Looming Constitutional Challenge on plant use as religious freedom

[baphomet]

Because Jesus died on a tree? Because he rolled a stone away? Maybe feeding the 5000 was just him with the munchies. I know for a fact people around his time were frequently stoned to death. [/dad jokes]

On more serious (but probably just as laughable note), I've had a Jesus-oriented religious experience on a joint. I won't go into details because I have a headache and am at work, but it involved a week-long mental struggle with the concept of being a 'born again', eventually culminating in a 15-minute peak experience. Sounds unlikely, but it completely took me by surprise too, and was definitely not just a weed thing. More like, conviction + prayer + weed. It only happened once and probably won't happen again, but it was certainly one of those all-the-pieces-fit moments.

http://video.google.com.au/videosearch?q=g...mp;sitesearch=#

[Yeti101]

Thanks Niall, I look forward to hearing more about this.

[rahli]

Hey naill, here is a bit of light reading on the subject.

Ayahuasca For The Masses - The Legal Right To Consume Psychedelics Under the Religious Freedom Act of 1993 (Kindle Edition)

A former prosecutor and Federal Public Defender interprets Supreme Court decisions under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, that have upheld the right of Americans to peaceably consume psychedelic substances as part of a safe religious ceremony. A concise summary of the pharmacological character of the Amazonian visionary brew known as Ayahuasca leads into a surprisingly clear and easy-to-understand description of the legal history that led up to the Supreme Court's decision in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao Do Vegetal in favor of an American outpost of a Brazilian Ayahuasca sect. At just over 4,000 words, this is must-read material for anyone interested in the intersection of psychedelics and the law.

and some heavy reading

Edited July 28, 2008 by rahli

[niall]

Hi guys, bit of an update. The brief is pretty much done, should be finalised in the next few days. My friend is choosing to summarise this in a more digestible form for widespread distribution - we'll release this asap, next appearance is on the 21st so likely around this date or hopefully before.

Again, please PM me privately if you would be willing to make your own submission to the High Court on this matter, pending release of some real detail on this case of course. We need to be ready to act on this, and trust me this is not only a very serious attempt, it is in my opinion a sure thing. To say that the brief is comprehensive, covering many points of law from many different perspectives, and it really a watertight case - is an understatement. This is going to blow them out of the water, the Court will have no choice but to declare Australia's drug laws null and void and to withdraw from the Treaty. It also connects all of the dots for activists in other countries to force their Governments to do the same.

My friend is an amazing man, I feel very honoured to be witnessing and assisting with this. Stay tuned and PM me so I can send you the details as soon as we can release them. We'll have a website up with all details, downloadable pdf etc. and probably forums to discuss the case etc. in a single place, but I'll be sure to post it all here as well.

[Jesus On Peyote]

Cool, so only 10 or so days till we can hear the master plan?

I dont know why, but your confidence fills me with doubt.

Ill be waiting for your next update tho.

[Torsten]

yeah, lots of grand plans, but no substance as yet. Like I said before, I am not going to get people involved until I can see there is some sort of substance to this.

Like JOP said, your confidence is reason for doubt. No high court case is ever THAT solid.

[JDanger]

I dont know why, but your confidence fills me with doubt.

Ill be waiting for your next update tho.

Ditto. ATM, I am filled with skeptical optimism, at best.

[Yeti101]

A friend has told me that the High Court is not presently favourable to amicus briefs, so your representation might want to think carefully about what they include (if they weren't already). If the argument is so good, then what are the submissions (or admissions) that we can provide going to add?

Good pick-up on the 'confidence' JoP. I agree that it seems strange, but I haven't seen the brief. The outcome described by niall seems unlikely to me, no matter what argument is presented. That's not about the law, that's about how the world works. The Law works for Power, not the other way around. And I would be very suspicious of any lawyer who claimed to be able to bring this about.

If this argument is half as good as it sounds, then it should be interesting. But I'm inclined to be pessimistic in order to avoid disappointment.

[niall]

Fair enough guys, but I've already stated the detail is coming - this was an update. Be as doubtful, skeptical and pessimistic as you like - but can we wait to see the substance of this argument before turning other readers away? Give him a chance - he's facing enough obstacles with this case, let alone his personal circumstances and other factors that will become clear soon.

[Torsten]

don't get us wrong. we are in support of this. but it is difficult to get involved or excited if we have no clue what is actually going on. many folks on this forum have a good udnerstanding of how these things work and have seen others try. for all we know there could be NOTHING at all and you're just shitting us. not making any judgements at all - one way or the other - until we've seen substance. It's not pessimism and we're not turning others away. If anything then having a 35 post thread with no substance at all would put people off.

[faustus]

here's some evidence supporting the spiritual effects of psilocybin

AbstractRationale Although psilocybin has been used for centuries for religious purposes, little is known scientifically about its acute and persisting effects.Objectives This double-blind study evaluated the acute and longer-term psychological effects of a high dose of psilocybin relative to a comparison compound administered under comfortable, supportive conditions.Materials and methods The participants were hallucinogen-naïve adults reporting regular participation in religious or spiritual activities. Two or three sessions were conducted at 2-month intervals. Thirty volunteers received orally administered psilocybin (30 mg/70 kg) and methylphenidate hydrochloride (40 mg/70 kg) in counterbalanced order. To obscure the study design, six additional volunteers received methylphenidate in the first two sessions and unblinded psilocybin in a third session. The 8-h sessions were conducted individually. Volunteers were encouraged to close their eyes and direct their attention inward. Study monitors rated volunteers’ behavior during sessions. Volunteers completed questionnaires assessing drug effects and mystical experience immediately after and 2 months after sessions. Community observers rated changes in the volunteer’s attitudes and behavior.<a name="ASec4">Results Psilocybin produced a range of acute perceptual changes, subjective experiences, and labile moods including anxiety. Psilocybin also increased measures of mystical experience. At 2 months, the volunteers rated the psilocybin experience as having substantial personal meaning and spiritual significance and attributed to the experience sustained positive changes in attitudes and behavior consistent with changes rated by community observers.http://' target="_blank">Conclusions When administered under supportive conditions, psilocybin occasioned experiences similar to spontaneously occurring mystical experiences. The ability to occasion such experiences prospectively will allow rigorous scientific investigations of their causes and consequences.

fulltext.pdf

fulltext.pdf

fulltext.pdf

[t st tantra]

appealed to a tribunal over a public service employment decision.......they said it was a bad and unfair decision but that the ps could do what they wanted!

i agree that logically it should all fall apart on a world scale but 'they' do what they want!

good luck,and thanx 4 the effort on our behalf.

t s t .

[Yeti101]

My scepticism is pretty profound about most things niall, but make no mistake, I would like to see your friend do well. I will PM you shortly.

Nice research Twix, but it doesn't sound like something that is going to Heavy Kevvy's mind about 'shrooms. Can't have people having religions experiences all over the place, we want quiet, churchly religious experiences only, if at all! We also can't have scientists demystifying the neuro-chemistry of these experiences (not that this would make the experiences less mysterious or significant, but that's another story).

[niall]

i agree that logically it should all fall apart on a world scale but 'they' do what they want!

They must follow the letter and spirit of the law. This is why we will win.

I've sent a confidential copy of the brief to Torsten - it's long and complex so hopefully once he's read it he'll be able to comment on the legitimacy of the arguments being put forward in this case. A PR summary of the key arguments should be released this week as the brief is being submitted in the next few days - we're having to be careful about what is made public at this stage but it will all come out soon.

They woke a Dragon

[Yeti101]

They must follow the letter and spirit of the law. This is why we will win.

"They" will only follow the letter and the spirit of the law if they think the alternative too destructive to their own interests. I don't mean the judges, they actually might follow the law, rather the overall system will seek to maintain the current situation. That's my hypothesis anyway. If we are all very lucky I'll be proved wrong.

Any news niall? I've kept an eye on the county lists, but without knowing the defendants name they don't mean much.

[Torsten]

I've read the first 10 pages of the brief and I am definitely going to put my support behind it. It is not as airy fairy as some of the tidbits suggest it might be and in fact, I think it has quite a lot of substance. I am not a lawyer nor do follow much constitutional law, so I can't judge what the chances of success are. I think what is more important though is that it is attempted. The subjects involved are perfect for this type of challenge and I think it would be a sad waste not to make use of this situation.

Religion was the main sticking point where myself and a few others became doubtful about the merits of this case. Let me just say that we all got it wrong. This has nothing to do with having to establish that annointing oil was made from hemp, which is what is often talked about as a defence. Any religious argument turns me off [which is why the Santo Daime and UdV victories leave a bad taste in my mouth]. This case however is more about freedom FROM religion while at the same time accepting freedom OF religion. It's really quite clever and I am glad someone had such a lateral thought process.

I haven't read the whole brief as my head can only deal with so much legal text per day and I find myself a little preoccupied with the HHH legal issues at the moment. Apparently there is a second part to the brief which I have not read yet. Given the novel approach of the first part I strongly recommend that anyone in the position to do so should support this cause.

I presume that documentary contributions are the most needed part, so please contact niall for instructions on what sort of contribution is needed. The rest of us should dig deep and support this financially. I think this might become an important moment in history so I am going to attempt to be present when it is all happening. Maybe we should make it a group trip.

[niall]

Thanks for the support Torsten, I just hope that everyone can take us on face value for a little bit longer until we can truly share the details of this case.

We were in County Court today for the first of 2 hearings this round, not sure what the terminology was but I think it was a Directions hearing. Next appearance is next week and it's going to be a treat. For now my friend wants to remain anonymous, as far as releasing the brief and details of the arguments, but I am sure he'd be up for people turning up to show support in person. PM me for details and we can meet up out front or in the lobby, corner of Lonsdale and William.

Today was an excellent result. My friends both have Autism (Asperger's) and so cannot be without legal representation due to our anti-discrimination laws. Legal Aid has finally been forced to fund the case and supply a lawyer, even though they are pleading not guilty and the case is largely argued on Constitutional grounds. This helps out tremendously with the procedural side of things, not offending the Court and doing things in the right order and presenting the right arguments to the correct Court etc. This was the achilles heel of the case, and I think it's now safely resolved. There's more to it than that, and more that I can't talk about yet, but you can maybe understand why I've been so careful about what I reveal. The Legal Aid lawyer has chosen to take this case on as he believes it has merit - this brought a bit of surprise and admiration from the Judge (she's actually very nice) and so we have a green light (and a safety net) to proceed.

A PR style summary of the arguments behind the case is forthcoming, entering its last draft. You can appreciate that my friends are on disability, unemployed (and now unemployable!), and are spending every waking moment thinking and re-thinking every aspect of this case and their arguments. Think about that - two highly intelligent, knowledgable, autistic adults spending every waking moment on this. You may be starting to understand what I meant about this being a 'perfect storm' of a case, and trust me there is much, much more to this than the little I've revealed so far :-) The PR summary will be out asap, hopefully in the next few days, so I'll post it here as soon as it's done.

We'll have a website up soon to keep everyone up to date.

Please, if you believe that we should be free from moralistic laws with no basis in science, to use the herbs and plants of your choice responsibly for the applications that you find them useful for, then please, please PM me and get in touch!

This case should make its way to the High Court, possibly rapidly. We need people like you to start thinking about what you could contribute to the case. We're looking for as wide a representation of the community, who are affected by these laws, as possible. We will distribute details on how you can get involved soon, either anonymously or publicly if you are ready to take a stand for what you believe in. For now please just think about the possibility of all Australian drug laws being declared invalid, and the issue being forced back for debate in Parliament. We need to be ready not only for the case but for the resulting public debate and legislative panic. This is, in my opinion, the best chance we have ever had - we're making use of all recent decisions e.g. Brazil, Canada, all of the offensive public comments that our elected representatives have spewed forth over the years, the actual intention and language behind the Single Convention and other International Treaties (Australia is in breach of them, as most countries are)..... the list goes on and on.

Any one argument in this case is enough to wipe these laws off the map. And this case has a dozen or more humongous whoppers, with plenty of supporting points, precedents and case law for each. It will probably require a full bench of the High Court, and as it happens the exact people that we need to be on that bench are now there. I'm hopeful for a unanimous decision with no explanation, a simple "Yes you're absolutely right - all laws are hereby struck". Hey, I can hope, but the fact that I'm hoping for the best outcome out of all the possible positive outcomes should tell you something ;-)

If you're ever going to stand up for what you believe in, this is the time to do it.

Edited August 21, 2008 by niall

[Yeti101]

Well if that isn't a vote of confidence, I don't know what is! I haven't seen the details, but from what Torsten has relayed, it sounds pretty good. And if there is going to be public debate/scrap over this you can definitely count me in.

When this case hits the news we need to be ready to respond in forums and comments sections of the news sites and topical blogs, as well as emailing in to Sunrise, writing in to the SMH etc.

If all this does go back to parliament, we need to be ready to contact our representatives, both as individuals, and possibly collectively.

I look forward to seeing the details. And if this is half as good as niall or T say, I look forward to helping if I can.

[Legba]

Request for a Public Hearing

RICHARD ALPERT, Ph.D., 1965

From: LSD, Richard Alpert and Sidney Cohen, The New American Library, ©1966

The first realistic step toward making the legislation concerning control and use of psychedelic chemicals based primarily on light rather than heat is public education. Toward this end I submitted to the Government this spring a request for a PUBLIC hearing. The text of this request follows:

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/hearing.htm

Found this and thought of this thread. Not sure if its of any use but worth perusing.

[Jesus On Peyote]

Wow, from the testimony torsten gave your brief, and the new information you gave out i cant not believe that somthing interesting is boiling.

Nice work Niall, sorry for doubting you ill help in any way i can.

Like yeti said also,ittle be a good for everyone to get ready for a PR campaign once it goes public. Everyone here that uses Facebook (i dont, but ill make an account ) should get ready to spread the word, send a msg to friends and tell em to send it to all theirs and so on, i think that might be a good way for individuals to find out about it.

Also, im not on the nook or ega so anyone whos on those should let the people there know.

Keep it up, and give your friends a kiss for me

[reptyle]

Anyone know anything of the field of all possibilities...your "scepticism" , pessimism and mistrust are unworthy of your future freedoms.

[ballzac]

As were others, I was mostly skeptical of this because it is easy for someone to come on here and make claims without substance, but of course Torsten's backing of this makes it very credible. What an exciting prospect. I feel that even a failure of this attempt would do great things to get momentum going for a change in attitude. I'm not going to pretend I really understand what's going on here, but I'm excited about all this.

[niall]

It's a good point - even if this case fails we have a very strong brief, and we will know the next piece of the puzzle and the right question to ask to take this to the next level. The brief will be made public and shared openly, in fact I think we should stick it in a Wiki and use it as the basis for all future cases if this one is unsuccessful.

[niall]

Thanks for the many PMs guys, I'll contact you each this weekend with further details. Been an incredibly busy week, lots of stuff happening behind the scenes, so it's taking me longer to get the info pack together and sent to everyone.

If anyone is interested in attending we are at County Court again this Friday - PM me for details and you can meet up with us or stay anonymous and observe (though the Court is pretty small only about 10-12 seats for the public). More as soon as I've got time to relay it.

[Jesus On Peyote]

Any updates Niall?

hope all is well.