|
|
|
OLP Had 4 Million Hits Updated Daily! 12795+ Files & Over
10,000+ Contact Us Here
Or Email Securely Here OLP NewsletterBOYCOTT PAYPAL!
|
|
1999-2008 Copyright ©
All Rights Reserved.
No part of this site maybe used or reproduced in whole or in part
without the written consent of the Copyright Owner www.onlinepot.org
OnlinePot assumes no legal
liability for any products, or
information
posted, services
offered,
Or contests run.
Here are some more talking
points that the Raich team has put together.
Let's show the DOJ that we are a strong unified movement and we know what
this case means to our lives.
Ashcroft v. Raich Talking Points
· This case, first and foremost, is about granting sick and dying patients
the right to a medicine that has proven medical benefits supported by
government studies and health care professionals.
· People who suffer from leukemia, cancer, multiple sclerosis and other
life-threatening illnesses should not have to live in fear of being arrested
for taking the medicine they need to survive – medicine their doctors are
recommending for them.
· An overwhelming majority of Americans agree with us. In fact, 80% of the
Americans are in favor of patients having access to medical cannabis if that
is what their doctors recommend, according to a recent TIME/CNN poll. This
is not a divisive red state/blue state issue. In fact, four states with
medical cannabis laws on the books are red: Colorado, Nevada, Montana and
Alaska.
· Overwhelming support for more common sense medical cannabis laws, most
recently in Montana, Ann Arbor MI, and Columbia MO further point to growing
public support for cannabis as legitimate medicine and the compassion most
Americans have for severely ill people who rely on cannabis to alleviate
their suffering.
· Doctors, not the federal government, know what’s best for their patients.
Who would you rather have overseeing your health? Your doctor or a federal
agent from Washington, DC?
· The federal government should not interfere between a patient and her
doctor’s decision to recommend the medicine that best treats the patient’s
illness.
· Angel’s doctors have tried regular pharmaceutical treatments and they have
failed. In fact, they have made her sicker. Medical cannabis has worked.
She can walk again, hug her children again, live her life again. If the
federal government is allowed to interfere and stop her from getting the
medical cannabis she needs, it is in effect condemning her to death.
· Furthermore, there is strong legal precedent for the Supreme Court to
decide that the federal government does not have the right to interfere if a
state decides to allow doctors to recommend proven treatments for their
patients. This is a federalism issue, and the federal government has no
business poking its nose into it.
· Combating terrorism and going after drug lords should be the priority of
Department of Justice and the Attorney General – not going after sick and
dying patients whose only crime is seeking relief and treatment for their
suffering.
· Legal point: The federal government is trying to persecute Angel and Diane
for violating interstate commerce laws. This is absolutely groundless. No
money ever changed hands and the cannabis the two women used as medicine
never crossed state lines. This is clearly a case where the feds are
grasping at straws to wage a misguided war on the sick.
· Federalism isn’t just for conservatives. This case is about enabling
states to advance social policies beyond the reach of Congress that help
extremely sick patients live with their illnesses.