2006-12-11 14:18:48 · 10 answers · asked by John Tiggity 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I notice that some people are speaking of the whether or not marijuana should be legal or not. In short, they are acting as if they are legislatures. But I asked whether the Supreme Court should recognize the right? So, while all the points about whether marijuana is beneficial or not are relevant, more will be needed to provide a good argument as to why the Supreme Court should enforce such a right in the teeth of a legislature's finding that marijuana is not substantially medicinally beneficial and should therefore be outlawed.
2006-12-11 17:22:54 · update #1
Nope.
I'm all for pot and I'm all for cancer/AIDS/glaucoma patients going to get stoned--really--but it's just not in the Constitution.
If it was up to me, I'd pass a law and allow it. And I'm sure some of the Supreme Court feels the same way, but that's not their job.
2006-12-11 14:23:58 · answer #1 · answered by foxwallow 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It would seem that there is a need for the pain relief that marijuana offers and since this is so it should be legalized for medicinal use. Prejudice against a drug should not interfere with a reasonable need for it's use.
2006-12-11 22:25:22 · answer #2 · answered by Kenneth H 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Why not, there are enough drugs out there that the drug industry puts out that does more harm to people than marijuana. Then after it "accidentally" kills enough people, they recall it. The drug companies are probably paying them off to vote against it since you can easily grow it yourself or get it some other way. They'll be missing out on their big profits. If it helps these poor sick people then give them whatever it takes to at least ease their pain. They may think differently if it's one of their loved ones suffering, or even themselves.
2006-12-11 22:32:25 · answer #3 · answered by Nemesis 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Answer yes. for those who say no what would be the reasons. Marijuana has less side effects then "legal" drugs. It can be used to treat different things. It won't happen because the drug companies have to much power.
2006-12-11 22:26:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
The only way they could address it is on Constitutional Review of a law. Since there have been many laws passed I think it could be one of the showdowns that Bush is stacking the court with conservatives for... that and abortion.
2006-12-11 22:28:56 · answer #5 · answered by eric_the_red_101 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
so far as can be determined there is no medical use for marijuana which has been researched since the early 1970's.
2006-12-11 22:24:17 · answer #6 · answered by bearbait7351 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Yes.
2006-12-11 22:20:40 · answer #7 · answered by ROBERT L O 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Sure, but by then the pain is gone...
and the Tax is too high
2006-12-11 22:25:09 · answer #8 · answered by tina m 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
if it helps people than why not?
2006-12-11 22:25:14 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No, not at all!
2006-12-11 22:22:37 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋