|
flyskimmah
Stranger
Registered: 04/04/04
Posts: 25
Last seen: 13 years, 10 months
|
Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics?
#8054225 - 02/21/08 09:50 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What if my stated religion requires the use of mushrooms? Am I protected? Maybe I should form the first ever Church of the Holy Fungus.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar



Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 3,926
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: flyskimmah]
#8054408 - 02/21/08 10:20 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
---
Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/13/21 01:38 PM)
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: flyskimmah]
#8054443 - 02/21/08 10:26 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
yes it applies to everything
but to be recognized you'd likely have to sue and be able to demonstrate a bona-fide practice of your religion
a seperate statute provides the following criteria for succeding on your claim
Quote:
(a) In general Government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability, except as provided in subsection (b) of this section. (b) Exception Government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person— (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling governmental interest. (c) Judicial relief A person whose religious exercise has been burdened in violation of this section may assert that violation as a claim or defense in a judicial proceeding and obtain appropriate relief against a government. Standing to assert a claim or defense under this section shall be governed by the general rules of standing under article III of the Constitution.
http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode42/usc_sec_42_00002000--bb001-.html
In theory this is a sepperate protection from the 1st amendment, but since this statute is more broad than the first amendment, this is really your saving grace unless your state has some funky rules.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
#8054457 - 02/21/08 10:31 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
DMT is also recognized as in ayhausca or whatever its called (by supreme court ruling) due to the religious freedom restoration act, which I've cited above.
Really I think the 1st amendment gives a better protection than this as written, but the court seems to think that controlling specific plants/chemicals is more important than people being free to live unmolested.. and somehow determined the state had a right to maintain its arbitrary drug laws in the face of legitimate religious practices (and stoners, which have no less a moral right to partake than do people w/ sincere religious beliefs, imo)
---
and entheogenicpeace, the law doesn't just apply to those native to the US's lands, but to everyone.
So if someone in asia could meet the aforementioned criteria they would be allowed to protection as well.
I believe the DMT people were from south america somewhere
|
DieCommie


Registered: 12/11/03
Posts: 29,258
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: flyskimmah]
#8054495 - 02/21/08 10:43 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
If you got special privileges because of your religion, wouldnt that be tantamount to state sponsorship of religion? I say thats a bad road to go down. Everybody should have the same rights.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: DieCommie]
#8054553 - 02/21/08 10:59 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I agree, there's no distinction between freedom of religion and freedom in general from a logical, moral sense, imo.
If a religion has an exemption, everyone should be free to that exemption.
Similar to how some states allow kids to drink alcohol with their parents as a way to allow religious services to proceed. THis is an example of a nice generally aplicable rule that is mroe justifiable.
Really waht it comes down to for me is that the factors in the law I cited above should be applied to everything a person does.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar



Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 3,926
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: johnm214]
#8054554 - 02/21/08 11:00 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
---
Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/13/21 01:39 PM)
|
blackegg
...has left the building.



Registered: 01/25/06
Posts: 1,021
Last seen: 15 years, 5 months
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
#8054802 - 02/22/08 12:00 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- 'Pain is meant to wake us up. People try to hide their pain. But they're wrong. Pain is something to carry, like a radio. You feel your strength in the experience of pain. It's all in how you carry it. That's what matters. Pain is a feeling. Your feelings are a part of you. Your own reality. If you feel ashamed of them, and hide them, you're letting society destroy your reality. You should stand up for your right to feel your pain and leave the Shroomery.' ~ Jim Morrison
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar



Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 3,926
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: blackegg]
#8055000 - 02/22/08 01:05 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
---
Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/13/21 01:39 PM)
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
#8055038 - 02/22/08 01:42 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
P.S. I did think "DMT people" was a funny (& possibly degrading! ) term to use given the circumstances. It makes much more sense now, though, in light of your revelation.
Well I was using it to refer to the group that sued for return of their bark or whatever it was, who I believe were from south america.
I don't know how that implies disrespect except to say I was kinda flippant. I'm not passing judgment, just didn't think it necessary to lookup all the details and figure out what they call themselves... really not relevant- (though likely helped prusuade the court... I doubt a cracker like me could get a religious emeption recognized so easily if it was for a substance not related to my heirtage... which is bullshit... equates religion with ancestry which shouldn't be conflate by the courts)
|
Seuss
Error: divide byzero



Registered: 04/27/01
Posts: 23,480
Loc: Caribbean
Last seen: 2 months, 20 days
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: johnm214]
#8055101 - 02/22/08 02:50 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
>> Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? > yes it applies to everything
Cool! So can I start human sacrifices again?
-------------------- Just another spore in the wind.
|
EntheogenicPeace
Scholar



Registered: 10/04/05
Posts: 3,926
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: johnm214]
#8057569 - 02/22/08 05:45 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
---
Edited by EntheogenicPeace (02/13/21 01:40 PM)
|
KetamineKatalyst
Skyhighatrist



Registered: 01/26/08
Posts: 1,647
Loc: Koma Kluster
Last seen: 13 years, 5 months
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: EntheogenicPeace]
#8058573 - 02/22/08 10:02 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Sadly I'm almost certain you would have no luck getting away with using mushrooms for religious purposes (legally anyways).
The religions that use Peyote and Ayahuasca have won numerous cases against the supreme court, after the government tried pressing various charges.
Btw, there already are mushrooms churches, and there's even a DPT church in New York. Although, I don't think any of these churches are legally exempt from the law with their choice of psychedelics...although that's not a fact, and I don't intend for it to be taken as a fact.
-------------------- "Cosmic Love is absolutely ruthless and highly indifferent: it teaches its lessons whether you like/dislike them or not." John C. Lilly
|
Coaster
Baʿal



Registered: 05/22/06
Posts: 33,501
Loc: Deep in the Valley
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: KetamineKatalyst]
#8058609 - 02/22/08 10:13 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
--------------------
|
HighHat
Repeat Gold Medal eBay -TiVoist



Registered: 01/24/08
Posts: 303
Loc: Delocated
Last seen: 13 years, 11 months
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: Coaster]
#8058769 - 02/22/08 11:09 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Coaster you stoned motherfucker. I see what you mean though, and I agree.
-------------------- Have you ever felt like you were wearing a hat, but you weren't? "Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" -Letter from the Pennsylvania Assembly, November 11, 1755 This profile is strictly for role-playing. Any alleged association with illegal activities is purely fictional. Any images depicting illegal activities are photo-shopped or stolen.
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: Seuss]
#8060613 - 02/23/08 02:10 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Seuss said: >> Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? > yes it applies to everything
Cool! So can I start human sacrifices again?
well you wouldn't meet the test for the religious freedom restoration act or the diluted freedom of religion as under the first amendment
you prolly couldn't show that prohibiting human sacrifice isn't a compelling government interest.
The natives in the two cases mentioned succeded cuz the feds couldn't demonstrate that the drugs were particularly dangerous, and they couldn't demonstrate that there was a risk of diversion, hence no compelling state interest.
I just mean that religious freedom applies to all areas, and the test employed to determine if the behavior meets the requirments of the law is the same no matter what the behavior being considered.
|
Luddite
I watch Fox News


Registered: 03/23/06
Posts: 2,946
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: johnm214]
#8061758 - 02/23/08 05:54 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
What happened to Leary's religion?
|
heilfire
the candy man



Registered: 02/07/08
Posts: 223
Loc: Rhode Island
Last seen: 2 years, 6 months
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: flyskimmah]
#8062134 - 02/23/08 07:44 PM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
I don't think the Rastafarians get to use pot legally, and they've been around for around 100 years. And thats just herb, imagine trying to get psychedelics legalized for your religion. The Man only allows people to use illicit drugs if the religion predates colonization of America. I don't think some brand new "religion" will gain any special privileges. Sorry, maybe I am just a pessimist.
-------------------- You swallow propaganda like a birth control pill, Sellin' your soul to the eye on the back of the dollar bill
|
johnm214



Registered: 05/31/07
Posts: 17,582
Loc: Americas
|
Re: Does freedom of religion apply to psychedelics? [Re: heilfire]
#8062937 - 02/24/08 01:04 AM (15 years, 11 months ago) |
|
|
There's not many cases about pot and rastas.
Under the first amendment as interpreted, the rastas have no claim.
Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, all the federal courts I found have ruled that they do (only ninth circuit seems to have reached the issue thus far) but only as applied to possesion- as no evidence has yet been put forth showing distribution of marijuana is necessary to the rasta faith, or so says the courts.
THese folks were denied the opportunity to present a defense that their possesion of marijuana was necessary as part of being a rasta, and their conviction on that count was reversed for retrial.
But since they were also convicted of money laundering, marijuana and cocaine dealing, et cet. this wasn't a big help. Still, it was a recognition that it is an issue available for a jury to consider as a defense in a criminal prosecution. Of note, the court rejected that marijuana dealing is necessary to the religion, but only cuz they didn't proffer any evidence to this point.
Quote:
Treiber, Meeks and Bauer may be retried on the possession counts. The government should be free to cross-examine them on whether they, in fact, are Rastafarians and to introduce evidence negating their asserted claims. It is not enough in order to enjoy the protections of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to claim the name of a religion as a protective [**23] cloak. Neither the government nor the court has to accept the defendants' mere say-so. The court may conduct a preliminary hearing in which the defendants will have the obligation of showing that they are in fact Rastafarians and that the use of marijuana is a part of the religious practice of Rastafarians.
USA v. Bauer; 84 F.3d 1549; (9th Cir- 1996)
The court again ruled that marijuana possesion may be defeated by a rasta, but not importation (interesting since the DMT case concerned importation though I think this was decided later, and that wasn't a criminal case)
Quote:
RFRA, as applied to Guam, is a constitutional exercise of Congress's Article I powers, yet provides no defense to Guerrero, who was prosecuted for importation of marijuana, not simple possession.
Guam v. Guerraro; 290 F.3d 1210 (9th Cir 2002)
Additionally, when you've got shittons of pot its hard to raise a defense. This Kansas state court ruled that rastas have a lesser claim to a religious exemption due to being massive tokers, whereas the native americans don't trip all the time. This seems like a week justification to me... but waddya expect... its kansas.
Quote:
First, Rastafarians are not similarly situated to NAC members because of the uncontrolled use to which they put marijuana in their religious practice. See Olsen, 878 F.2d at 1463-64. Joe McBride testified that his religion places no limitation on how much marijuana he smokes or at what time of the day he smokes it. Such practices have been noted by other courts addressing the disparate treatment accorded Rastafarians and NAC members under federal law. See Olsen, 878 F.2d at 1464. These practices make the administration of a regulatory scheme for the religious use of marijuana nearly impossible because of widespread and uncontrolled usage....
Second, Rastafarians and NAC members are not similarly situated because peyote is not abused at the same rate as marijuana; thus, the attendant social ills regarding marijuana are exponentially higher than that of peyote....
Modern courts have interpreted the unique obligations owed to Native Americans as exempting laws passed pursuant to the trust responsibility from the strictures of traditional equal protection analysis...
No court in United States history has acknowledged a similar political status on behalf of the Rastafarians. As such, the two groups [*920] are not similarly situated, and the McBrides' Equal Protection-Establishment Clause argument must fail.
Kansas v. McBride; 24 Kan. App. 2d 909 (1998)
I don't believe any court has ruled on this after the case where the S. American guys got their DMT plants back after being seized. This was clearly importation/ distribution, so perhaps the rastas can have a larger defense to marijuana now that the DMT dealing was sanctioned.
|
|