# Conservatives. Defend your objections to medical marijuana. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 9, 2003, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161 "2003-11-09T02:11:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 5:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/41 "2003-11-09T17:52:55Z")
> [@](#): > > So the Bush admin’s hardline stance on Medical MJ is to a great extent one big pander to the “moral conservatives”, who tend to be very strident. And who are apparently in short supply on the SDMB. As for me, I’m all in favor of medical as well as recreational use of marijuana being perfectlyy legal. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/42 "2003-11-09T19:03:03Z")
The republicans, according to a recent survey, are all at church today. 😉 We’ll probably hear from them later. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/43 "2003-11-09T19:18:58Z")
Forgot my freakin’ [cite](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99945,00.html) Is anyone surprised? ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/44 "2003-11-09T19:41:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mangeorge \* > > Conservatives as a group are opposed to legal mj, medical or recreational, because they like to control, and they don’t embrace change. That’s part of the definition of conservatism. Yeah. Right. :rolleyes: How about: conservatives want less control by the federal government, more power to the states, more power to the individual and slower, more deliberate change. Maybe the big drug companies have something to lose if marijuana is legalized, but that doesn’t mean that conservatives as a whole are opposed to it. Consider the issue of federalism. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/45 "2003-11-09T19:49:34Z")
Well, there are consertives, and there are conservatives. WF Buckley, surely a conservative by anyone’s definition, [favores legalization of marijuana.](http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley102902.asp) Ditto for Goldwater, IIRC. But I’d be surprised if more self-identified conservatives than self-identified liberals favored legalization of medicinal pot. In fact, I’d expect there to be a pretty big spread on those numbers. ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/46 "2003-11-09T20:52:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by John Mace \* > WF Buckley, surely a conservative by anyone’s definition, [favores legalization of marijuana.](http://www.nationalreview.com/buckley/buckley102902.asp) Ditto for Goldwater, IIRC. So does Dana [Rohrabacher](http://www.mpp.org/releases/rohrabacher.html). ---
**Author:** ![JThunder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e95f7d/32.png) [@JThunder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JThunder)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/47 "2003-11-09T21:14:50Z")
I saw at least one physician on TV say that, in his experience, the only people who truly needed medicinal marijuana were those who were already using the substance illegally. No, I don’t have a cite. Like I said, I just saw it on TV. I was flipping channels at the time, and didn’t take note of which program it was. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/48 "2003-11-09T22:40:45Z")
Don’t you :rolleyes: me, **sleeping**. 😉 “Embrace” means to accept something, a concept in this case, with open arms. Conservatism calls for power to states and indivuduals (corporations _are_ individuals, right?) as it pertains to capitalism. Conservatism is not especailly big on many “human” rights. I think drug companies have the least to lose in the face of legal pot. Corporations with large labor forces claim to have the most to lose. You want to consider something? Consider that virtually all companies are, as I said, anti-legalization _and_ conservative. Sure, there are conservative people who, for whatever reasons, support legalization. Mostly intellectuals, I’ll venture. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![SnoopyFan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d07c76/32.png) [@SnoopyFan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SnoopyFan)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/49 "2003-11-09T22:58:37Z")
I’d daresay most people who are vehemently against legalizing pot are in the law enforcement field. Despite the fact that the “war on drugs” has been a miserable failure, many cops & other law types would be out of a job if they were no longer needed to protect the masses from grass. ---
**Author:** ![Voodoochile](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/898d66/32.png) [@Voodoochile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voodoochile)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/50 "2003-11-09T23:03:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mangeorge \* > **…Conservatism calls for power to states and indivuduals (corporations _are_ individuals, right?) as it pertains to capitalism. Conservatism is not especailly big on many “human” rights. > …** This makes absolutely no sense. Human rights and individual rights are two terms for the same thing. And I find that while there are many religous conservatives who are anti mary-jane, there are also many liberals who are anti mary jane in an elitist, snobbish, social sort of way. After all, liberals tend to see drug use as some sort of ‘problem’, some sort of abnormal behavior, just like conservatives do; its just that the liberal solution to this perceived but non existant problem is different than conservatives’. The view of recreational drug use as being some sort of problem (abnormal behavior) that needs to be fixed (to ‘normal’ behavior) is itself a pretty tainted view, whether its paternalistic as is the case with many conservatives, or patronising as is the case with many liberals. After all, Joe Six-Pack is an increasingly inaccurate stereotype of working class conservatives; in many places, definately here in Cal, it would be more accurate to say Joe Dimebag or Joe Ragweed. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/51 "2003-11-09T23:14:05Z")
I’m trying to find a poll that answers the question by party affiliation, but haven’t had much luck. In general, polls say that 75% of americans support leaglization. The republicans, supporters of individual power, are in charge right now. Let’s go, pubbies!!! Legalize. The “folks” have spoken. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/52 "2003-11-09T23:29:16Z")
> [@](#): > > This makes absolutely no sense. Human rights and individual rights are two terms for the same thing. No, no _no_. Not even close. “Individual” includes companies, but that’s another debate, done to death already. A company is a person, but not a human. 😉 I think the definition of conservative, in Joe Dimebag’s view, is changing to “I wanna keep my whole paycheck”. And liberal is becoming “I wanna give _your_ paycheck away”. Anyway, does anyone know (and can prove) if the OP’s assertion is valid? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 11:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/53 "2003-11-09T23:31:44Z")
> [@](#): > > **gazpacho** : Biggirl the white house was leading the opposition when Clinton was in. Uh…no. Despite what Clinton’s own drug policy chief said, Clinton’s own stand on the matter of the medical use of marijuana was made clear when he vetoed an appropriations bill: From the NORML website: > [@](#): > > Citing the rights of DC residents to make “their own decisions about local matters,” President Bill Clinton has **vetoed the DC Appropriations Bill, in part because it included a congressional ban on medical marijuana**. [http://www.november.org/razorwire/rzold/15/1438.html](http://www.november.org/razorwire/rzold/15/1438.html) If you will permit an old woman’s observations from the last thirty-five years of interest in the legalization of marijuana, it has consistently been the conservative _citizens_ who have objected to the legalization. They were not the only ones. I think that most of the GI generation, with some exceptions, objected to any use. For most all of that generation, _use = abuse_. The liberal boomers made usage common during the 1960’s. When that happened, use spread to the generation a little older than the Boomers and, of course, younger. When we didn’t have two headed babies or become violent under its influence, younger generations, both conservative and liberal, recognized it for what it – basically pleasant and harmless. But politicians of both sides are still caving in to the fundamentalists and older Conservatives. In so doing, especially on the issue of medical use, they are doing the citizens a great injustice. It’s nice to see the younger generations on both ends of the political spectrum agreeing on its medical use. If you speak up, maybe your Senators and Representatives can quit being such stuffed shirts and er…blouses. Under one of the Presidents, there was a Presidential Committe to Study the Effects of Marijuana. The report was favorable toward the use of MJ. So naturally, the report was stashed away somewhere and ignored. Was that Nixon? ---
**Author:** ![sleeping](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/839c29/32.png) [@sleeping](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleeping)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2003, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/54 "2003-11-09T23:56:39Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by mangeorge \* > Don’t you :rolleyes: me, **sleeping**. 😉 “Embrace” means to accept something, a concept in this case, with open arms. Conservatism calls for power to states and indivuduals (corporations _are_ individuals, right?) as it pertains to capitalism. Agreed. But I was making a distinction between the nature of conservatism and its political roots, and the actions of corporations (to whom, for the most part, conservatism would be more appealing). > [@](#): > > Conservatism is not especailly big on many “human” rights. I think drug companies have the least to lose in the face of legal pot. Corporations with large labor forces claim to have the most to lose. You want to consider something? Consider that virtually all companies are, as I said, anti-legalization _and_ conservative. Well, when I speak of “individual rights” it’s more in the sense of individual liberties, so there is room for your distinction. > [@](#): > > I think the definition of conservative, in Joe Dimebag’s view, is changing to “I wanna keep my whole paycheck”. And liberal is becoming “I wanna give your paycheck away”. _Gasp!_ You couldn’t possibly be suggesting that people in general want to just declare their opinion without actually considering the facts. > [@](#): > > I’m trying to find a poll that answers the question by party affiliation, but haven’t had much luck. [Here ya go.](http://ohiopatient.net/pdf/TPHS_AppendixII.pdf) > [@](#): > > Sure, there are conservative people who, for whatever reasons, support legalization. Mostly intellectuals, I’ll venture. 😛 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/55 "2003-11-10T01:20:21Z")
JRDelerious: > [@](#): > > Ah, but you see, Biggirl, that brings us into the realm of how current-day “conservatism” or “Republicanism” in America is a coalition that includes both “economic” or “political” conservatives who believe that what threatens the nation is the hobbling of the free market, the growth of Big Government, the abdication of individual responsibility, and that a weak national defense may embolden our enemies to strike; and on the other hand “social” or “moral” conservatives, puritans who believe that the threat is evil corruption of our “family values”, weakening of respect for institutional authority, and the possibility of God smiting us for being tolerant of sin. You hit the nail on the head, but this calls into question how the term “conservative” can encompass such a glaring contradiction. John Mace: > [@](#): > > The truth is, it’s the Feds of both stripes who oppose medicinal pot. Conservatives and Liberals, or Republicans and Democrats if you prefer, at that level have consistently opposed the states’ rights on this issue. And both groups seem to be using the “slippery slope” argument. What this indicated is that the Democrats aren’t as liberal as the Republicans are conservative. The Clinton Admin. was worried about appearing soft on drugs due to pressure from the Right and needed to make a show of cracking down. ---
**Author:** ![neutron\_star](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/51bf81/32.png) [@neutron\_star](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/neutron_star)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/56 "2003-11-10T04:22:12Z")
I know I mentioned this in another thread on this subject, but it’s worth repeating. It’s kind of funny how Bush’s stance on medical marijuana has gone from “I believe each state can choose that decision as they so choose” on the [campaign trail](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/campaigns/wh2000/stories/bush102299.htm) to not only ignoring the states’ rights, but even going so far as to try to threaten doctors who so much as discuss the option of med pot with their patients. ---
**Author:** ![clayton\_e](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c57346/32.png) [@clayton\_e](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/clayton_e)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/57 "2003-11-10T04:28:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > \*\*But the 'hoppers would have a good time. And, having the munchies, they would be even more destructive. \*\* No… They would get little or no high. Needs to be heated along with a lipid, like butter. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/58 "2003-11-10T04:39:09Z")
Mmmm. Tollhash chocolate chip cookies. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/59 "2003-11-10T04:52:02Z")
Who was it, J.Elders?, who got into trouble for suggesting that the war on marijuana should be looked at with some common sense? She got fired for talking about sex education for kids. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2003, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161/60 "2003-11-10T04:57:32Z")
Who was it, J.Elders?, who got into trouble for suggesting that the war on marijuana should be looked at with some common sense? She got fired for talking about sex education for kids. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-defend-your-objections-to-medical-marijuana/212161.md?page=4)