marijuana, religion and the law?

Question

sorry i don't know the proper terms here, but from what i understand the US and most 'western' liberal governments deny legal protection for religious marijuana use.

on what legal grounds is this supported, in light of the fact that marijauna has been used for religious purposes for thousands of years? i think of hinduism in particular when i ask this, although rastafarians are also a more recent addition to the religious use of cannabis.

i also am thinking of the native americans rights in regard to peyote or other generally illegal substances which they use for ceremonial or religious purposes. thanks for any insight.

Answer 1

Generally, the Constitution is interpreted as follows with regard to laws affecting religious practice.

Religious beliefs are absolutely protected. No government authority can tell someone what to think or believe.

Religious expression (including prayer, or symbolic speech) is protected under the strictest scrutiny, the same as any other form of personal expression. So, the govt can't punish someone for saying what they believe, not compel them to say something they don't believe. There are few exceptions, where the regulation is necessary to achieve an essential (compelling) govt interest, and is the least restrictive means possible to achieve that goal.

Religious conduct is no more protected than any other form of personal conduct. So neutral laws that make a certain actions criminal are generally applicable, and no special exception is granted because of religion. In other words, religious conduct is treated no differently than non-religious conduct.

In the case of drug use, that's illegal. And the law is not targeted at religious organizations, nor does it affect religious drug users drastically more than it affects any other drug users. So, the criminal laws are generally applicable to everyone, without treating religion differently (no better, no worse). Which makes the law constitutional.

Answer 2

as a results of fact it extremely is illegitimate, it extremely is illegitimate. in case you observed a faith that allowed for human sacrifice, could you be allowed to kill somebody? Nope. I rather have an concept why it is not allowed (nicely, greater an concept why the pot exception isn't allowed).... human beings could stert claiming they have been a member of that faith basically so as that they could smoke legally. it does no longer in elementary terms be a spit interior the face of our regulations, yet a spit interior the face of the those that rather believe in mentioned faith.