Chapter 1B.3.3
WHY CANNABIS WILL NEVER BE RE-LEGALIZED:
Part III - Civic Organizations --- their lack of courage:

How many well recognized civic clubs and service organizations took part in the Reefer Madness dis-information campaign?   The list would be endless, and a subject best left for our sister museum [13], however, the important question now is -- What are these groups doing TODAY; --- at this present time, to rectify the situation?   Answer: Nothing.

The following examples (for the sake of brevity only three are given), are unfortunately all too atypical of the situation.   Note that (almost universally) they ALL simply want to sit on the fence, and hope the whole issue would just go away.   In other words, they support the de-facto situation.


EXAMPLE 1: THE CALIFORNIA TEACHERS ASSOCIATION:
[The following are selected parts of a letter that was sent to the C.T.A. (California Teachers Association.]
January 8, 2002
[Name withheld], President
California Teachers Association
PO Box 921
Burlingame, California 94010-0921

Mr. [name withheld], it is our understanding (in keeping with the statements made in your "Official Journal") that your present position with regards to the Medical Marihuana Plant is as follows:

"Marihuana has proven to be a drug of addiction and an alarming factor in the creation of degeneracy" ….."The vicious qualities of the drug render it highly dangerous to the body and mind upon which it operates. Eventually it weakens the physical powers. It destroys the will, causes the user to lose the power of connected thought, produces imaginary situations and frequently leads to insanity. … [That] the addict may develop a delirious rage and become temporarily irresponsible and likely to commit violent crimes."

[The following examples are given:]
  • "A man under the influence of the drug attempted to shoot his wife but killed her grandmother instead and then committed suicide."
  • "A man 25 years old, charged with criminally assaulting a 10-year-old girl, entered a plea of not guilty because of insanity. He was convicted and sentenced to death."
  • "A young boy … addicted to smoking marihuana cigarets killed his father, mother, two brothers and a sister, wiping out the entire family." --- SIERRA EDUCATIONAL NEWS - Nov. 1938 (pp 40)- Official Journal of California Teachers Association.
. . . Ms. C. Heller (your local official spokesperson) has already stated "NO APOLOGY," and refuses to even acknowledge that these statements were even made by the C.T.A. I did make the attempt to show her the article, to which she replied, "I don't have time for this - Get out or I will call the police."

Andrew Garret
Cc interested groups
An unofficial reply was received, stating that this ‘was no longer their position on the subject,’ BUT to the best of our knowledge NO OFFICIAL corrections, retractions or actual clarifications etc., have ever been made. Please do contact them to hear their side of the story, and then let us over here at this museum know. We would love to get their official position on the matter.


EXAMPLE 2: THE CALIFORNIA JAYCEES:
[The following is an internet Posting that was made a few years back. I believe that it's self-explanatory]

I'm afraid that I have yet another piece of bad news. It seems that the California Junior Chamber of Commerce [or the Jaycees], with whom I have been corresponding with, will be sticking by their 1937 anti-marihuana resolution from the Reefer Madness Era. A resolution which officially puts the California Jaycees, "Officially on Record" as being anti-Marihuana, as well as anti-Medical Marihuana as well.
According to the S.F. Chronicle (Oct 6, 1937):
"a resolution adopted at the last State meeting of the junior chambers, the committee said that sale of marihuana to school children is widespread and that a campaign of education is vitally necessary to stamp out this evil."
According to Jaycees State President [Name withheld by request]:
  • "At this time there are no resolutions or wording(s) to the effect that we are 'for' or 'against' the use of marijuana for medical uses in our policies or bylaws."
  • "[the] California Jaycees is not a political organization . . . nor do we endorse politically charged issues such as this."
  • "We will remain neutral as an organization on this matter."
  • "At this time, on behalf of the California Jaycees, we are declining your request to get involved with this issue. We are not obligated in any way shape or form to argue a point on a resolution that was passed back in 1937. It was the opinions of the organization at that time."
Huh?!   Excuse me;   I'm I the only one who thinks there is a disconnect with reality somewhere out there?

Maybe the subject of evil is a little hard to grasp, but the way I see it:
    (a) The Jaycees are now trying to hide behind the old, "we don't want to take a position, one way or the other," on the issue. Now leaving aside the fact that such a position automatically places the Jaycees in support of the status-quo, meaning in favor of the anti-medical marihuana laws. But again, leaving that aside for now, the Jaycees have, by virtue of their reefer madness resolution, ALREADY taken an anti-Medical Marihuana stand on the matter.

    (b) Thus if the Jaycees "really" don't what to take a stand on the matter, "One way or the Other." Logic would dictate that they should officially null-and-void, their original 1937 resolution.
Instead, they are choosing to hide, behind their by-laws and various other pieces of paper. Which I (and I feel the average sane person out there) can only interpret as meaning that they wish to maintain their present position against the right of Cancer patients to make use of the Medical Marihuana plant.


EXAMPLE 3: ASSOCIATION OF CANCER EXECUTIVES:
Below is the last in a series of back and forth letters between the Museum and the Association of Cancer Executives.   They had made it clear that with respect to the right of cancer victims to use Medical Cannabis, they didn't want to take a position "One Way Or The Other", on the subject.   To which, I had replied that for a [so-called] anti-Cancer Society to has such a position, was the equability of, Not having a position "One Way or the Other" as to whether or not the Jews should be herded off on the trains during WW2.   Might as well just go out and wave bye bye, to them.
Dear Sir:
Our organization does not make any claims regarding marihuana and it's use in cancer treatment.   We have no stand on it and will not consider any stand in the near future.

I am requesting that you remove the mention of Association of Cancer Executives from all of your materials, exhibits, mailers, etc.   In addition, remove us from your e-mail list. Thank You.

[Name Withheld] Executive Director
Association of Cancer Executives
PO Box 9539 Downers Grove, IL 60515
rcipollo@cancerexecutives.org
www.cancerexecutives.org
Ok, Ok, maybe I do have as much tact as a clam, but honestly, HOW on earth is it possible for a (so-called) anti-Cancer Organization to, "Not have a position, ONE WAY OR THE OTHER" on the subject.   At least in my opinion the book, "Dante’s Inferno” was right, the hottest spot in hell should be reserved for those "neutrals" who should have acted, when the time came to act.


And the list of examples can go on and on. Look the only point I'm trying to make is this --- no one is going to do Jack. The very organizations and civic groups that should be leading the fight to END the anti-Medical Marihuana laws, are apparently just kicking back and doing nothing.

Thus again, I am of the belief that NO re-legalization will take place.


FOOTNOTES:
[13]- www.ReeferMadnessMuseum.org


WANT TO KNOW MORE:
=====================
Due to space / download time considerations, only selected materials are displayed. If you would like to obtain more information, feel free to contact the museum. All our material is available (at cost) on CD-Rom format.
CONTACT PAGE



Left Arrow
Back to the
Last Section
  		greencross
BACK TO
CHAPTER 1B
  		Right Arrow
On to the
Next Section