I was listening to POTUS on Sirius/XM yesterday afternoon, and Julie Mason had a gentleman on named Michelangelo Signorile. I have a feeling some of you know who he is. I found him to be a very well-spoken and seemingly super knowledgeable LGBT activist. The portion of the interview that I caught interested me, big time. I would like to discuss those reasons with my fellow Kossaks.
I am passionate about legalizing access to cannabis for adults for any reason, period. There are many, documented reasons why, but they are not the point of this post. As a middle aged adult male in 2015 in the U.S.A., I just cannot believe we continue to have this debate about legalizing weed. Mr. Signorile made some points that really hit home--points applicable to the homophobic world and the potheadphobic one.
As Mr. Signorile was talking about what changes we need to make concerning our ongoing discussion of LGBT rights, he astutely pointed out that when it comes to equality, in the racial context, the very issue of equality is settled. The debates are about policy now, and this needs to extend to the LGBT world, he pointed out. At that moment, I realized the same problem exists in the fight to legalize weed.
For example, on CNN, the Sunday morning news shows, college admissions panels, etc. we no longer even feature "the other side" that says brown people are not equal as humans. There was a time not that long ago where that side got a seat at the table, insisting that certain types of people were not really people. Or less than people--the half people arguments , etc. They had a loud voice in the past but no longer do because it is settled that those arguments carry zero weight.
So in the LGBT rights debate world, Mr. Signorile observed, why in the heck do we continue to let people representing designated hate groups spew their ongoing crap about things that have been 100% debunked--like homosexuality leading to beastiality? Everybody in the U.S. in 2015 knows that such arguments mean nothing, but the folks saying them still get attention.
In the cannabis world, the same rules apply. When Chris Christie insisted, yet again the other day, that pot is a dangerous "gateway" drug, I could only shake my head in exhaustion. Marijuana is not a gateway drug; it is not dangerous; and it is not addictive. Yet these arguments continue to be used used by our own government for the ongoing justification of this wholly irrational war on pot. And I use the word "rational," because, as per our Constitution, please recall that every law must pass the "rational basis test." How anti marijuana laws stand up to this test in 2015 perplexes me to no end.
Black lives matter. Gay lives matter. Pothead lives matter. All lives matter.
We are all people seeking out our little successes during this crazy life journey, and for some of us, pot works. For others, pot not only works well, it is downright critical. Like that woman with Crohn's disease in Kansas who just had her son removed from her house by child protective services. Do you know anyone with Crohn's disease? I do, and believe me, I would not wish that condition on my enemies. Thinking about her plight gets me madder than hell. Who the heck is Kansas trying to help? But I digress . . . .
Pot legalization is rational. Continuing the pot war is irrational. Honestly, who disagrees with this if money gets removed from the equation? But if we continue to have debates premised on debunked theories of dangerous pot, the terms of the debate never change. And if we refuse to recognize the sole, economic drivers keeping the pot war alive, we cannot even begin a rational debate about legalizing pot, itself, for the better good of humanity.
All the while, thousands of non-dangerous, harmless potheads continue to rot in jail in the "Land of the Free."
I believe potheadphobia is the cause of much of this. But unlike homophobia, which appears to largely be based on religious doctrine, I can find nothing in any religion that demonizes pot, so where does this potheadphobia come from?
Well, I have asked, and now I am asking the Kossack community to chime in.
Why are people so afraid of pot? What does it do? The worst thing anyone has ever said to me about potheads--and why that person is totally fine with the continuing war on pot--is that they make stupid faces when stoned. Got that? So it makes sense to throw people in prison for that? This person said this to me over several belts of scotch, and her face looked pretty absent, blank, and/or stupid at the time, but I digress again . . . .
The gateway argument is all fine and dandy (despite it being wrong), but why are the pot prohibitionists not daily calling for alcohol prohibition to be reinstated? I will submit that alcohol is vastly more of a "gateway" drug than pot. Alcohol is a depressant, and although I am not a drug scientist, I would be willing to bet that the overall effects of alcohol on the body are more similar to opiate-based narcotics than weed is to either.
I have researched this topic, and it appears that weed has minimal negative impact on the liver, including compromised ones. My father died of liver cancer many years ago, and he suffered a lot. I wish I could have purchased pot for him legally back in the day to help alleviate his pain.
He was allowed to self-administer endless morphine in the hospice, however. Nobody had a problem with that. I watched it drip away, along with his mind. Virtually all drugs, including morphine--legal or not--wreak mad havoc on the liver, as well. So why is pot illegal when it does not? And my dad had liver cancer, mind you.
Ever been to a bar when the World Cup is on TV and everyone is drunk? I have, and I hate the angry atmosphere. When I visited Amsterdam many years ago, the worst I saw in a pot smoke filled coffee shop was a dude passed out on a table, clearly on something way more potent than pot. Zero fear, however. I felt bad for him because it seemed like he needed treatment, but I did not fear for my safety the way I have, multiple times, around drunk, aggressive folks at a variety of venues.
So why is pot illegal? Where does the potheadphobia come from? Heroin addicts stealing money to support their habit? Yeah, that gets people scared. I can see why, too. Potheads stealing money to support their habit? I honestly have not even seen a movie about that.
Why do pothead lives continue not to matter? I read about a man in Louisiana who recently received 13 years in prison for a third pot possession offense. Possession only! He is a dad. He is a son. He is a man now in a cage for what?
Are people afraid of potheads munching away their life savings? Or do people just hate it when others become a little stoned and therefore slightly more separated from the pain all around us? Is it the laughing that newbie potheads experience during the first year of smoking? Experienced potheads do not laugh like that--at least not the ones I have observed. From what I can tell, experienced potheads tend to gravitate toward granola and great conversations . . . .
So why do these debunked myths continue to get attention? Where does the potheadphobia originate? Alcoholics are often feared in their homes due to their unpredictable behavior. This is well-documented. I know folks who grew up with hardcore alcoholics, and there are zero similarities between them and potheads.
I have never met a potoholic, but if that qualifies as an actual diagnosed condition, I blame the addictive personality and not the weed. Same with laziness. I know a dude who can snowplow his property while stoned like an Olympian. And he smiles the whole time, relishing the cold air. The same cannot be said about tobacco or even coffee, however. I have experienced tobacco addiction, first hand, and trust me it sucks.
So I thank Mr. Signorile for shining the LGBT right light onto the pothead predicament. I salute Colorado, Washington State, and Oregon for taking the lead on rational treatment of--oh, here's the scary part--RECREATIONAL use of cannabis.
Note: will continue to shout about the biggest injustice of them all--Washington, D.C.! Although I am happy for the residents of our Capitol, I cannot wrap my mind around the fact that it, governed exclusively by federal law, is the one city where the Schedule 1 classification of pot--via federal law no less--is wholly inapplicable. Colorado, Washington, and Oregon deserve credit for having the balls to defy our extremely powerful federal government. Which brings me to . . . .
I will end with this question about potheadphobia: If the use of pot (sharing and growing at home, as well) is now wholly legal in Washington, D.C., how is it justifiable that the federal government can apply an entirely separate standard to all living outside of D.C.?
Where does this potheadphobia come from???