|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 28 days
|
Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV)
#4263420 - 06/06/05 12:21 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
This is the case that will decide whether the O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) will be able to use Ayahuasca tea in their religious ceremonies.
Today in my constitutional law class, we are doing a mock oral argument, and I am one of the judges. We have to ask the attorneys questions and I wanted to think up about 10 of them. I have 7 currently, and I was gonna quit with 7, but I figured I'd see what you guys think about the topic.
Can you think of any more questions for me to ask?
|
OneMoreRobot3021
Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 61,026
Loc: the sky
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4263423 - 06/06/05 12:22 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Post the 7 you've got.
-------------------- Acid doesn't give you truths; it builds machines that push the envelope of perception. Whatever revelations came to me then have dissolved like skywriting. All I really know is that those few years saddled me with a faith in the redemptive potential of the imagination which, however flat, stale and unprofitable the world seems to me now, I cannot for the life of me shake. -Erik Davis
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 28 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: OneMoreRobot3021]
#4263463 - 06/06/05 12:35 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Ok. Hoasca = Ayahuasca in our case. My questions are much longer, but I'll sum them up quickly.
1. How would allowing the UDV to use Hoasca undermine the goverment's War on Drug's when the drug is both obscure and not often used recreationally? There is very little interest in Hoasca and the DEA website contains almost no information on DMT (the active chemical in Hoasca).
2. How would granting an exemption for UDV to use Hoasca cause the Court to be inundated with requests for exemption, since the Native American Church in New Mexico has been granted exemption for drug use and this inundation did not ocur.
3. Would it not be safer for the gov't to allow, but oversee Hoasca use instead of making it illegal and forcing the use to be done in hiding?
4. Concerning the UN convention banning trade of psychotropic substances, both Brazil and Franch have granted exemptions for religious use. Why should the US not be able to do the same?
5. Is it mre important to protect the religious rights of a minority groups or to continue the prohibition of a drug that has little recreational use and is relatively unknown.
6. Concerning health matters, there is very little and very conflicting evidence that says Hoasca is damaging to the user's health. Is this just an instance of the gov't automatically condemning is as unhealthy just b/c it is a drug?
7. How is Hoasca (DMT) a schedule I drugs when it neither has potential for abuse and has very little evidence that it is damaging to the user's health?
I'm not sure what else to ask. I only need to ask 3 of them in class, but I want to be prepared.
|
OneMoreRobot3021
Registered: 06/06/03
Posts: 61,026
Loc: the sky
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4263477 - 06/06/05 12:40 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Those are all very good ?'s. I'll think on it but I feel like you've covered most of the bases.
-------------------- Acid doesn't give you truths; it builds machines that push the envelope of perception. Whatever revelations came to me then have dissolved like skywriting. All I really know is that those few years saddled me with a faith in the redemptive potential of the imagination which, however flat, stale and unprofitable the world seems to me now, I cannot for the life of me shake. -Erik Davis
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 28 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: OneMoreRobot3021]
#4263483 - 06/06/05 12:42 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
I'll probably also think of questions when I hear the attorney's briefs as well.
|
MAIA
World-BridgerKartikeya (DftS)
Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 7,396
Loc: Erra - 20 Tauri - M45 Sta...
Last seen: 3 months, 5 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4263487 - 06/06/05 12:43 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
"O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal"
Union of the vegetable, beneficent spirit center ? Sounds ... happy !
MAIA
-------------------- Spiritual being, living a human experience ... The Shroomery Mandala Use, do not abuse; neither abstinence nor excess ever renders man happy. Voltaire
|
Deadmaker
Stranger
Registered: 02/09/05
Posts: 5,471
Last seen: 1 month, 2 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4263488 - 06/06/05 12:43 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
You could always steal the old bill hicks line that goes something like
"What business is it of yours what I eat, drink, watch on tv, who I fuck, or what I put into my body as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?"
You could just change where he says I to they and it would fit. But probably too hostile and profane for class.
|
afoaf
CEO DBK?
Registered: 11/08/02
Posts: 32,665
Loc: Ripple's Heart
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4263753 - 06/06/05 01:40 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
those are all very solid.
-------------------- All I know is The Growery is a place where losers who get banned here go.
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 28 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4291161 - 06/13/05 12:34 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
If anyone wants to check it out, I wrote a dissenting Supreme Court Opinion and posted it in PAL.
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/4291150/an/0/page/0
This is a very important case if you are interested in Freedom of Religion or Ayahuasca.
|
Krishna
कृष्ण,LOL
Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,285
Loc: oakland
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4291230 - 06/13/05 01:01 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: This is a very important case if you are interested in Freedom of Religion or Ayahuasca.
this sentence struck me as very funny for some reason.
imagine the audience to view such a case - half of them constitution-thumping libertarians, the other half wild-eyed shamans.
--------------------
|
Redstorm
Prince of Bugs
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,175
Last seen: 5 months, 28 days
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Krishna]
#4291276 - 06/13/05 01:11 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
It's much more important to the free practice of religion than ayahuasca, since most people can just go online and purchase the materials to make it.
|
Krishna
कृष्ण,LOL
Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,285
Loc: oakland
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Redstorm]
#4291340 - 06/13/05 01:25 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Redstorm said: It's much more important to the free practice of religion than ayahuasca, since most people can just go online and purchase the materials to make it.
i agree. freedom of religion is, at some ground level, freedom of thought - and if we don't preserve freedom of thought, well then who freaking cares if we can eat psychedelics?! that being said, i believe the campaign for legalizing plants (jesus, it's absurd to think that plants are illegal!) is a very important one as well, and often goes hand-in-hand with the campaign for freedom of religious expression.
--------------------
|
Ravus
Not an EggshellWalker
Registered: 07/18/03
Posts: 7,991
Loc: Cave of the Patriarchs
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Krishna]
#4291347 - 06/13/05 01:28 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
So it'd be best to legalize the opium poppy, but to stay far away from legalizing synthetic chemicals like that crazy LSD?
Explain why you say only plants.
-------------------- So long as you are praised think only that you are not yet on your own path but on that of another.
|
Krishna
कृष्ण,LOL
Registered: 05/08/03
Posts: 23,285
Loc: oakland
|
Re: Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV) [Re: Ravus]
#4291364 - 06/13/05 01:35 PM (18 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
i certainly don't mean only plants.
but while LSD being illegal is bad governmental policy in the classification of what LSD is, a plant being illegal just simply doesn't make any sense. why is it growing if it is illegal? obviously because a plant doesn't care in the slightest about our moral evaluation of it - it is a plant that is a part of the intricate web that is our earth. to legislate morality over something that, in my mind, follows a much higher 'moral-code' than we do reeks of absurdity.
again, i most definitely do not subscribe to the concept of "hey dude i only take natural drugs" - because everything in this universe is just made of energy twisted around itself, and is thus 'natural' - but find the concept of illegal plants to be more ludicrious than illegal synthesized chemicals.
--------------------
|
|