Wednesday, June 08, 2005

AJC Letters > Opinion

Letters from our readers
Published on: 6/8/05

Dan Meehan, John Eaton Morris, Harris Green, Jack Miller, Richard Erickson, Tom Ellicott - For the Journal-ConstitutionWednesday, June 8, 2005
Medical marijuana: Responses to "Ruling: Feds trump states," Page One, June 7
Patients lose their hope
In the decision citing that federal law supersedes state law for the purposes of prosecuting the users of medical marijuana, the Supreme Court has struck a powerful blow for . . . who? what?
The potential defendants in these cases are terminal AIDS and cancer patients who use the drug to curb their nausea enough to be able to eat, gain weight and keep their energy up so that they might fight off for another day the diseases slowly killing them.
While the pharmaceutical companies that hold Washington under their thumbs are producing highly addictive narcotics and reaping tremendous profits, the court has destroyed the small hopes for survival of thousands of patients all over the country.

Compassion from Congress unlikely
Who would have thought that the liberals on the Supreme Court would vote against medical marijuana while Sandra Day O'Connor, Clarence Thomas and Chief Justice William Rehnquist voted for it?
Was this compassionate conservatism? Actually, they voted on the basis of states' rights, finding the federal government's intrusion into health decisions overreaching. Will the conservative Congress now show compassion and amend the law to allow seriously ill patients the only relief from suffering available to them? Don't count on it.
It is sad that the two appointees by the president who didn't inhale couldn't find the compassion to agree with O'Connor's well-reasoned arguments.

Ties prompt Bush to silence science
The Republican-controlled Congress is not about to allow scientists to establish whether compassionate use of marijuana is a good idea ("Set rules on medical marijuana," Editorial, June 7).
If scientists concluded that marijuana has legitimate medical applications, the Bush administration (and Sen. Bill Frist) would have to dismiss it as "junk science," since it would undermine their relationship with a major contributor --- the pharmaceuticals industry.
Can you imagine the anguish at Merck, SmithKline et al. if suffering cancer victims could grow their own palliatives?

No comments:

Post a Comment