ONE STANDARD APPLIES

Dear Editor:

I will stress the fact that while I am not supporting Michael Patriquen's
use of marijuana, his situation does incline me to support his fight.

In an age when the government makes snap decisions on issues such as war
and economics, it is perplexing that it can have so many conflicting views
on marijuana.

As I write this, the debate continues in Ottawa on whether or not to
legalize the controversial drug.

I do not see the rationale in giving Mr. Patriquen the legal right to smoke
pot at home and then removing that right because he is going to prison. One
standard should do just fine.

The court had ruled that Mr. Patriquen required medicinal marijuana to
control his "chronic" pain. Nothing has changed.

I think it should be ruled that Mr. Patriquen's right be reinstated to the
original ruling, in prison or at home.

The question that sits at the front of my mind is one about that original
ruling: Just how have almost 20,000 people across the country convinced the
court system that marijuana is the only relief they get from their pain?

Sounds more like my five-year-old cousin's argument that chocolate pudding
is the only thing which cures his stomach ache.

Forest Kenney, student, Halifax