Show Me the Facts

I’m pretty proud about how my parody video came out. Check it out! http://bit.ly/1nKdF4 #marijuana #cannabis #mmot

Study rebuffs mental illness link with #cannabis – Schizophrenia link to cannabis denied http://bit.ly/mHKBw #marijuana #mmot

California #Marijuana Supporters, tell the gov you want legal #cannabis! http://bit.ly/vrpEd Vote up @lostangel’s idea

Carbon Negative #Hemp Walls are 7x Stronger than Concrete http://bit.ly/1SkPTT #marijuana #mmot

If you care about children, give them safe #marijuana instead of dangerous stimulants for ADHD. – http://bit.ly/3wf6p #mmot

In case you missed it: My Trip to Los Angeles’ THC Expo 2009 – Part 1 http://bit.ly/Ccpoa #mmot #marijuana #cannabis #420

Why People Use Cannabis http://bit.ly/hFPJ8 #marijuana #cannabis #mmot

Two days ago I glimpsed past a mention of another Stephen Baldwin debate. At first I thought for sure this wasn’t a new article, since who in their right mind would put Baldwin in any position of authority after his failed attempts at logic while debating Ron Paul back in March, or being embarassed on Larry King Live while attempting to convince Montel Williams that marijuana should remain illegal. Sadly, my hopeful assumptions were made in vain as this was indeed a new peek inside the twisted, desperate world of fallacious prohibitionist syllogisms.

The format this time was a guest column pro/con opinion piece run by CBS News.com. On the pro-side, we have the friendly, familiar face of Ethan Nadelmann, founder and director of the Drug Policy Alliance. Nadelmann does a wonderful job at providing a serious response to a serious issue facing our country (if not the world). He provides a clear, concise viewpoint which is complimented by various references to current events and statistics.

On the con-side, we have a co-written piece by Stephen Baldwin and Kevin McCullough; I can only assume that the task of putting 500 or so different words side by side was a bit overwhelming for any single prohibitionist? For those of you not familiar, Stephen Baldwin is an actor who became a born-again Christian after his cleaning woman prophesized that Stephen and his wife would have their own ministry in the future. He has since “turned his life around” and one of his major targets is marijuana (perhaps no one told him that marijuana is not a sin?).

Stephen’s partner, Kevin, is quite the colorful, loving character as well. You may be familiar with some of his articles, including, Why Liberals Still Think Like the KKK, Obama as Hitler, Why Liberals Despise American Patriots, and–my personal favorite–Obama: America’s first Gay President?. Yes, this is who Stephen chooses to associate himself with because, as we all know, the answer to “WWJD” is, “Hang out with people who know how to write passionate hate-pieces.”

I will be responding to Stephen and Kevin’s article on a point-for-point basis, per my usual style. I want you to pay attention, however, to the overall condescending, patronizing tone used throughout the article. This is a common technique by prohibitionists as it helps create a more friendly and open “voice” for the reader, which helps to make an emotional connection in hopes of gaining support for beliefs which can not stand on their own merits. In other words, when faced with debating about a topic of which the individual in question has no education or authority, some choose to compensate with charm and quips.

Continue reading

Per usual, I had my Twitterfall page open and scrolling as I worked. This time, however, I came across a twitter post that lead me to a debate with Jim Alger (@JimAlger) and a few guest-host voices that I could not readily identify (other than knowing one was named “Mike”).

It was hard to engage fully in the debate due to the quality of the audio (often fading in and out) and the unwillingness of participants to let each other talk (I often found myself having to talk over others, which I do not enjoy).

In the end, before I could refute the various fallacies perpetuated by “Mike” (including the scientifically debunked myth that marijuana causes lung cancer), I was hung up on. I figured I had just been disconnected, so I called back and was informed by the screener that it was intentional due to the “segment being over”. It is a shame that they didn’t feel it prudent to allow me to have any sort of “last comment”, but I suppose this only reflects the casual nature of the show.

Below is my open letter to Mr. Alger:

Mr. Alger,

I enjoyed briefly being able to speak on your show, however, I feel that I, as well as your audience, were not given the respect that this topic deserves. I’m not sure who “Mike” was, as I missed the introductions to your show, however, he is pretty much the epitome of what is wrong with the United States’ policies regarding marijuana.

Studies–released by groups far more versed in this subject than Mike–have concluded that the various fear-mongering myths about marijuana (be it cancer, brain damage, etc.) have shown no correlation, yet alone causation, with marijuana use whatsoever. So to have him sit there and deny their legitimacy while offering nothing more than his personal beliefs regarding the subject is childish at best and malicious at worst.

Are there potential horrible side effects to marijuana? Of course, there is always potential for everything. That fact is, though, that no legitimate study has ever shown the existence of such risks. Of the ones that find something, it is usually a weak correlation that has much to do with the method of the test, rather than the subjects of the test.

If there is science to back up Mike’s claims, I ask him to show it to me. What other substance can you think about that is so hard to find a definitive study to back up a claim of harm? Even water has been proven to be deadly if it lacks sufficient amounts of electrolytes and consumed in large amounts.

We should stop penalizing marijuana based purely on the speculative, irrational fears of people like Mike who are so obsessed with finding fault with things that when they don’t, they latch on to whatever myth promotes their “gut feeling” regardless of its merit.

Marijuana is a safe substance. If you do not agree with this, show me your facts. Otherwise, please stop helping to perpetuate the current demonization of a plant that can literally improve every facet of our lives (be it through clean energy, medicine, or safe recreation) if only it was given the chance.

Sincerely,
Eric
ShowMetheFacts.org

(Update): I’ve had some feedback regarding how I format my updates. Usually I place them on top of the article, but I can see how this would be confusing. For now on I will post updates at the end of an article with a short notice at the top to let you know they are there, like so:

Updates as of 4/28/09 added to bottom of article.

————————————————–

As many of you know, I love keeping a TwitterFall window open to keep track of hashtags that interest me. Usually this helps me find new friends or efficiently retweet information to my followers, etc.

Sometimes, like tonight, however, I see a post/link that leads me to write an article. Here is that post:

Twitter message from @ParentingWithD

The formatting made it a bit difficult to understand what exactly I was about to click, but I decided to go for it and followed through to the article, How does marijuana use affect physical health? (article has been removed)

I wish I could say this was an appreciative post thanking both Denise Witmer and About.com for a wonderful exhibition of journalistic integrity, research, and factual information. Instead, the article is not only highly questionable, it made it pretty hard to find where she got her information since no sources were posted (other than a tip of the hat to the NIDA at the end). It honestly appears as if the author re-packaged NIDA-talking-points in the form of an article.

I will be responding to her article on a point-for-point basis. Ms. Witmer, I invite you to e-mail me with your responses, as I–and my readers–would love to hear them.

Continue reading