Pubdate: Sat, 26 Jun 2004
Source: Washington Post (DC)
Page: B07
Copyright: 2004 The Washington Post Company
Contact:  http://www.washingtonpost.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/491
Author: Bill Broadway, Washington Post Staff Writer
Cited: Coalition for Compassionate Access http://www.compassionateaccess.org/
Cited: Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative http://www.idpi.us/
Cited: Marijuana Policy Project http://www.mpp.org/
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/mmj.htm (Cannabis - Medicinal)

BLESSING MARIJUANA FOR MERCY'S SAKE

Support for Permitting Medical Use Is Growing Among Major Religious 
Denominations

Several major religious denominations have joined a growing movement to 
legalize the medical use of marijuana, asserting an ethical responsibility 
to help ease the pain and other debilitating effects of such diseases as 
cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis and glaucoma.

The United Methodist Church, the Union for Reform Judaism, the Progressive 
National Baptist Convention, the Episcopal Church, the Unitarian 
Universalist Association, the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Evangelical 
Lutheran Church in America and the United Church of Christ have made 
statements supporting the controlled use of marijuana for medical reasons.

"According to our tradition, a physician is obligated to heal the sick," 
begins a resolution adopted in November by the Union for Reform Judaism. 
The statement acknowledges the medical use of marijuana as a 5,000-year-old 
tradition and encourages the federal government to change marijuana's 
status from a prohibited substance to a prescription drug.

The denominations have called for a reassessment of penalties for marijuana 
users trying to increase their appetites during chemotherapy or alleviate 
chronic pain. "We believe that seriously ill people should not be subject 
to arrest and imprisonment for using medical marijuana with their doctors' 
approval," asserted a Coalition for Compassionate Access statement endorsed 
in 2002 by the United Church of Christ.

Some denominations assert strong support for medicinal marijuana but reject 
its recreational use -- thus supporting one goal of secular marijuana 
lobbying groups but not the ultimate goal of completely decriminalizing the 
drug.

"The medical use of any drug should not be seen as encouraging recreational 
use of the drug," reads a statement approved last month at the general 
conference of the United Methodist Church in Pittsburgh. "We urge all 
persons to abstain from the use of marijuana, unless it has been legally 
prescribed in a form appropriate for treating a medical condition."

One thing notable about religious support of medical marijuana has been the 
lack of intense debate, especially in denominations riven over the issues 
of same-sex unions and the ordination of gay clergy, according to religious 
activists.

The Rev. Cynthia Abrams, director of alcohol, tobacco and drug programming 
for the United Methodists' General Board of Church and Society, said 
delegates to last month's convention voted 877 to 19 in favor of an 
amendment to drug-use guidelines that supports the drug's medical use in 
states that allow it.

"The surprising thing, it was almost unanimous," she said of the vote.

Increased evidence of the drug's usefulness and personal anecdotes of lay 
members and clergy helped the amendment's passage, she said. During the 18 
months her panel worked on the proposal, "we heard many stories, from 
conservatives and liberals, of family members, or people they knew or 
ministered to, who had used marijuana in the course of chronic illness."

The movement to legalize the medical use of marijuana faces significant 
opposition, however -- especially from the Justice Department, which 
enforces federal laws prohibiting the cultivation and distribution of 
marijuana, and the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy.

"Marijuana is a dangerous drug, a surprisingly dangerous drug," said Tom 
Riley, a spokesman for the drug policy office. More teenagers are treated 
for marijuana abuse than for abuse of any other substance, including 
alcohol, and any law making marijuana more accessible will exacerbate the 
problem, he said.

Proponents are trying to circumvent "a well-developed system for 
introducing new medicines," Riley said, adding that a pill form of 
marijuana's primary active ingredient has been available for years and that 
other cannabis-based medicines are in the works.

Since 1996, when a successful California referendum opened the door to 
medical marijuana use there, nine states have enacted laws that allow 
certain patients to use the drug despite federal prohibitions.

The most recent addition is Vermont, which last month passed a law allowing 
qualified patients to grow, possess and use marijuana. The other states are 
Alaska, Colorado, Maine, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont and Washington. In most 
cases, patients receive a card or other documentation permitting them to 
use the drug.

D.C. residents approved the medical use of marijuana in a 1998 referendum 
- -- 69 percent voted in favor -- but Congress, the District's overseer, has 
blocked implementation of the law and prevented efforts to hold subsequent 
referendums on the issue.

Last year, the Maryland legislature stopped short of legalizing marijuana 
for medical use but passed a bill allowing anyone convicted of marijuana 
possession to argue for a reduced sentence based on its use to relieve the 
pain of a chronic or life-threatening illness. Instead of a maximum penalty 
of a year in jail and $1,000 fine, violators could get off with a $100 fine.

More than a dozen other states, including Virginia and Arizona, have 
enacted laws that recognize marijuana's medical value but do not protect 
those involved in its use from federal law, said Steve Fox, director of 
government relations for the Marijuana Policy Project, a Washington-based 
lobbying organization.

Some of those states have laws that permit doctors to prescribe marijuana 
as they would any other medication. But those statutes have only symbolic 
value because federal law clearly prohibits doctors from doing so, and they 
would be subject to prosecution, Fox said.

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling last October, however, bars the federal 
government from punishing doctors who recommend marijuana to their patients.

In the past six years, thousands of patients and hundreds of doctors have 
participated in medical marijuana programs in the states that allow them, 
and numerous medical associations have endorsed the concept. More than 
4,000 physicians have submitted statements to the Marijuana Policy Project, 
saying they support the medical use of marijuana, Fox said.

Religious activism on Capitol Hill began heating up in November with the 
founding of the Silver Spring-based Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative, 
whose purpose is to advocate "more just and compassionate drug policies," 
according to executive director Charles Thomas.

This week, the initiative faxed letters to members of the House of 
Representatives asking support for an appropriations bill amendment coming 
up for a House vote after the Fourth of July break.

The amendment, introduced by Rep. Maurice D. Hinchey (D-N.Y.) and 
co-sponsored by Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), would prohibit federal 
funds from being used to arrest and prosecute approved medical marijuana 
users and caregivers in states that allow such use. A similar amendment 
introduced last summer was rejected by a vote of 273 to 152.

Hinchey said the amendment is needed because the U.S. Drug Enforcement 
Administration has raided the homes of medical marijuana users in such 
states as California, Colorado and Oregon -- confiscating the drug, making 
arrests and obtaining some convictions -- despite the states' laws on the 
issue.

"I'm suggesting to my colleagues that it doesn't make sense to give money 
to the Justice Department to superimpose its will on several states that 
decided in the interest of their citizens to go in a different direction," 
Hinchey said, acknowledging the legal confusion over a federal law that 
prohibits marijuana use and state laws that allow it.

Hinchey said there's also an ethical dimension to the issue, involving the 
freedom to make personal health choices, especially in a system where most 
medical practices are regulated by state, not federal, law. "To the maximum 
extent possible, people should be able to regulate their private lives in 
the way they see fit, as long as it doesn't interfere with others," he said.

Hinchey welcomes the support of the Interfaith Drug Policy Initiative and 
the denominations whose leaders have signed a statement endorsing the House 
amendment -- the United Methodist Church, the National Progressive Baptist 
Convention, the Union of Reform Judaism and the Unitarian Universalist 
Association.

The statement reads: "Licensed medical doctors should not be punished for 
recommending the medical use of marijuana to seriously ill people, and 
seriously ill people should not be subject to criminal actions for using 
marijuana if the patient's physician has told the patient that such use is 
likely to be beneficial."

In its letter-writing campaign, the initiative targeted members of Congress 
who are members of those and other religious groups that have taken a 
supportive position on medical marijuana. Letters included a subject line 
that began with the name of the denomination, as in: "United Methodist 
Church supports medical marijuana; please vote accordingly."

General letters were sent to other House members, listing the organizations 
that support medical marijuana use. "No denominations have opposed medical 
marijuana," the letters assert.

Asked whether the letter wasn't a breach of church-state separation, Thomas 
responded: "I don't think it is. It's a chance to educate [representatives] 
about the thinking of people in their denomination whose job is to put a 
lot of thought and prayer into a particular issue."

Some religious leaders have undertaken their own lobbying efforts. In 
Vermont, Bishop Kenneth Angell of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington 
personally urged Gov. James Douglas (R), who opposed the bill, not to veto 
it. Douglas allowed the law to take effect -- without his signature.

The Catholic Church has taken no official position on the issue.

"I know this was a hard decision for Governor Douglas, but I am pleased to 
hear that he will not veto the bill for Medical Marijuana," Angell said in 
a statement. "I share his concern for the possible abuse of the drug and 
his worry that our children might misinterpret the message. I am 
encouraged, however, that the final bill addresses those concerns and still 
preserves the real intent, which is to offer relief and solace from 
chronic, severe suffering and pain."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Richard Lake