I'm a 65-year-old Virginia man, and I have written hundreds of essays about the philosophical problems with the War on Drugs at my website, abolishthedea.com. I saw the interview with Tom Riedlinger and was fascinated to hear that Ligare actually exists, especially being a somewhat lapsed protestant myself. I've thought for years that Christianity needed to employ these sacred substances in order to become relevant again and to stir hearts and not just minds. For I think Quanah Parker was right when he said,
"The White Man goes into his church house and talks about Jesus, but the Indian goes into his tipi and talks to Jesus."2
I will be using psilocybin on a guided basis over the coming year as I taper entirely off of the SNRIs that I have been on for the last 35 years. The research that I have done on user reports gives me hope that my experience can reignite at least the mature part of my neglected faith.
I just don't understand, though. How does the DEA get away with it? It is so clear to me that the Drug War denies us our freedom of religion by outlawing sacred medicines of Mother Nature. Merely knowing about your group and what it stands for should be a wakeup call to any politicians who still believe in the freedom of religion. I wonder that you're not suing the DEA even as we speak. (Though the courts seem ready to trot out any ad-hoc argument when challenged on this topic. A court in the '70s ruled that a church could not use psychedelics because the members' ancestors had no religious history of such use, which is basically a law against human progress, let alone religious liberty.)
Best wishes!
Author's Follow-up: October 31, 2024
See, folks, this is why I do not get on wagon trains: nobody let's this poor Rudolph join in any reindeer games. Ligare's like, "Best wishes, indeed! Who are you, exactly?" They apparently reserve the right to ignore me entirely. Fair enough. I guess God never explicitly said: "Do not ghost your neighbor."
The Hindu religion was created thanks to the use of a drug that inspired and elated. It is therefore a crime against religious liberty to outlaw substances that inspire and elate.
Prohibition is a crime against religious freedom.
William James found religious experience in substance use. See his discussion of what he calls "the anesthetic revelation" in his book entitled "The Varieties of Religious Experience."
The drug war is a meta-injustice. It does not just limit what you're allowed to think, it limits how and how much you are allowed to think.
The Drug War violates religious freedom by putting bureaucrats in charge of deciding if a religion is 'sincere' or not. That is so absurd that one does not know whether to laugh or cry. No one in government is capable of determining whether the inner states that I achieve with psychoactive medicine are religious or not. This is why Milton Friedman was so wrong when he said in 1972 that there are good people on both sides of the drug war debate. WRONG! There are those who are more than ready to take away my religious liberty and those who are not. If the former wish to be called 'good,' they will first need a refresher course in American democracy and religious freedom. They need to renounce their Christian Science theocracy and let folks like myself worship using the kinds of substances that have inspired entire religions in the past. Until they do that, do not expect me to praise the very people who have launched an inquisition against my form of experiencing the divine.
There would be no Hindu religion today had the drug war been in effect in the Punjab 3,500 years ago.
"They have called thee Soma-lover: here is the pressed juice. Drink thereof for rapture." -Rig Veda
The Drug War is based on a huge number of misconceptions and prejudices. Obviously it's about power and racism too. It's all of the above. But every time I don't mention one specifically, someone makes out that I'm a moron. Gotta love Twitter.
Getting off antidepressants can make things worse for only one reason: because we have outlawed all the drugs that could help with the transition. Right now, getting off any drug basically means becoming a drug-free Christian Scientist. No wonder withdrawal is hard.
I just asked New York Attorney General Letitia James how much she was getting paid to play Whack-a-Mole. I pointed out that the drug war created the gangs just as liquor prohibition created the Mafia.
This is why America is creeping toward authoritarianism -- because of the prohibitionists' ability to get away with everything by blaming "drugs." The fact that Americans still fall for this crap represents a kind of collective pathology.
High suicide rates? What a poser! Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that the US has outlawed all substances that elate and inspire???
The problem with blaming things on addiction genes is that it whitewashes the role of society and its laws. It's easy to imagine an enlightened country wherein drug availability, education and attitudes make addiction highly unlikely, addiction genes or no addiction genes.
I can't believe people. Somebody's telling me that "drugs" is not used problematically. It is CONSTANTLY used with a sneer in the voice when politicians want to diss somebody, as in, "Oh, they're in favor of DRUGS!!!" It's a political term as used today!
The DEA is a Schedule I agency. It has no known positive uses and is known to cause death and destruction.
Until we legalize ALL psychoactive drugs, there will be no such thing as an addiction expert. In the meantime, it's insulting to be told by neuroscience that I'm an addictive type. It's pathologizing my just indignation at psychiatry's niggardly pharmacopoeia.
Capitalism requires disease-mongering -- and disease-mongering requires the suppression of medicines that work holistically, that work by improving mood and elating the individual AND THEREFORE improving their health overall.