Marijuana?

[lil-rush]

You seem a very angry person. I will pray for you. God bless you lil rush, its ok to laugh.

I laugh when the occasion calls for it. In a serious thread where it did not appear like anyone was in a humorous mood, your comment seemed out of place. Your subsequent comment only served to exasperate the issue.

While I am never hesitant to admit I am easily angered, at the time of my post I was offended and not angered.

 

[that_one_guy]

weed, crack, boooze all the same

 

[Artbox]

lol. What a reach--balsam reeds become canibis, a claim only made by proponents of marijuana... sorry, doesn't fly.
Re USA and marijuana, we are in fact the most addicted Western nation in the world. That's the problem. By the way, Netherlands spends much more per capita on drug enforcement than we do....

Balsam reeds are a false translation The original Hebrew is kaneh-bosm or sometimes rendered kannobus or kannabus, and often falsely rendered calamus. The root of the word, kan or kaneh means "reed" or "hemp" and and the bosm means "aromatic."
The Hebrew University in Israel confirmed kaneh-bosm as being marijuana, as well as several other etymologists. I wouldn't call that a claim made only be "proponents of marijuana"

Song of Solomon also refers to calamus, calling his bride a fragrant garden full of many incense trees and an orchard, and also calamus. And, most notably, it was also used as an incense before the Lord (Isaiah 43:24, Jeremiah 6:20)

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Coca Cola uses coca leaves in its drink. As to poisonous plants, how many countries do you know of that make holly berries illegal to eat? It is perfectly legal for me to go out to the side of my yard, pick some of the holly berries from the holly bushes there and eat them. Would I? No, but I can if I want to. Just because it is not good for me, does not mean it cannot be good for other creations of God's, though. Animals can eat holly berries with no adverse effects.

I don't have to be a physician to know when the AMA or NIDA produce incorrect information. If physicians were right all the time, there would not always be civil action suit commercials on TV saying "If you used this drug and had these adverse side effects, call this number now."

You said "mind-altering." You did not say "hallucinagetic."

My stake in this is a government that has over-extended its bounds. Have you ever heard of civil asset forfeiture? That is where the government can come in and take your property based on the assumption that you might have possibly be using that property for illegal purposes. And if you are proven innocent, you most likely will not get your property back.

In the Federalist No. 84 papers, authored by Alexander Hamilton, he states "To bereave a man of life, [says he] or by violence to confiscate his estate, without accusation or trial, would be so gross and notorious an act of despotism, as must at once convey the alarm of tyranny throughout the whole nation; but confinement of the person, by secretly hurrying him to jail, where his sufferings are unknown or forgotten, is a less public, a less striking, and therefore a more dangerous engine of arbitrary government."

The marijuana laws violate some of the Bill of Rights. Marijuana laws prohibit the production of hemp, which would produce a great source of economic income in this country. Marijuana laws create a corrupt criminal system.

It's not so much that I am intent on defending this one thing as it is that I am intent on calling for reform in a corrupt government, and protecting my rights as an American.

My point is that your defense of marijuana on the basis of God declaring all seed bearing plants "good" does not follow, since opiates, cocaine and holly berries aren't good.
I used the word to clarify--mood altering is something different than mind altering and I wanted to clarity that difference.
Your charges concerning the economic value does not hold as the court has consistantly found that drug enforcement does not constitute interference with commerce. Regarding the forfeiture, can you point out one case where property siezed in a marijuana bust was not returned after a verdict of innocence? In what way does the enforcement of laws against marijuana create a corrupt system?
Finally, with so many areas where the government is increasing in power and regulation, why choose marijuana as your cause. You have told me the basis of your protest, but not the reason.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Balsam reeds are a false translation The original Hebrew is kaneh-bosm or sometimes rendered kannobus or kannabus, and often falsely rendered calamus. The root of the word, kan or kaneh means "reed" or "hemp" and and the bosm means "aromatic."
The Hebrew University in Israel confirmed kaneh-bosm as being marijuana, as well as several other etymologists. I wouldn't call that a claim made only be "proponents of marijuana"

Song of Solomon also refers to calamus, calling his bride a fragrant garden full of many incense trees and an orchard, and also calamus. And, most notably, it was also used as an incense before the Lord (Isaiah 43:24, Jeremiah 6:20)

Sorry, but you are still wrong. I am more concerned with this charge then I am with others. Would you then claim that the insence used during worship in the temple was making the priests a litlle high?

 

[Artbox]

Sorry, but you are still wrong. I am more concerned with this charge then I am with others. Would you then claim that the insence used during worship in the temple was making the priests a litlle high?

Excuse me...but are you saying the Hebrew University of Israel, the experts and speakers of the language are wrong? I can understand if I alone was making that claim...this is a fact agreed upon by experts and linguistics and you are simply rejecting it out of hand based on absolutely nothing but the fact you don't want to believe it...

*shrug* I have no idea whether they got high or not. I'm just going by what's in the Bible. It was an incense offered to God.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Excuse me...but are you saying the Hebrew University of Israel, the experts and speakers of the language are wrong? I can understand if I alone was making that claim...this is a fact agreed upon by experts and linguistics and you are simply rejecting it out of hand based on absolutely nothing but the fact you don't want to believe it...

*shrug* I have no idea whether they got high or not. I'm just going by what's in the Bible. It was an incense offered to God.

I am saying that without citation this means nothing. If the soccar coach at Hebrew university says something about it, so what. I am rejecting it based upon what I know of Hebrew and on the type of endorsement that I found regarding this translation.
Finally, why would incense offered to God justify the smoking of marijuana unless you believe that the priests were being affected by it. so, what does the shrug mean. Do you justify it based upon this odd translation or not?

 

[Maddog]

My point is that your defense of marijuana on the basis of God declaring all seed bearing plants "good" does not follow, since opiates, cocaine and holly berries aren't good

All things created by God are, in and of themselves, good.

 

[lil-rush]

My point is that your defense of marijuana on the basis of God declaring all seed bearing plants "good" does not follow, since opiates, cocaine and holly berries aren't good.
I used the word to clarify--mood altering is something different than mind altering and I wanted to clarity that difference.
Your charges concerning the economic value does not hold as the court has consistantly found that drug enforcement does not constitute interference with commerce. Regarding the forfeiture, can you point out one case where property siezed in a marijuana bust was not returned after a verdict of innocence? In what way does the enforcement of laws against marijuana create a corrupt system?
Finally, with so many areas where the government is increasing in power and regulation, why choose marijuana as your cause. You have told me the basis of your protest, but not the reason.

God's creation is good. He said it was, so it is. He also gave to us all seed-bearing plants to eat. He never said we have to eat them, but He gave us the choice to eat them. As such, what God said I am allowed to eat, the government has no right to tell me differently.

the NAIHC states "The US Drug Enforcement Agency classifies all C. sativa varietes as 'marijuana.' While is it theoretically possible to get permission from the government to grow hemp, DEA would require that the field be secured by fence, razor wire, dogs, guards, and lights, making it cost-prohibitive." Before marijuana became illegal, hemp production in America was cheap and common. Even our founding father Washington promoted hemp production. Due to the marijuana laws, hemp production is no longer cost effective. In fact, it is cheaper to import hemp from Europe than to produce it here in America. So, you are correct in saying the government does not legally prohibit the production of hemp, but due to their ridiculous marijuana laws, hemp production might as well be illegal.

www.Fear.org While I am not quick to believe everything said in the stories on this site, they can at least be believable to the point that their cases were not handled correctly. I also have stories my friend has told me of civil asset forfeiture.

Marijuana does not create a corrupt government. It helps to make an already corrupt government even more corrupt. Cops are willing to steal part of the marijuana they confiscate from users for personal use, civil asset forfeitures can end up with part of the seized property "mysteriously" disappearing, marijuana users are considered guilty until proven innocent, etc.

I did not choose marijuana as my cause. The reason I am discussing it right now is because someone started a thread about it. If someone started a thread about universal health care, I would say the same thing: the government has no right to micromanage my life. It cannot tell me to pay for other's health insurance. Likewise, the government cannot micromanage my life and tell me which plants I can eat and which plants I cannot eat.

 

[Artbox]

I am saying that without citation this means nothing. If the soccar coach at Hebrew university says something about it, so what. I am rejecting it based upon what I know of Hebrew and on the type of endorsement that I found regarding this translation.
Finally, why would incense offered to God justify the smoking of marijuana unless you believe that the priests were being affected by it. so, what does the shrug mean. Do you justify it based upon this odd translation or not?

Here is a Wiki article on one of the etymologists who confirm that kaneh-bosm is cannabis, as well as containing several references, if you'd like :] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sula_Benet There is some controversy concerning the translation, but on the whole it is agreed upon and the leading authority Hebrew University confirms it, so it's not an "odd" translation at all. It's merely a very unpopular one with people who like their Bible drug-free :]

I never said that it justified smoking cannabis, did I? :] I was merely commenting on an interesting side-note to the conversation, about the Biblical usage of cannabis.
Although I should think that if it was an incense offered to God, it's hardly sinful, is it?

 

[charisenexcelcis]

God's creation is good. He said it was, so it is. He also gave to us all seed-bearing plants to eat. He never said we have to eat them, but He gave us the choice to eat them. As such, what God said I am allowed to eat, the government has no right to tell me differently.

the NAIHC states "The US Drug Enforcement Agency classifies all C. sativa varietes as 'marijuana.' While is it theoretically possible to get permission from the government to grow hemp, DEA would require that the field be secured by fence, razor wire, dogs, guards, and lights, making it cost-prohibitive." Before marijuana became illegal, hemp production in America was cheap and common. Even our founding father Washington promoted hemp production. Due to the marijuana laws, hemp production is no longer cost effective. In fact, it is cheaper to import hemp from Europe than to produce it here in America. So, you are correct in saying the government does not legally prohibit the production of hemp, but due to their ridiculous marijuana laws, hemp production might as well be illegal.

www.Fear.org While I am not quick to believe everything said in the stories on this site, they can at least be believable to the point that their cases were not handled correctly. I also have stories my friend has told me of civil asset forfeiture.

Marijuana does not create a corrupt government. It helps to make an already corrupt government even more corrupt. Cops are willing to steal part of the marijuana they confiscate from users for personal use, civil asset forfeitures can end up with part of the seized property "mysteriously" disappearing, marijuana users are considered guilty until proven innocent, etc.

I did not choose marijuana as my cause. The reason I am discussing it right now is because someone started a thread about it. If someone started a thread about universal health care, I would say the same thing: the government has no right to micromanage my life. It cannot tell me to pay for other's health insurance. Likewise, the government cannot micromanage my life and tell me which plants I can eat and which plants I cannot eat.

I understand and respect your point of view. We disagree on many things, but I do not consider you unreasonable. Perhaps, like myself, a little stubborn. lol

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Excuse me...but are you saying the Hebrew University of Israel, the experts and speakers of the language are wrong? I can understand if I alone was making that claim...this is a fact agreed upon by experts and linguistics and you are simply rejecting it out of hand based on absolutely nothing but the fact you don't want to believe it...

*shrug* I have no idea whether they got high or not. I'm just going by what's in the Bible. It was an incense offered to God.

And I found it. It was a single Polish linguist. No one else has supported this. There have been many who claimed that the Hebrew University said this, but no such thing. The linguist is not and was not connected to the Hebrew University.

 

[Artbox]

And I found it. It was a single Polish linguist. No one else has supported this. There have been many who claimed that the Hebrew University said this, but no such thing. The linguist is not and was not connected to the Hebrew University.

Sula Benet is simply the first person who pointed out the connection, not the only person who has supported this. Another notable personage supporting this theory is the noted anthropologist Weston La Barre. And the Hebrew University did in fact agree with their conclusion.

 

[imoss]

Apologies to lilrush for her offense taken on behalf of her dope smoking bible reading poor feeding friend. Glad you werent angry

 

[Cako53]

I laugh when the occasion calls for it. In a serious thread where it did not appear like anyone was in a humorous mood, your comment seemed out of place. Your subsequent comment only served to exasperate the issue.

While I am never hesitant to admit I am easily angered, at the time of my post I was offended and not angered.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!! Mood lightened?

 

[charisenexcelcis]

Sula Benet is simply the first person who pointed out the connection, not the only person who has supported this. Another notable personage supporting this theory is the noted anthropologist Weston La Barre. And the Hebrew University did in fact agree with their conclusion.

You state without citing. give me an citation from Hebrew University. Benet was a linguist, not a Hebrew scholar. And an anthropologist is not a Hebrew scholar. The study by Benet was not saying that marijuana was being used in the temple worship, but was noting similarities of words, much like one might trace the common ancestor of agnostic and ignorant.

 

[Artbox]

You state without citing. give me an citation from Hebrew University. Benet was a linguist, not a Hebrew scholar. And an anthropologist is not a Hebrew scholar. The study by Benet was not saying that marijuana was being used in the temple worship, but was noting similarities of words, much like one might trace the common ancestor of agnostic and ignorant.

I can't give you a straight citation from the Hebrew University, considering that statement from them probably isn't online. However, if you followed the link I gave earlier, you will find the wiki article does indeed cite the reference where the Hebrew University confirmed her interpretation.

The study was merely about what the word meant. Based on what the word means, one can reasonably assume that if the word kaneh-bosm means cannabis, then any Bible verses mentioning kaneh-bosm as incense in temple worship refer to cannabis.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

I can't give you a straight citation from the Hebrew University, considering that statement from them probably isn't online. However, if you followed the link I gave earlier, you will find the wiki article does indeed cite the reference where the Hebrew University confirmed her interpretation.

The study was merely about what the word meant. Based on what the word means, one can reasonably assume that if the word kaneh-bosm means cannabis, then any Bible verses mentioning kaneh-bosm as incense in temple worship refer to cannabis.

Word origins and relations do not always equate to meaning. for instance, in the KJV there is the word corn. This was before "corn" as you know it, existed. The word corn, means grain. So, her study has no impact regarding anything other than that the Hebrew word for sweet calumus is related to the wiord cannibis and that is only conjecture.
What citation did your Wiki article give? If there is no citation it has no weight, it is wiki-myth.

 

[Artbox]

Word origins and relations do not always equate to meaning. for instance, in the KJV there is the word corn. This was before "corn" as you know it, existed. The word corn, means grain. So, her study has no impact regarding anything other than that the Hebrew word for sweet calumus is related to the wiord cannibis and that is only conjecture.
What citation did your Wiki article give? If there is no citation it has no weight, it is wiki-myth.

...you could follow the link and read the article, you know...

But I shall humor you, even if you don't read sources after demanding them :] The citation for the Hebrew University comes from a book by Rowan Robinson, "The Great Book of Hemp distributed in 1995, on page 89.

The wiki link also links to another article where it is posted that another agrees with the translation and states cannabis was used in anointing oil. Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, in his 1981 the Living Torah, on pg. 442.

As well, the Encyclopedia Judaica is cited, where Jewish scholars generally agree about talmudic references to hemp.

Aside from that, if you prefer not to accept that cannabis is the translation, you could go with the other non "odd" translation, that is, calamus. In which case, calamus is also a psychotropic drug. So any way it's translated, it's a drug. It's just whether you prefer to go with the cannabis translation or the calamus translation.

 

[charisenexcelcis]

...you could follow the link and read the article, you know...

But I shall humor you, even if you don't read sources after demanding them :] The citation for the Hebrew University comes from a book by Rowan Robinson, "The Great Book of Hemp distributed in 1995, on page 89.

The wiki link also links to another article where it is posted that another agrees with the translation and states cannabis was used in anointing oil. Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, in his 1981 the Living Torah, on pg. 442.

As well, the Encyclopedia Judaica is cited, where Jewish scholars generally agree about talmudic references to hemp.

Aside from that, if you prefer not to accept that cannabis is the translation, you could go with the other non "odd" translation, that is, calamus. In which case, calamus is also a psychotropic drug. So any way it's translated, it's a drug. It's just whether you prefer to go with the cannabis translation or the calamus translation.

You are making a very serious statement. all the evidence is heresay. You have no knowledge of Hebrew, so you are relying on the heresay evidence. A wikepedia article that cites The Great Book of Hemp which states without citing that Hebrew University says something. Again, Rowan Robinson does not cite his source. Rabbi Kaplan state that some believe that it is hemp, but does not endorse that. Not to mention the difference between hemp and marijuana, hemp being a generic term for a whole class of plants. (Which you can figure out by trying to smoke a rope.) As for calamus, I've yet to have a mindbending reaction to calamine.
So, I'm done. If you want to believe it, talk to God cause I've said all I can.