Marijuana The New Same-Sex Marriage Debate

 

yes-we-cannabis-resized-600.jpg

Well, it looks like the Weed Wars are back in California. We will likely see an initiative to legalize marijuana on the ballot in 2016 and it could be an issue that even affects the presidential race.

Rolling Stone has a long piece on the issue in their upcoming edition. I think it gives a good indication of the types of arguments the pro-legalization side will make. Their strategy is similar to that of gay marriage proponents: You should vote for this because…shut up. This is inevitable and so there’s no point in stopping what is bound to happen.

An excerpt from the article:

A successful legalization vote in California, advocates believe, would force a national reckoning on marijuana law – and a cultural tipping point similar to what we’ve seen in the acceptance of gay marriage. “When California goes in 2016, that will be the determinative moment,” says Holcomb. “I don’t think Congress can ignore the issue.” In the December spending bill, Congress took the historic step of blocking the Justice Department from busting state-level medical-marijuana operations. Similar protections, Holcomb says, could be extended to state-legal commercial pot.

I think much of the article is wishful thinking — it’s Rolling Stone, after all — especially the scenario of a Paul-Clinton match up in which Paul beats Clinton (figuratively, not sexist) on this issue. Like I said, though, this is a good preview of what we’ll hear in the coming years.

The author points out that opponents have reason to be hopeful as well. In California, marijuana is already quasi-legal and so it takes the urgency out of the issue. They can take advantage of that complacency and turn it into a win. Is the GOP returning to “rum, Romanism, and rebellion”?

 

There are 23 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. user_554634 Moderator
    user_554634
    @MikeRapkoch

    Put that in your bong and smoke it.

    • #1
  2. user_280840 Inactive
    user_280840
    @FredCole

    Sorry, how does this relate to SSM?

    • #2
  3. user_2505 Contributor
    user_2505
    @GaryMcVey

    Fred, let’s face it: if you wanted to promote even a sober examination of prewar Federal tariffs and how they affected trade, a wise Ricochet member would headline it something like “Hawley and Smoot: Just Good Friends? Or Something More? The Leviathan State Says ‘Bend Over’ for SSM!”

    As for the issue under discussion, I am reluctant to express an opinion, as the arresting power of Officer and Ricochet Member Jack Dunphy of the LAPD is only a mile from my door. I can hear the highly unlikely call already–

    “Santa Monica PD? This is Lt. Dunphy at L.A. Ramparts. We have information that an elderly man somewhere in your jurisdiction has some pro-420 views, and I thought you’d like to know.”

    “You’re a good man, Dunphy. I’ll put a few black and white patrol units on it. Right now we’re chasing down some rumors that someone used an ethnic slur.”

    • #3
  4. user_51254 Member
    user_51254
    @BereketKelile

    The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    • #4
  5. Limestone Cowboy Coolidge
    Limestone Cowboy
    @LimestoneCowboy

    I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other  on legalization of marijuana as such.

    But I suspect that many advocates of legalization in California, Colorado and other places are the same foks who froth with rage at the evils of second hand smoke, and roundly condemn e-cigs as the gateway to smoking.

    • #5
  6. user_138562 Moderator
    user_138562
    @RandyWeivoda

    Gary McVey:“Santa Monica PD? This is Lt. Dunphy at L.A. Ramparts. We have information that an elderly man somewhere in your jurisdiction has some pro-420 views, and I thought you’d like to know.”

    “You’re a good man, Dunphy. I’ll put a few black and white patrol units on it. Right now we’re chasing down some rumors that someone used an ethnic slur.”

    Gary, the longer you are on Ricochet, the funnier you get.

    • #6
  7. Bryan G. Stephens Thatcher
    Bryan G. Stephens
    @BryanGStephens

    Limestone Cowboy:I don’t have a strong opinion one way or the other on legalization of

    Not if they are heavy users. Then most of them don’t rage against anything. Or do much of anything, actually. Except Eat.

    • #7
  8. user_2505 Contributor
    user_2505
    @GaryMcVey

    Aw, thanks, Randy! Truly it is said: The world is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who can afford $50 a year to crack jokes.

    • #8
  9. x Inactive
    x
    @CatoRand

    Isn’t there a deeply conservative argument that this morals legislation is none of the federal government’s dad-gummed business?  That the Controlled Substances Act is every bit as unconstitutional as the Affordable Care Act?  That federal powers are limited and enumerated and that the plenary police power belongs only to the states?

    • #9
  10. user_280840 Inactive
    user_280840
    @FredCole

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    • #10
  11. user_51254 Member
    user_51254
    @BereketKelile

    Fred Cole:

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    I don’t follow.

    • #11
  12. x Inactive
    x
    @CatoRand

    Fred Cole:

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    I see BKs point.  Both do have the feel of social/legal changes that are inevitable given the trajectory of the culture.  I’m just not sure that tells you much.  It’s sort of like saying apples and rubies are similar in that they’re both red.  True, but kind of trivial.

    • #12
  13. user_138562 Moderator
    user_138562
    @RandyWeivoda

    Cato Rand:Isn’t there a deeply conservative argument that this morals legislation is none of the federal government’s dad-gummed business? That the Controlled Substances Act is every bit as unconstitutional as the Affordable Care Act? That federal powers are limited and enumerated and that the plenary police power belongs only to the states?

    Along with 90% of what the federal government does, it’s hard to find the constitutional justification for it.  Why did it take a constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, but every time somebody discovers some new chemical that makes someone feel good, it’s outlawed as a matter of course?

    • #13
  14. x Inactive
    x
    @CatoRand

    Randy Weivoda:

    Cato Rand:Isn’t there a deeply conservative argument that this morals legislation is none of the federal government’s dad-gummed business? That the Controlled Substances Act is every bit as unconstitutional as the Affordable Care Act? That federal powers are limited and enumerated and that the plenary police power belongs only to the states?

    Along with 90% of what the federal government does, it’s hard to find the constitutional justification for it. Why did it take a constitutional amendment to outlaw alcohol, but every time somebody discovers some new chemical that makes someone feel good, it’s outlawed as a matter of course?

    Three words:  “Wickard versus  Filburn“.  The day the structural constitution gasped its last breath.

    • #14
  15. user_51254 Member
    user_51254
    @BereketKelile

    Cato Rand:

    Fred Cole:

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    I see BKs point. Both do have the feel of social/legal changes that are inevitable given the trajectory of the culture. I’m just not sure that tells you much. It’s sort of like saying apples and rubies are similar in that they’re both red. True, but kind of trivial.

    But my point is that the strategy is the same. I’m not saying that there’s a similarity between marijuana and same sex marriage. I’m talking about the campaign strategy.

    • #15
  16. x Inactive
    x
    @CatoRand

    Bereket Kelile:

    Cato Rand:

    Fred Cole:

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    I see BKs point. Both do have the feel of social/legal changes that are inevitable given the trajectory of the culture. I’m just not sure that tells you much. It’s sort of like saying apples and rubies are similar in that they’re both red. True, but kind of trivial.

    But my point is that the strategy is the same. I’m not saying that there’s a similarity between marijuana and same sex marriage. I’m talking about the campaign strategy.

    I get it.  I’m just not sure why I care.  It’s kindof a commonplace in politics.  Like red.

    • #16
  17. Charles3669@gmail.com Inactive
    Charles3669@gmail.com
    @TheChuckSteak

    Bereket Kelile:

    Cato Rand:

    Fred Cole:

    Bereket Kelile:The connection is the approach. The strategy is to portray this as the inevitable change that’s coming so there’s no point resisting, just as in the debate over gay marriage.

    I’m sorry, but that strikes me as a hell of a stretch.

    I see BKs point. Both do have the feel of social/legal changes that are inevitable given the trajectory of the culture. I’m just not sure that tells you much. It’s sort of like saying apples and rubies are similar in that they’re both red. True, but kind of trivial.

    But my point is that the strategy is the same. I’m not saying that there’s a similarity between marijuana and same sex marriage. I’m talking about the campaign strategy.

    The left’s campaign strategy is always the same. Don’t you know you are on the wrong side of history? Change is inevitable and leftist utopia is coming whether you like it or not. We will live in a world where unisex bathrooms are the standard and weed flows like wine as soon as the left makes the wine flow like wine for free!

    • #17
  18. user_280840 Inactive
    user_280840
    @FredCole

    Is it a strategy? Or is it just a fact? I’m
    On my phone or else I’d post the Gallup polls on it. They are startling. I wrote a post on it before. (Prob more than once.)

    • #18
  19. user_358258 Member
    user_358258
    @RandyWebster

    Cato Rand:Isn’t there a deeply conservative argument that this morals legislation is none of the federal government’s dad-gummed business? That the Controlled Substances Act is every bit as unconstitutional as the Affordable Care Act? That federal powers are limited and enumerated and that the plenary police power belongs only to the states?

    Sure, but good luck with that.  That argument hasn’t worked since at least the 30’s.

    • #19
  20. x Inactive
    x
    @CatoRand

    Randy Webster:

    Cato Rand:Isn’t there a deeply conservative argument that this morals legislation is none of the federal government’s dad-gummed business? That the Controlled Substances Act is every bit as unconstitutional as the Affordable Care Act? That federal powers are limited and enumerated and that the plenary police power belongs only to the states?

    Sure, but good luck with that. That argument hasn’t worked since at least the 30′s.

    Yea, I know.  But I’m holding out hope anyway.

    • #20
  21. CuriousKevmo Member
    CuriousKevmo
    @CuriousKevmo

    You mean it isn’t legal in CA already?  Few are the days when I don’t get blasted with a whiff either on the BART train or in my walk to the office in SF.  I routinely see people standing outside bars, coffee shops, etc. smoking a joint in much the same way you’d see someone smoking one of those awful cigarettes.

    Limestone Cowboy: But I suspect that many advocates of legalization in California, Colorado and other places are the same foks who froth with rage at the evils of second hand smoke, and roundly condemn e-cigs as the gateway to smoking

    This has always amused me Limestone…heck I even have it in my own family.  My number 2 step-son is a routine partaker of the funny weed yet has no problem railing against his younger sister about her cigarette smoking habit.

    • #21
  22. user_51254 Member
    user_51254
    @BereketKelile

    Fred Cole:Is it a strategy? Or is it just a fact?I’m On my phone or else I’d post the Gallup polls on it. They are startling. I wrote a post on it before. (Prob more than once.)

    Yes, and no. The last time this was on the ballot in California (2010) no one expected it to fail but it did. Nothing is inevitable until it happens. It may seem that way to people who are very pessimistic.

    • #22
  23. user_280840 Inactive
    user_280840
    @FredCole

    Bereket Kelile:

    Fred Cole:Is it a strategy? Or is it just a fact?I’m On my phone or else I’d post the Gallup polls on it. They are startling. I wrote a post on it before. (Prob more than once.)

    Yes, and no. The last time this was on the ballot in California (2010) no one expected it to fail but it did. Nothing is inevitable until it happens. It may seem that way to people who are very pessimistic.

    One of the things 2.0 makes easier is to repost stuff you’ve already posted:

    equality

    pj6n_afvre6fxevpsa6a8g

    Both of these have a general progression upwards.

    • #23

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.