Medical Marijuana and the Church

[Mars]

Too bad the opposition itself is in poor taste.

[snoscythe]

I have got to give the Trib some props, they tweeted this today:



Used the full form of the name.

....and completely misstated the Church's position.

Church actually supported medical pot, just not the version Prop 2 wants.

[ABYUFAN]

I have got to give the Trib some props, they tweeted this today:



Used the full form of the name.

....and completely misstated the Church's position.

Church actually supported medical pot, just not the version Prop 2 wants.

They're batting .500 - so that's an improvement for them - right?

[Mars]

I have got to give the Trib some props, they tweeted this today:



Used the full form of the name.

....and completely misstated the Church's position.

Church actually supported medical pot, just not the version Prop 2 wants.

Just not a version that exists anywhere. In any state. Sounds like a cop-out, no?

[ABYUFAN]

I have got to give the Trib some props, they tweeted this today:



Used the full form of the name.

....and completely misstated the Church's position.

Church actually supported medical pot, just not the version Prop 2 wants.

Just not a version that exists anywhere. In any state. Sounds like a cop-out, no?

Or they see the problems that exist with pot in other states and want to have something better. (like that's a bad thing)

[snoscythe]

I have got to give the Trib some props, they tweeted this today:



Used the full form of the name.

....and completely misstated the Church's position.

Church actually supported medical pot, just not the version Prop 2 wants.

Just not a version that exists anywhere. In any state. Sounds like a cop-out, no?

Yeah, heaven forbid (pun intended) that someone propose and support something the law doesn't currently support.

Personally I think it was a bit of a watershed moment for the Church to come out in support of regulated medical pot. There's a lot to be done to get to that point, but I think that's the more prudent path over Prop 2.

[Mars]

It's dumb to support nothing that exists over something that exists and is currently helping people elsewhere. But I guess the Church is just very pro-Heroin.

[snoscythe]

But I guess the Church is just very pro-Heroin.

[ABYUFAN]

It's dumb to support nothing that exists over something that exists and is currently helping people elsewhere. But I guess the Church is just very pro-Heroin.

Why should we even have an automobile? Our horses and buggies are perfectly fine, and they currently get people everywhere they want to go anyway.

[snoscythe]

It's dumb to support nothing that exists over something that exists and is currently helping people elsewhere.

Their issue isn't with helping people. It's with the negative externalities that come with it.

As an example from research on the effects of legalizing medical weed:



"The authors note that the 6 to 9 percent increase in frequency of adult binge drinking, along with an estimated increase in the probability of simultaneous use of marijuana and alcohol of 15 to 22 percent, suggests that legalization could result in considerable economic and social costs from downstream health care expenditures and productivity loss." (http://www.nber.org/digest/oct14/w20085.html)


The thing that doesn't exist yet is in response to the studies coming out showing the societal effects in other states that have enabled medical marijuana. How is it dumb to try to reduce these costs?

The Church is actually urging its members in Utah to "join us in a call to state elected officials to promptly work with medical experts, patients, and community leaders to find a solution that will work for all Utahns, without the harmful effects that will come to pass if Proposition 2 becomes law."