harmful to society for the "questionable" benefit of a few.

I'd love to hear more on how you are able to dictate the votes of your employees. And, feel free to report back here as to what you find out about whether or not my opponents here on the ballot in District 9 agree with me on this issue.

Great points here by Dr. Omdahl…

Letters: Alternatives to marijuana
Dr. Bonnie B. Omdahl • Sioux Falls• October 22, 2010

South Dakotans should vote no on Initiative 13.

The medicinal component of marijuana, THC, already is available by prescription in a synthetic form that, unlike homegrown marijuana, would deliver a consistent level of pain relief. The prescription form, Dronabinol, is regulated, so the purity and medication are within standard limits.

Under Initiative 13, a prescription for marijuana could be written for vague complaints such as pain and with no need for an underlying medical condition. In states where medical marijuana is permitted, less than 10 percent of the prescriptions are for cancer patients.

A marijuana prescription appears to be a lifetime card. Even antibiotics require a renewal of a prescription with re-evaluation to determine the continued need of the prescription.

Discrimination against marijuana cardholders for employment or housing is prohibited under the proposed initiative except in certain instances, so theoretically, your child's teacher, your doctor, maybe even your air traffic controller could be high.

The use of marijuana brings multiple health risks, including increased risk of testicular and bladder cancer, increased potential for schizophrenia and decreased cognitive function as well as permanent changes in the brains of young users as documented by magnetic resonance imaging.

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20101022/VOICES09/10220319/-1/voices

The way medicine works, it's a lot easier to do testing on a very specific amount of a medication manufactured in a lab where potency can be controlled than a generalized amount of a natural medication where potency is unpredictable. That's why supplements and natural forms of medications are less likely to embraced by the medical community while more natural versions, which inevitably are cheaper at first (until the Rx goes generic), are embraced by those self-medicating. Also, when you monkey with the molecules to get a patent, you're confusing the human body–that's why prescription drug side effects can have so many side effects. I'm all for people debating natural vs. pharmaceutical, but I also think we have to talk about the downside of making marijuana more readily available vs. the upside of having pot and hemp legal. And I don't think we can have that conversation based solely on extrapolating from personal experience, i.e., "I never knew anyone who got addicted to pot" or "I know someone who got addicted to it." We need to look at the research and the big picture, and the potential for compromise–could use of marijuana for medical purposes when one has a diagnosis from an M.D. be legal while sale of marijuana remains illegal?

Nancy -

The research done many years ago (no time to dig up the actual documents) says pot is less harmful than alcohol and does not cause addiction. There were also studies done on the effects of pot on driving skill. It has been studied, and my anecdotes are backed up by science.
Not so much for the anti-pot people.

Again, I encourage you to go to the addiction recovery centers and ask them how many people come to their clinics seeking help for marijuana addiction. Addiction is a complex process involving the overstimulation of opiate receptors. If you want to split hairs, go ahead and call it a compulsion that ruins peoples' lives; I won't argue semantics.
Some people are fortunate enough to not develop addictions despite heavy use of substances such as marijuana and alcohol but unfortunately, some people do become addicted (and often, cross addicted). It is no joke for people suffering from addiction. It's not responsible to consider legalizing marijuana without considering the possibility that more people will have access to it and therefore we will have more marijuana addicts in need of treatment in a country with woefully inadequate mental health treatment.