Pubdate: Wed, 07 Jan 2009
Source: Sun, The (Yuma, AZ)
Copyright: 2009 The Sun
Contact: http://yumasun.com/opinion/sendletter.php
Website: http://www.yumasun.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1258
Author: Howard Fischer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/pot.htm (Cannabis)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/spirit.htm (Spiritual or Sacramental)

HIGH COURT TO CONSIDER WHETHER POT CAN BE PART OF RELIGION

PHOENIX - The Arizona Supreme Court has agreed to  decide whether 
there is a religious right to possess  marijuana.

Without comment, the justices granted to hear Daniel  Hardesty's 
argument that the First Amendment  protections of free exercise of 
religion entitle him to  use marijuana as a "sacrament" of his 
church. Both a  trial judge and the state Court of Appeals rejected 
those arguments.

If the high court decides otherwise, it would be the  first time in 
Arizona that judges have concluded there  is a legal defense for 
those who use marijuana.

Hardesty was arrested in 2005 after being stopped by  police while 
driving in Yavapai County.

At trial, Hardesty testified he had been a practicing  member of the 
Church of Cognizance since 1993. A church  official said that the 
religion, founded in 1991, is  based on "neo-Zoroastrian tenets" and 
that marijuana  provides a connection to the divine mind and 
spiritual enlightenment.

Prosecutors never challenged the status of the church  but convinced 
the judge to exclude the religious  freedom claim.

Hardesty was convicted and placed on probation for 18 months.

The appellate court, in rejecting Hardesty's argument,  concluded 
that while he has an absolute right to  believe what he wants, the 
First Amendment does not  give him a right to perform or abstain from 
certain  acts for religious reasons.

Appellate Judge Sheldon Weisberg, who wrote that  ruling, also said 
the Legislature has a legitimate  interest in the outright ban on the 
possession and use  of marijuana. Weisberg said courts are not in a 
position to second-guess those laws.

Hardesty's attorney Daniel DeRienzo said there is no  evidence that 
allowing church members to use marijuana  would result in serious 
harm. He called that "the  Reefer Madness argument," referring to a 
1936  propaganda film that showed high schoolers lured 
into  marijuana use engaging in manslaughter, suicide, rape  and a 
descent into madness.

There is a precedent for what Hardesty wants.

Arizona courts have allowed the possession of peyote  for religious 
use by the Native American Church. But  Weisberg said that is 
different, as prosecutors in that  case never showed that peyote was 
addictive or being  used in quantities harmful to the health of the 
participants.

Weisberg said the long and continuous use of peyote by  a "discreet 
and well-defined group" makes it different  than drug use claims by 
other religions.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom