MORAL VIEWS MUST NOT TRUMP FACTS IN DISEASE PREVENTION

Re: Harm reduction wins, abstinence loses, Aug. 19.

I have noticed that people who are against needle exchanges, free
crack-pipe programs, safe-injection sites, condoms in schools and the
like are usually against them for quasi-moralistic or religious
reasons. They let their ideologies cloud their views of the facts.

Lives are saved, disease spreads more slowly, crime rates go down and
society at large benefits from harm reduction. This is not an opinion,
it is a documented fact. Every article or report I have read that
slams harm reduction ignores all of these facts.

Maybe they think that anyone who gets a deadly disease from drug use
or non-matrimonial sex deserves it? Then the "immoral" will all
perish, and then the "righteous" can inherit the Earth, perhaps?

These groups and individuals -- most of whom are connected to the
Conservative party, a church, or some other established group with a
vested financial interest in the war on drugs -- insist that harm
reduction is a myth and a danger to our society. It leads me to wonder
just what their motives are, and which side of the law these people
are really on.

RUSSELL BARTH

Ottawa

Federal medical marijuana licence holder