Let's All Smoke A Fat One

I'm just kidding; I gave up smoking pot on December 1, 1970 in a sweltering parking lot at the Pakistan-India border. It was a godsend-- but so were all the years before that when I was using it. I was happy that voters in Washington and Colorado have decriminalized the use of marijuana for recreational usage and that Massachusetts legalized medical marijuana. Too bad about Oregon's proposal to basically stop treating pot like some kind of dangerous substance. A Fox contributor, Keith Ablow, a psychiatrist, argues that the implications of legalized marijuana could be massive, massively bad, from a psychiatric perspective. and he's for legalization!

[J]udging from the frequent users of marijuana I have met with in my practice, this predicts a likely increase in the number of people suffering with depression, the number suffering with worsening symptoms of underlying psychotic illnesses, the number suffering with attention deficit and memory problems and the number who will be involved in accidents at work and on the roads.

Colorado and Washington should begin very aggressive public awareness campaigns about the dangers of marijuana use right now, to try to reduce the toll of the substance. Perhaps they should earmark a large percentage of all state revenues from marijuana sales for that purpose. The end of Prohibition is an instructive example; alcohol-related illnesses skyrocketed.

It will also be desirable to now devise protocols to test the blood of drivers who seem to be driving under the influence. Breathalizers that detect alcohol won’t suffice. Marijuana can impair driving, too. And marijuana is frequently “cut” with other mind-altering drugs.

Even though I think legalizing marijuana is the correct path, in keeping with giving people autonomy (and in keeping with avoiding the hypocrisy of arresting people for using something a whopping percentage of our lawmakers have used), I believe the substance is dangerous when used for pleasure-- especially, habitually. It has poorly understood and substantial neurochemical effects on the brain.

No matter what anyone says, I am utterly convinced from my 20 years practicing psychiatry, that it does act as a gateway drug, tempting people to use other illicit substances, including opiates. And that’s just the beginning of the trouble.

Marijuana also delays people from actually searching for the root emotional causes of their problems. They get high, instead of getting to the core of what is bothering them.

Marijuana is the antithesis of insight-oriented psychotherapy. It is a Band-Aid over suffering that will not stay covered up forever by inhaling smoke from a burning plant (marijuana) or, for that matter, injecting the byproduct of another plant (heroin, from the poppy).

That’s why, in the longer run, I predict a second, more destructive wave of trouble from marijuana. This will represent the groundswell of unaddressed psychiatric issues that will have been temporarily camouflaged by the drug.

At a time when so many Americans seem anesthetized to their personal challenges, to the facts about our fractured economy and to the challenges we face from enemies, it should come as no surprise that voters are clamoring for mind-altering drugs to perpetuate and deepen their dream state.

Dependence on substances is already an epidemic, of course, but it will get even worse. And the overall effect will be to kick the can of dealing with personal problems and psychiatric illness down the road, building a “reality deficit” to match the staggering fiscal debt we are accumulating.

  And then there's the legal perspective. After all, the federal government says possessing any pot for any reason is illegal. I bet the Justice Department finds it a lot easier to prosecute potheads than banksters. Though it's now legal to one degree or another in 17 states and the District of Columbia, tens of thousands of people are in prison for marijuana-related crimes. The Justice Department said they're looking into it and figuring out how to proceed. A DEA spokesperson said that its “enforcement of the Controlled Substances Act remains unchanged.”

In the run-up to the latest initiatives, the Justice Department was unusually muted about the possible conflicts between federal and state laws, even as former DEA officials called on Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to publicly oppose the measures.

On Wednesday, Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) signaled his awareness of the legal conflict with the Justice Department, cautioning voters that the marijuana initiative violates federal law.

“The voters have spoken and we have to respect their will,” Hickenlooper said in a statement. “This will be a complicated process, but we intend to follow through. That said, federal law still says marijuana is an illegal drug, so don’t break out the Cheetos or gold fish too quickly.”

Colorado Amendment 64 allows individuals 21 and older to buy up to an ounce of marijuana at retail stores that are regulated. Possession of marijuana would be legal, although it would not be legal to use the drug publicly. Washington’s Initiative 502 is similar and allows adults 21 and older to buy up to an ounce of dried marijuana; up to a pound of a marijuana-infused product, such as brownies; or up to 72 ounces of marijuana-infused liquids.

Supporters of the measures argued that they would bring in hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue, with the funds being used for education, health care and other government services. They also said that the initiatives would give proponents a chance to show that decriminalization of marijuana could benefit the country’s war on drugs.

In Colorado, the measure was supported by more than 300 physicians in the state, including Bruce Madison, the former associate medical director of faculty at the University of Colorado School of Medicine, who said that current laws waste “hundreds of millions of dollars in a failed war on marijuana, by ruining thousands of lives by unnecessary arrest and incarceration, and by causing the deaths of hundreds of people killed in black-market criminal activities.”

Opponents of the measures in both states warned of a federal crackdown and unauthorized drug use by children. They also argued that the states could attract “drug tourists.”

A similar proposal legalizing marijuana use was on the ballot in Oregon but did not pass.

In September, nine former DEA administrators wrote a letter to Holder expressing their concerns about the initiatives. The attorney general did not respond.

“To continue to remain silent conveys to the American public and the global community a tacit acceptance of these dangerous initiatives,” wrote the former administrators, who oversaw the DEA under both Democratic and Republican presidents from 1973 to 2007. “We urge you to take a public position on these initiatives as soon as possible.”

The Justice Department can file suit to try to block state laws that it deems to have violated federal statutes. It did so, for example, after Arizona passed a law in 2010 that the state said was aimed at cracking down on illegal immigrants but that the Obama administration believed was unconstitutional.

On Wednesday, Justice spokeswoman Nanda Chitre would not comment on whether a lawsuit is being considered. “The Department of Justice is reviewing the ballot initiatives, and we have no additional comment at this time,” Chitre said.

Maybe the success Obama had and the success for marriage equality and pot initiatives had something to do with the big turnout from voters under 30. Many were infuriated that Republican legislatures tried dienfranchising college students and pulling off lots of backward social policy. The numbers aren't completely in yet but it looks like youth participation was more than the banner turnout in 2008. It looks like between 22 and 23 million young people (under 30) voted.  

UPDATE: Pot Tourism?

I lived in Amsterdam for 4 years. When I graduated from college I spent a lot of time in Kabul and a lot of time in Kathmandu. You know what all three cities had in common? Economically significant amounts of weed tourism. And now entrepreneurs in Colorado and Washington are getting ready to start making fortunes from the same phenomena.

Tourists may not be able to pack their bowls along with their bags, but as long as out-of-state tourists purchase and use the drug while in Colorado or Washington, they wouldn't violate the marijuana measures.

Of course, that's assuming the recreational marijuana measures take effect at all. That was very much in doubt Friday as the states awaited word on possible lawsuits from the U.S. Department of Justice asserting federal supremacy over drug law.

So the future of marijuana tourism in Colorado and Washington is hazy. But that hasn't stopped rampant speculation, especially in Colorado, where tourism is the No. 2 industry thanks to the Rocky Mountains and a vibrant ski industry.

The day after Colorado approved recreational marijuana by a wide margin, the headline in the Aspen Times asked, "Aspendam?" referring to Amsterdam's marijuana cafes... Ski resorts are "certainly watching it closely," said Jennifer Rudolph of Colorado Ski Country USA, a trade association that represents 21 Colorado resorts.

Any plans for an adults-only après lounge where skiers could get more than an Irish coffee to numb their aches?

"There's a lot that remains to be seen," Rudolph said with a chuckle. "I guess you could say we're waiting for the smoke to clear."

The Colorado counties where big ski resorts are located seem to have made up their minds. The marijuana measure passed by overwhelming margins, with more support than in less visited areas.

The home county of Aspen approved the marijuana measure more than 3-to-1. More than two-thirds approved marijuana in the home county of Colorado's largest ski resort, Vail. The home county of Telluride ski resort gave marijuana legalization its most lopsided victory, nearly 8 in 10 favoring the measure.

"Some folks might come to Colorado to enjoy some marijuana as will be their right. So what?" said Betty Aldworth, advocacy director for the Colorado marijuana campaign. Washington state already sees a version of marijuana tourism.

Every summer on the shores of the Puget Sound, Seattle is host to "Hempfest," which according to organizers attracted around 250,000 people over three days this year. For those three days, people are largely left alone to smoke publically at a local park, even as police stand by.

"People travel to Seattle from other states and countries to attend Seattle Hempfest every year to experience the limited freedom that happens at the event," said executive director Vivian McPeak. "It's reasonable to assume that people will travel to Washington assuming that the federal government doesn't interfere."

McPeak draw parallels to Amsterdam where an annual "Cannabis Cup" attracts tourists from all over the world and Vancouver, British Columbia, which has lax marijuana rules that have borne marijuana cafes drawing travelers.

Can The Roman Catholic Hierarchy Fight A Two Front War-- One Against America And One In The Hague?

With a national election on the horizon, the Roman Catholic hierarchy has decided to pressure Obama against his Administrations recently accelerated pace in backing equality for the LGBT community. They had their top general bishop in the U.S., Tim Dolan, who runs their NY operations and heads the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, send an offensive and threatening letter to President Obama.

I write with a growing sense of urgency about recent actions taken by your Administration that both escalate the threat to marriage and imperil the religious freedom of those who promote and defend marriage. This past spring the Justice Department announced that it would no longer defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in court, a decision strongly opposed by the Catholic Bishops of the United States and many others. Now the Justice Department has shifted from not defending DOMA-- which is problem enough, given the duty of the executive branch to enforce even laws it disfavors-- to actively attacking DOMA's constitutionality. My predecessor, Cardinal Francis George, OMI, and I have expressed to you in the past our strong disappointment about the direction your Administration has been moving regarding DOMA. Unfortunately the only response to date has been the intensification of efforts to undermine DOMA and the institution of marriage.

The Justice Department's move, in addition to other troubling federal decisions occurring recently, prompts me yet again to register my grave concerns. The content of this letter reflects the strong sentiment expressed at a recent meeting by more than thirty of my brother Bishops who serve on the Administrative Committee of our episcopal conference. I know they are joined by hundreds of additional Catholic bishops throughout our nation. My observations are offered in the spirit of respectful, but frank dialogue.

The Catholic Bishops stand ready to affirm every positive measure taken by you and your Administration to strengthen marriage and the family. We cannot be silent, however, when federal steps harmful to marriage, the laws defending it, and religious freedom continue apace. Attached you will find an analysis prepared by my staff detailing the various executive activities of late that warrant our increasing apprehension.

...We as Bishops of the Catholic Church recognize the immeasurable personal dignity and equal worth of all individuals, including those with same-sex attraction, and we reject all hatred and unjust treatment against any person. Our profound regard for marriage as the complementary and fruitful union of a man and a woman does not negate our concern for the well-being of all people but reinforces it. While all persons merit our full respect, no other relationships provide for the common good what marriage between husband and wife provides. The law should reflect this reality.

Mr. President, I respectfully urge you to push the reset button on your Administration's approach to DOMA. Our federal government should not be presuming ill intent or moral blindness on the part of the overwhelming majority of its citizens, millions of whom have gone to the polls to directly support DOMAs in their states and have thereby endorsed marriage as the union of man and woman. Nor should a policy disagreement over the meaning of marriage be treated by federal officials as a federal offense-- but this will happen if the Justice Department's latest constitutional theory prevails in court. The Administration's failure to change course on this matter will, as the attached analysis indicates, precipitate a national conflict between Church and State of enormous proportions and to the detriment of both institutions.

Thus, on behalf of my brother Bishops, I urge yet again that your Administration end its campaign against DOMA, the institution of marriage it protects, and religious freedom. Please know that I am always ready to discuss with you the concerns raised here and to address any questions that you may have. I am convinced that the door to a dialogue that is strong enough to endure even serious and fundamental disagreements can and must remain open, and I believe that you desire the same. Also please know that you, your family, and your Administration continue to be in my prayers.

I hope-- though sincerely doubt-- that President Obama sent it directly to the IRS to start proceedings to solve the current U.S. economic problem by taxing the Catholic Church since they are clearly-- and have been for decades-- taking political positions, both directly and by secretly funding hard right, overtly political organizations like NOM (as does the Mormon church and several evangelical operations). This isn't a theocracy; the Pope-- particularly not the current fascist thug who grabbed the throne-- and his hierarchy don't rule in America. The Constitution and democracy do.

The Catholic Church thinks it should control exclusive sexual access to the children of its parishoners for its employees. Child rape cases-- which always involve a pattern of cover-up and obstruction of justice-- involving the Catholic Church never end and the Catholic Church hierarchy should have been rounded up and tried for their egregious systematic criminal activities against children decades ago.

And speaking of which... last week SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, and the Center for Constitutional Rights announced a new push for Justice against the Roman Catholic hierarchy's pattern of sexual abuse of children by urging the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor to investigate the Vatican for crimes against humanity. LONG OVERDUE! Their long and detailed complaint charges that "Vatican officials tolerate and enable the systematic and widespread concealing of rape and child sex crimes throughout the world. Together with the complaint, they submitted more than 20,000 pages of supporting materials consisting of reports, policy papers, and evidence of the crimes by Catholic clergy committed against children and vulnerable adults."

SNAP members from Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands and the U.S. traveled to The Hague to insist that the ICC take action and prosecute the Pope and three other high-ranking Vatican officials for their direct and superior responsibility for the crimes against humanity of rape and other sexual violence committed around the world.

“Crimes against tens of thousands of victims, most of them children, are being covered up by officials at the highest level of the Vatican. In this case, all roads really do lead to Rome, ” said CCR Senior Staff Attorney Pam Spees. “These men operate with impunity and without accountability. The Vatican officials charged in this case are responsible for rape and other sexual violence and for the physical and psychological torture of victims around the world both through command responsibility and through direct cover up of crimes. They should be brought to trial like any other officials guilty of crimes against humanity.”

Said SNAP President Barbara Blaine, “SNAP wants to prevent even one more child from being raped or sexually assaulted by a priest and we hope that victims around the world will know today that they are not alone and that it is safe to speak up and report their abuse. We as victims are mobilizing across the globe, and every survivor is invited to join us.”

Said 21-year-old SNAP member Megan Peterson, who spoke publicly of her abuse for the first time last week, “It’s important that the Court understand that this is still happening and that they need to take this case seriously and do the right thing. I don’t want any more kids to go through what I went through.”

Clergy sex crimes have been perpetrated and concealed in nearly every country. In the United States alone, church authorities admit that nearly 6,000 priests have been publicly accused of molesting children over the past few decades. SNAP estimates that there are as many as 100,000 American victims of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church, and that in other nations, where child-protection laws may not be as robust as in the United States, the number of victims is equally staggering. As many as 20,000 sexually abusive or violent predator priests are still working even after having been accused of a crime; often, these priests are simply shifted to areas where the Church has extreme power or influence, or to remote areas isolated from mechanisms of support, prevention, and accountability.

The jurisdiction of the ICC names rape, sexual violence assault, and torture as crimes against humanity. It also provides for individual criminal liability for those with command or superior responsibility over those who directly commit such crimes. These are the mechanisms through which the complaint urges investigation and prosecution of Vatican officials for their roles in the rape, sexual assault, and torture of thousands of individuals around the world. This could be the first time that an international court asserts jurisdiction over the Vatican for crimes committed by its agents worldwide.

The Vatican is a beautiful museum but historically it's a center of predatory sexual abuse and crimes against... well, you name it. The Vatican will have this classic Penn and Teller video pulled down within a week. They've been doing so for years. So watch it while you can!

Preparing For My Trip To Rome-- With Penn And Teller And Sabina Guzzanti

I may have mentioned how I'm planning out a trip to remote, mysterious Albania in a few months. In all honesty, most of the vacation will be spent in Rome eating in places like La Pergola, Roscioli, Quinzi & Gabrieli, Colline Emiliane, and Al Ceppo and wandering around the Pantheon, the Trevi Fountain, the Castel Sant'Angelo and, of course, the Vatican. Two weeks of that, then Albania; then more Rome. Yesterday, though, Roland, who was raised an atheist and claims to not even know what religion his antecedents were, directed me to a story in the L.A. Times about how Junipero Serra needs just one more miracle and-- BOOM-- he's a saint. It's been 75 years since they've been looking and 22 since he was beatified after being credited with curing a nun in St Louis who had lupus. One place they probably shouldn't look for the second miracle is on the Penn and Teller show, Bullshit! You, on the other hand, will certainly enjoy it, especially if you're planning a trip to the Vatican-- or even plan to live it vicariously through my reports on the travel blog.

[This video was originally hosted as a single clip by Vimeo, a company that pulls down videos if anyone says "boo" to them. I have a feeling that someone-- Satan perhaps-- may have said more than "boo."]