Is the White House doing more harm than good...

[degrawj]

So, I just saw this article on the front page of Yahoo! saying "White House Seeks Ban on Religious Tea." Link to article, and said article will be posted at the end of this post. Apparently there is this really small church, like 8,000 members worldwide, and as a part of their religious services, they drink a hallucinogenic tea called hoasca. Now, I'm not really concerned with whether or not the church should be able to use it or not, and I'm not really concerned about the White House making a stink about it. Here is what I am wondering: I had never heard of this tea before, and so I am assuming (perhaps incorreclty) that it is rather unknown to most people, especially since it seems to be used mostly by a group of about 8,000 people. There are lots of people out there who are interested in taking mind altering drugs, myself included, and by going public with this declaration, the White House is basically advertising this psychadelic drug, which probably would have otherwise gone unoticed.

I am curious as to other peoples opinions on this. EXCEPT, please read this part, I don't want people attacking ME personally for my stance on drugs, because that is not the point of this thread. If you're against drugs, and feel that the White House did the right thing, that's fine, like I said, I don't really care about this declaration from the White House. I just think that they could possibly cause MORE people to try this drug than if they had just left the whole thing alone. Your thoughts?

Linkey: http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor..._religious_tea

White House Seeks Ban on Religious Tea


WASHINGTON - The Bush administration asked the Supreme Court on Thursday to block a New Mexico church from using hallucinogenic tea that the government contends is illegal and potentially dangerous.

The appeal from Attorney General Alberto Gonzales argues that a lower court was wrong to allow the Brazil-based O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal to import and use the hoasca tea as part of its religious services.

"The court's decision has mandated that the federal government open the nation's borders to the importation, circulation and usage of a mind-altering hallucinogen and threatens to inflict irreparable harm on international cooperation in combating transnational narcotics trafficking," the filing states.

The church, which has about 140 members in the United States and 8,000 worldwide, said the herbal brew is a central sacrament in its religious practice, which is a blend of Christian beliefs and traditions rooted in the Amazon basin.

The group has won several rounds at the lower courts, most recently at the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (news - web sites) in November.

In December, the Supreme Court lifted a temporary stay that allowed the church to immediately use the tea after its court victories. The Justice Department (news - web sites) had argued they should be blocked from doing so until it filed a formal appeal, which it did Thursday.

If the high court agrees to hear the case, it won't be heard until next term.

The church's U.S. operations are based in Santa Fe, N.M.

[MSD]

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The government is not allowed to do this. Case closed.

[shakran]

Originally Posted by MrSelfDestruct

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"

The government is not allowed to do this. Case closed.

Well just to throw a monkey wrench into your argument, let's say I want to start shooting heroin. I form my own church where heroin plays a prominent role in my religious ceremonies. Should I be allowed to do this?

I say no, because that would set the precedent that all I have to do to avoid obeying any law that I don't like is to form my own church and then make the illegal action a religious ritual.





Also, some religions believe in involuntary human sacrifice, yet they're not allowed to do this even though they enjoy first amendment protections. The first amendment does not absolve church members from obeying the laws of the land.


What do you think?

[jwoody]

I can definitely see your point, degrawj. I quite enjoy the occasional hallucinogen and I fucking love tea.

I'd certainly be interested in getting my hands on some hallucinogenic tea.

[C4 Diesel]

Originally Posted by jwoody

I can definitely see your point, degrawj. I quite enjoy the occasional hallucinogen and I fucking love tea.

I'd certainly be interested in getting my hands on some hallucinogenic tea.

Which is exactly why the (stupid) US government will never let it legally exist in this country.

[The_wall]

Well I think drugs should be legalized so I think that this sucks for the church, but you're right I doubt many people have heard of this tea, that is until now. Expect teabags of hoasca to hit the streets soon. Hell this is great publicity for the church.

"Dude did you hear about that church that gives you hallucinagenic tea, I'm totally joining it"

Originally Posted by shakran

Well just to throw a monkey wrench into your argument, let's say I want to start shooting heroin. I form my own church where heroin plays a prominent role in my religious ceremonies. Should I be allowed to do this?

Hell yeah i'll join the church of junk!

Hasnt the Gov. already allowed plently of churches to use mescaline and peyote? Whats the difference? MrSelfDestruct has hit the proverbial nail on the head on this one... It'll never happen. The can schedual the herbs themselves, but i doubt they can remove it from churches who can prove the legitimacy of it's use.

edit/pee ess:
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/ayah...journal1.shtml
i couldnt read it all, but i skimmed. interesting stuff, i'd like to get some.

[degrawj]

whoa! i thought this thread died or something after i got no response to it for a few days. i'm glad to see that i'm not the only one who thinks the White House is kind of shooting themselves in the foot.

and jwoody, if you happen to come across some of that tea, give me a PM to let me know how it was! :-) (and where to get it!) :-)

and thanks for the link thinktank. i hadn't thought of checking erowid for information on it. (stupid me) i love that site.

[dksuddeth]

well, is this tea a hallucinogen or a narcotic?

[sprocket]

Originally Posted by dksuddeth

well, is this tea a hallucinogen or a narcotic?

Hallucinogen. Not a narcotic. Not likely to have heard of it unless your a hippie. Ask anyone at a dead show what it is and you'll probably get an answer worthy of an encyclopedia.

Like most other popular hallucinogens, Ayahuasca isnt detrimental to your health in any way, so its still really puzzling why these things are illegal. Really i think its irrational fear and others trying to outlaw a way of life that they are uncomfortable encountering (ie kinda like gay marriage!!).

For more information than you probably want, go here:

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/ayah...yahuasca.shtml

[MSD]

Originally Posted by shakran

Well just to throw a monkey wrench into your argument, let's say I want to start shooting heroin. I form my own church where heroin plays a prominent role in my religious ceremonies. Should I be allowed to do this?

I say no, because that would set the precedent that all I have to do to avoid obeying any law that I don't like is to form my own church and then make the illegal action a religious ritual.





Also, some religions believe in involuntary human sacrifice, yet they're not allowed to do this even though they enjoy first amendment protections. The first amendment does not absolve church members from obeying the laws of the land.


What do you think?

Drug-church? Go ahead, just don't drive under the influence.

Involuntary sacrifice is defeated by the right to be free from coercion and harm by others. That's not OK.