NO SUBSTANCE TO MARIJUANA POLICY

I write to respond to Gregory J. Sullivan's column about the
legalization of marijuana for compassionate use, "Compassionate, but
still illegal"(Dec. 30, 2008).

Mr. Sullivan says that the "law has a distinct pedagogical function,
and New Jersey and other states are using it to convey, to say the
least, a confusing message."

If the law has a pedagogical function, then it should be based on
reality, right? Long before the Controlled Substances Act, we have
the foundations of marijuana's prohibition. I believe those laws were
enacted through manufactured horror stories and perjured testimony
before Congress.

In such a context, there is no confusing message. The message is
simple: Humanity has used marijuana as food, fiber, medicine,
religion and yes, recreation, far longer than we have recorded our
history. Lies do not trump a solid "grandfather clause."

The message is that we don't follow lies as policy. I'm not sure
whether such a message is more a thumbing of the nose or an act of
intentional civil disobedience against the fallacious federal
prohibition of marijuana. At least the Prohibition (of alcohol) was
legally established and legally ended.

- -- ALLAN ERICKSON, Eugene, Ore.