Growing up I was led to believe that a relationship with g(G)od would somehow make me feel different or would somehow have a physical presence or manifestation inside me; it didn’t. It never did. Puff puff puff, however, and I can feel the power of the lord coursing through my veins, my brothers and sisters!

It’s okay to be religious, it’s okay to have faith in some higher power, I won’t poo poo on anyones right to that, I’m just saying, there’s g(G)od and then there’s pot and they are mutually exclusive.

Your final paragraph says everything that needs to be said on the subject of religious use.

Atheism can be either the rejection of theism,[1] or the position that deities do not exist.[2] In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence of deities.[3]

As an atheist, you have a right to not worship any deity. That is how you exercise your right to freedom of religion. It is the same right that permits those whose religious beliefs include the sacramental use of cannabis to use cannabis in their religious practice. It is not a special right. We will probably continue to disagree about this.

The religious use of cannabis involves more than just the act of smoking a joint, or consuming cannabis in some other way. The distinction between religious use and non-religious use can be very subtle. In some cases, it may not be possible to distinguish between religious and non-religious use when considering only observable behavior. Religion is a very personal matter. The real distinction is the internal motivation for the use. This cannot be observed.

Nevertheless, the government should not concern itself with the citizens’ motivation for using cannabis. Smoking a joint is an act which, given the legality of drinking alcohol or eating cheeseburgers, the government has no legitimate interest to prohibit. As it is common for users of cannabis to enjoy its effects with no harmful effects external to themselves, they should be allowed the freedom to do so. The really sinister thing about the prohibition of drugs is that the government is asserting an authority to control your consciousness. No one, right-wing or left-wing, should consider this to be acceptable.

-ED

They are, too, claiming a right I wouldn’t have – the right to smoke a joint because they have different thoughts than me. They are claiming that if me and a Rasta came upon a marijuana plant, the Rasta should be free from arrest for smoking that bud because he thinks Jah provided it to us, but I should be arrested because I think it evolved from a lower form of plant life. The notion that I should change my view of the plant from one of botanical appreciation to one of sacred worship in order to share the bud with my Rasta friend is one of discrimination against (lack of) religion.

I dislike any laws that give people special rights on account of their religion. I’ve always found it ironic that courts of law will afford special protection to some based on something (religion) that cannot be proved in a court of law.

Of course, polygamy as it is practiced in America is rarely between consenting non-coerced adults, that’s the problem.

The First Amendment protects my choice not to embrace or create a religion. It deems that in affairs of state, religion is a neutral and moot point. Getting the protection to smoke my herb as an enticement to embrace or create a religion seems a bit like government sponsorship of religion.