Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

LDS Church gets beat on medical marijuana


Recommended Posts

Posted
38 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

This is twice now you've posted this bus. And I don't know if it's gotten enough attention, because it's pretty funny. 😁

Well, preach it, Sister! 😁  (The reason why I post the bus and that imaginary bit of driver-passenger dialogue is because the word is cannabis ...)

Posted

By the way, it should be noted that those who trade in black market marijuana now are taking advantage of legalization trends here in the United States:  "Why should we risk growing it outside the U.S. and potentially getting caught for possession with intent to distribute in states in which it is still illegal (at least on the state level; it should also be remembered that possession, distribution, and use violate federal law nationwide) when we can simply grow, transport, distribute, and sell it IN the U.S. legally?"

The fact that it is stll illegal federally ... nationwide ... Is likely to play a role in the stance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints concerning it.

Posted
1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

By the way, it should be noted that those who trade in black market marijuana now are taking advantage of legalization trends here in the United States:  "Why should we risk growing it outside the U.S. and potentially getting caught for possession with intent to distribute in states in which it is still illegal (at least on the state level; it should also be remembered that possession, distribution, and use violate federal law nationwide) when we can simply grow, transport, distribute, and sell it IN the U.S. legally?"

The fact that it is stll illegal federally ... nationwide ... Is likely to play a role in the stance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints concerning it.

If they are simply growing, transporting, distributing and selling it legally, how is it Black Market trade?

Posted

In our Ward we had a fifth Sunday lesson on the difference between church,  Doctrine, Policy, and Commandment. I wish we had gone a little deeper into the Word of Wisdom with that. The church may come out with a policy on MM, but in the end it may be right or wrong. Sort of like when Joseph Smith created the anti bank and it failed. He was just using his brain to do something he thought was good, and it failed, period. The church could keep saying we need to follow the USDA and their expertise, then months later it comes out that the USDA is receiving big payoffs from Pharmaceutical companies to keep MM out of the drug stream. Then how would everyone's attitude about MM change? I have a father approaching 100 years old that has horrible back pain, when the doctor was asked about CBD oil as an alternative the doctor said, I don't know anything about that. We said; is that because you don't have a drug rep. pushing it? He said, yes.  

Posted
13 hours ago, hope_for_things said:

I wonder if the church will ask regular members in Utah to participate in organizing efforts to get people to vote against the initiative, similar to prop 8.  I sure hope not.  

I bet not.  Guess we'll see.

Posted (edited)
26 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I bet not.  Guess we'll see.

it is rumored that Utah Wards were sent out to request that people remove their names from the initiative petition.

Edited by provoman
Posted
19 minutes ago, provoman said:

it is rumored that Utah Wards were sent out to request that people remove their names from the initiative petition.

I'm in Utah and haven't heard that.

Posted (edited)

I think it now reasonable to ask the Church to declare its stock position with Pharmaceutical companies. It’s relevant in terms of understanding their statement of opposition to something that might harm the stock price of those holdings.

Here’s a list of stocks the Church holds.

https://www.scribd.com/document/380562519/2017-12-31-Thirteen-LLC-Investment-Summary

There are plenty of investments in the healthcare sector. Is it beyond reasonable to think the Church considers where its’ money is before coming out for or against a particular piece of legislation?

Edited by Marginal Gains
Posted
10 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Is the LDS Church opposed to prescribed medicines?

Of course not....I guess I should be more clear. My pops self medicates with marijuana butter and oil. He never got a prescription from a physician.  He is a TBM and after years of taking all the prescriptions his doctor gave him without sufficient relief my brother and his wife (also TBM) convinced him to try cannabis. Now he swears by the stuff. 

Posted

From Fox News (on March 26):

Quote

More than three-quarters of Utahns surveyed support the concept of medical marijuana, a new poll reveals.

The poll, published Monday by the political news website UtahPolicy.com, showed that 77% of Utahns strongly or somewhat favor medical cannabis access. Those numbers show an overwhelming support for the concept as it heads to the November ballot. (The poll was conducted in February among 609 voters with a margin of error of 4%.)

From UtahPolicy.com today:

Quote

Utahns are split over whether an LDS Church legal analysis criticizing the medical marijuana initiative leads them more to support the initiative, or turns them away from it, a new UtahPolicy.com poll shows. 

...

The new survey by Jones asked Utahns whether the church’s legal analysis (which raises 31 questions why the initiative is a bad idea) makes them more or less likely to support the initiative:

  • 40 percent said the church’s analysis makes them “much more” or “somewhat more” likely to support the initiative. (In other words, does just the opposite of what church leaders want.)
  • While 41 percent said the church’s analysis makes them LESS likely to support the initiative. (Which is what church leaders desired by releasing the legal analysis.)
  • And 20 percent said they don’t know if the analysis changes their minds. It’s likely many in this group had never heard of the church’s legal analysis before Jones asked them the question.

Interesting stuff.

Thanks,

-Smac

Posted
1 hour ago, provoman said:

it is rumored that Utah Wards were sent out to request that people remove their names from the initiative petition.

Haven't heard anything about that.

-Smac

Posted
1 hour ago, provoman said:

read it on reddit

 

mr9xqw.jpg

So it sounds like one bishop asked someone in his ward to make members aware of a non-church meeting not sponsored by the church. 

That’s a lot different than the church sending out wards to get people to remove their names. 

Posted
1 hour ago, snowflake said:

Of course not....I guess I should be more clear. My pops self medicates with marijuana butter and oil. He never got a prescription from a physician.  He is a TBM and after years of taking all the prescriptions his doctor gave him without sufficient relief my brother and his wife (also TBM) convinced him to try cannabis. Now he swears by the stuff. 

it causes swearing? that's interesting, never heard that before!

Posted
8 minutes ago, bluebell said:

So it sounds like one bishop asked someone in his ward to make members aware of a non-church meeting not sponsored by the church. 

That’s a lot different than the church sending out wards to get people to remove their names. 

excellent point

Posted
21 hours ago, Duncan said:

I think it's July? in Canada that Marijuana becomes legal, although provinces have some form of veto power. So, here you can down a cold one at a work party but you can't have marijuana.  I know my Dr. has prescribed medical marijuana, so it's legal to some extent. The Church hasn't said tickety-boo about it here

Weed is legal up there?

Posted
3 hours ago, Regor said:

In our Ward we had a fifth Sunday lesson on the difference between church,  Doctrine, Policy, and Commandment. I wish we had gone a little deeper into the Word of Wisdom with that. The church may come out with a policy on MM, but in the end it may be right or wrong. Sort of like when Joseph Smith created the anti bank and it failed. He was just using his brain to do something he thought was good, and it failed, period. The church could keep saying we need to follow the USDA and their expertise, then months later it comes out that the USDA is receiving big payoffs from Pharmaceutical companies to keep MM out of the drug stream. Then how would everyone's attitude about MM change? I have a father approaching 100 years old that has horrible back pain, when the doctor was asked about CBD oil as an alternative the doctor said, I don't know anything about that. We said; is that because you don't have a drug rep. pushing it? He said, yes.  

The United States Department of Agriculture has nothing to do with the regulation of marijuana in the United States.  The wisdom of allowing medicinal use of marijuana or of whether such use is consistent with obeying the Word of Wisdom certainly can be debated.  However, I don't think there's much dispute that the psychoactive component(s) in marijuana mean that it is a drug, and as such is not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration or by the Department of Agriculture.

Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, poptart said:

Weed is legal up there?

I think under a certain amount for personal use, I think it officially becomes legal in July?  but the provinces can have their own laws as in one province can say you have to be at least 18 yrs old and another can say 21 but the fine print for that stuff is still being drawn up as far as I know. So, here you can have a brewski at a work party but pot is illegal, so it's legal but just not at a work party and i'm guessing most businesses won't allow it on their property but I don't know for sure. There are adverts running now about driving even

 

Edited by Duncan
Posted
13 minutes ago, Kenngo1969 said:

The United States Department of Agriculture has nothing to do with the regulation of marijuana in the United States.  The wisdom of allowing medicinal use of marijuana or of whether such use is consistent with obeying the Word of Wisdom certainly can be debated.  However, I don't think there's much dispute that the psychoactive component(s) in marijuana mean that it is a drug, and as such is not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration or by the Department of Agriculture.

As an agricultural crop,  Cannabis is certainly regulated to an extent by the USDA and state departments of agriculture.  There are a number of federal and state agencies involved in the regulation of this plant. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I think under a certain amount for personal use, I think it officially becomes legal in July?  but the provinces can have their own laws as in one province can say you have to be at least 18 yrs old and another can say 21 but the fine print for that stuff is still being drawn up as far as I know. So, here you can have a brewski at a work party but pot is illegal, so it's legal but just not at a work party and i'm guessing most businesses won't allow it on their property but I don't know for sure. There are adverts running now about driving even

 

Once i get my RN I'm moving up there. I had already been planning it, I miss the North.  Things are so expensive here now and wages aren't going up.  I'm also sick and tired of the drug testing here, what someone does in their free time is no ones business.  Not a fan of hair strand tests, way I see it for a lot of jobs they know competition is fierce so they can pick and choose. 

I've always preferred Canada over the states anyway, love the people.  Have no qualms leaving my pistols and what not in Alaska or down here, the legal weed just sealed the deal.

Posted
11 minutes ago, poptart said:

Once i get my RN I'm moving up there. I had already been planning it, I miss the North.  Things are so expensive here now and wages aren't going up.  I'm also sick and tired of the drug testing here, what someone does in their free time is no ones business.  Not a fan of hair strand tests, way I see it for a lot of jobs they know competition is fierce so they can pick and choose. 

I've always preferred Canada over the states anyway, love the people.  Have no qualms leaving my pistols and what not in Alaska or down here, the legal weed just sealed the deal.

yeah gun laws here are pretty strict!!! but few mind it TBH,  come!!!!!

Posted
1 hour ago, Duncan said:

yeah gun laws here are pretty strict!!! but few mind it TBH,  come!!!!!

I'm more of a sportsman, don't see the point in sleeping with an AR, I swear that thing is like the barbie doll of firearms, so many accessories. 

Posted
10 hours ago, Kenngo1969 said:

By the way, it should be noted that those who trade in black market marijuana now are taking advantage of legalization trends here in the United States:  "Why should we risk growing it outside the U.S. and potentially getting caught for possession with intent to distribute in states in which it is still illegal (at least on the state level; it should also be remembered that possession, distribution, and use violate federal law nationwide) when we can simply grow, transport, distribute, and sell it IN the U.S. legally?"

The fact that it is stll illegal federally ... nationwide ... Is likely to play a role in the stance of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints concerning it.

 

8 hours ago, Marginal Gains said:

If they are simply growing, transporting, distributing and selling it legally, how is it Black Market trade?

Bumping for Kenngo

Posted
1 hour ago, poptart said:

I'm more of a sportsman, don't see the point in sleeping with an AR, I swear that thing is like the barbie doll of firearms, so many accessories. 

fair enough!

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...