March 18, 1987
To the Editors:
Re: The October 18, 1986 Human Events article “The Marijuana Litmus Paper Test”
Upon a recent visit to Hillsdale College, I received a stack of H.R.s (Human Events) and was astonished to find an article as this in a publication that states on its inside front page that it is “biases in favor of limited constitutional government, local self government, private enterprise and individual freedom.”
How can you in all seriousness support the intrusive deferral government “war on drugs” (really a war on individuals whom with New right conservatives do not identify) while claiming to support totally contrary values? As a publication professing such a statement do you actually think that the federal government ought to led a government war on millions of individuals with personal you might not personally like? To harass people with sanctions of fines and imprisonment for marijuana of all things is contemptuous in a free nation. The vast majority of users of illegal drugs, like alcohol, have no problems except for the threats posed to them by our government’s intrusive policies. Drug prohibition does not keep products as marijuana or cocaine away from the public, including those who do have problems with the use of these items. Driving the problem underground (the main effect of this asinine Edwin Meese Lyndon LaRouche policy) only makes the matter worse through the laws of contraband: stronger, easier to misuse substances or versions of such substances are imported, such as cocaine versus marijuana, pr pure smokable cocaine (which is dangerous) versus weaker snort able cocaine hydrochloride, or better yet coca leaf, coca tea and Mariani coca wine.
Indeed not only has it not worked, it has made the problem worse.
And one more important thing, drug “warriors” are often total hypocrites, my congressman for instance (20th district, N.Y.) who cries out against even pot decriminalization, yet alone legalization (apparently a $100 or $250 fine for possession for adults is wrong- they should be jailed [and at what cost?]; his main campaign contributor was U.S. Tobacco.
As long as conservatives eschew the constitutional principles of limited government and individual liberty which they claim as being dear when it does not sit their personal preferences- the millions who are torn too disgusted to vote will see them as being little to no better then the liberals who also want to control our lives but for equalitarian reasons as opposed to moralitarian ones.
Please get serious, don’t describe a joker like Carl Turner who makes silly statements as marijuana use causing homosexuality as being “no-nonsense”. Reconsider your view, or add that common “New Right” conservative disclaimer to your statement of principles that reads “traditional values”: translated: our personal preferences over constitution principles when convenient.
Douglas A. Willinger