rigorousintuition.ca

<!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>Supreme Court sides with church in dispute over hallucinogenic tea</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--><br><br>By Gina Holland<br><br>The Associated Press, Feb 21<br><br>WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled unanimously today that a small congregation in New Mexico may use hallucinogenic tea as part of a four-hour ritual intended to connect with God.<br><br>Justices, in their first religious freedom decision under Chief Justice John Roberts, moved decisively to keep the government out of a church's religious practice. Federal drug agents should have been barred from confiscating the hoasca tea of the Brazil-based church, Roberts wrote in the decision.<br><br>The tea, which contains an illegal drug known as DMT, is considered sacred to members of O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao do Vegetal, which has a blend of Christian beliefs and South American traditions. Members believe they can understand God only by drinking the tea, which is consumed twice a month at four-hour ceremonies.<br><br>New Justice Samuel Alito did not take part in the case, which was argued last fall before Justice Sandra Day O'Connor before her retirement. Alito was on the bench for the first time on Tuesday.<br><br>Roberts said that the Bush administration had not met its burden under a federal religious freedom law to show that it could ban "the sect's sincere religious practice."<br><br><!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2002819478_webtea21.html">Seattle Times</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--> <p></p><i></i>

Well... THAT'S interesting.<br><br>Do the Powers That Be think it's time for some of us to start breaking on through to the other side? And, if so, what do you suppose are the implications of that?<br><br> <p></p><i></i>

The LAST thing that they want people doing is to "break through". And frankly, I don't think that the Supreme Court is an authority to say who can "break through" and when. <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :) --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> <br><br>What this decision does is not to make it legal for everyone to drink the tea-- it makes it legal for only that congregation to do so. A small, unknown sect in the middle of nowhere. <p></p><i></i>

Isn't the case where Jeffrey Bronfman was the petitioner ? <p></p><i></i>

Bronfman? That would make it even MORE interesting along the lines of a preliminary "breaking through" scenario. <p></p><i></i>

There were previous such official "breakthroughs", - ie LSD. It comes and goes. If this is another "round", as the previous one, in ten years, the decision will be reversed, and lawsuits will be filed by those adversely affected by this new drug. There are known connections between drugs/big money/sick occultism.<br><br>In israel, Ecstasy was the nectar of the gods, for a while. Now, it probably is going to be this ayasoca, etc. etc. I met several people in Israel who are still convinced that the ecstasy they ingested twice or more, healed them from all trauma, afflictions and powerlessness. They would not even HEAR about evidence to the contrary. they truly think everyone should receive a few doses, under controlled conditions (safety etc.), and ALL THEIR psychological, spiritual and personal problems are GONE. The other layer are the pushers, big money, and then government, etc. etc. <br>--<br>the facilitators and PR people are the middle class yuppies who get free samples and maybe some covert bribes from those behind the campaigns. <br>I brought a link from Israel, in November I think, a huge PR article FOR this Ayasoca by a Professor of Psychology in the Hebrew University (Benny Shanon). The article in haaretz "forgot" to mention the pending hearings before the supreme court, AND the involvement of Bronfman. Maybe, the article was a coincidence <!--EZCODE EMOTICON START :x --><img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/sick.gif ALT=":x"><!--EZCODE EMOTICON END--> Maybe this sect is for real, I doubt it. <br> <p></p><i></i>

i'm guessing this is just a way for the neo-con vampires to say,"see, roberts really is 'fair-minded'", they're storing up points for later, for instance, i heard today that a/the late-term abortion case will come before the court again, a perfect opportunity for sam the scam alito to shine...although, on a more sinister level, perhaps they're attempting to popularize DMT so that many more will break on through as has been suggested in this thread...to me that would suggest that what's on the other side is bad/evil...which i don't agree with, at least in reference to DMT...i don't think what's on the other side is necessarily evil, it's KERRRAZZZY, but not bad... <p></p><i></i>

The fact that the supreme justices even know about DMT is unsettling. My guess is they are going to shine just enough light on this, and then let the christian fundies jump up and down about the unmorality of it all. Then the justices will have some cause to pass more restrictive laws against DMT type plants.<br>Get it while its legal:<br><br>Good source for salvia-divinorum, good selection and good prices.<!--EZCODE LINK START--><a href="http://www.greenstranger.com/salviapage_revised.html">Greenstranger</a><!--EZCODE LINK END--><br> <p></p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>The fact that the supreme justices even know about DMT is unsettling.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Why wouldn't they know about it? It was in a case presented before them-- shouldn't they try and know everything about the case before rendering a decision? <p></p><i></i>

The case was brought before them and they decided, now they know about DMT.<br><br>As of now most states have no laws prohibiting DMT type plants, this could (most likely) all change.<br><br>Religious use is one thing,but for someone who wants to use it without organized religion it could get restrictive.<br><br>Unsettling. <p></p><i></i>

Restrictive in that it would be illegal. But then again there are plenty of herbs that are illegal and people seem to be doing just fine in being able to procure it.<br><br> <p>--<br>CyberChrist<br>http://www.hackerjournal.org<br>My brain is hung like a horse.</p><i></i>

<!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>There were previous such official "breakthroughs", - ie LSD. It comes and goes. If this is another "round", as the previous one, in ten years, the decision will be reversed, and lawsuits will be filed by those adversely affected by this new drug. There are known connections between drugs/big money/sick occultism.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The case was referred back to a Federal Court, so this victory for cognitive freedom may be short-lived (I don't know all the details, but I spoke to a person involved with the case who told me this). <br><br>I don't see this ruling as anything sinister -- I truly believe the court decided that the UDV's use of ayahuasca is protected, and that their religious use is legitimate. And it's not like ayahuasca churches are any threat to mainstream religion.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>In israel, Ecstasy was the nectar of the gods, for a while. Now, it probably is going to be this ayasoca, etc. etc. I met several people in Israel who are still convinced that the ecstasy they ingested twice or more, healed them from all trauma, afflictions and powerlessness. They would not even HEAR about evidence to the contrary. they truly think everyone should receive a few doses, under controlled conditions (safety etc.), and ALL THEIR psychological, spiritual and personal problems are GONE. The other layer are the pushers, big money, and then government, etc. etc. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>MDMA is a very effective psychological medicine. Have you considered that maybe the people you met are being honest with you? I have known many examples of people who have greatly benefitted from MDMA therapy, which is why it became so popular with underground therapists in the first place -- it can be a powerful catalyst for healing.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>the facilitators and PR people are the middle class yuppies who get free samples and maybe some covert bribes from those behind the campaigns.<hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>Again, I suggest you look into the subject a bit further before casting aspersions on people who see positive aspects of the drug.<br><br><!--EZCODE QUOTE START--><blockquote><strong><em>Quote:</em></strong><hr>I brought a link from Israel, in November I think, a huge PR article FOR this Ayasoca by a Professor of Psychology in the Hebrew University (Benny Shanon). The article in haaretz "forgot" to mention the pending hearings before the supreme court, AND the involvement of Bronfman. Maybe, the article was a coincidence Maybe this sect is for real, I doubt it. <hr></blockquote><!--EZCODE QUOTE END--><br><br>The ayahuasca churches are a recent phenomenon, but they are definitely "real." <p></p><i></i>

Profpan - thanks, always good to keep an open mind. Rick Ross has some darker aspects of this "church" he is usual pretty reliable. <br>MDMA can be useful, but for regular users it proves to be disasterous, as any other drug in the streets. just this months two israeli ladies dropped dead for some reason from using it with alcohol, but there are other factors, as addiction and serious bone/teeth damage, recorded and known. What I certainly oppose are the experiments which were exposed in ISrael, using mentally ill inpatient (with no capacity to grant consent), these were experiments that were prohibited in the USA, and so they found some hell hole hospital (beer sheva psychiatric hospital) where they ran those experiemnts and drove the patients into further trouble. <br>Generally, I admit, I have a conservative view on drugs. Including pot. I have seen what it did to people I know, and that was enough for me.<br>As for the ruling. I find it irresponsible, and the issue of this drink and the chemical DMT is in debate in europe, in most cases it is prohibitted, because DMT is dangerous and used also in rape drugs etc. But some people call me narrow minded on the issue of drugs, and that includes legal mind-messing drugs, I am against it, unless really needed. <p></p><i></i>

<i>DMT is dangerous and used also in rape drugs etc. </i><br><br>That doesn't sound accurate- for several reasons, but mostly because DMT is such a short-lived experience. Also, it doesn't physically incapacitate, in terms of rendering one limp and pliant. A person on DMT would be fully capable of going ballistic and scratching your face out. <p></p><i></i>

i might be confusing it with another acronym. in the meantime<br>wiki<br><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK START--><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyltryptamine</a><!--EZCODE AUTOLINK END--><br><br>Edit- correction, date rape drug is GHB <br>the DMT is called "<!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START--><span style="text-decoration:underline"><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>the alien abduction</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--></span><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END-->" drug, as it creates this experience in 20% users, according to one website. Check the websites on streetdrugs. that's even more disturbing.<br><br>--<br>I know some people really don't see the problem in ANY drug, ingested voluntarily. I don't share that view, and I see what drugs did to Israel. If you are educated and mature you can ingest drugs with care, but kids and people with real problems are the ones who fall for it and die. The same goes for the overuse in psychiatric drugs, I think it is disastrous. So when a psychology prof. goes public and virtually markets DMT as advisable, as a spiritual must (and he didn't mention the "religion" that accompanies it), this is very irresponsible. Religious use is one thing (I am totally FOR IT, Jews do it with wine and the high priests used hallucinogenics; Native Americans use their peyote etc. in ceremonies), and so if that brazilian group was serious, it wouldn't bother me, but reading who they are, the people in NM, they don't appear as religious. they appear as rich, mostly white american yuppies, who go on a trip, and are looking for a legal loophole. .( <!--EZCODE UNDERLINE START--><span style="text-decoration:underline"><!--EZCODE BOLD START--><strong>I didn't mean to offend anyone who truly belongs to that caste, and if I did I take my words back.).</strong><!--EZCODE BOLD END--></span><!--EZCODE UNDERLINE END--><br> <p></p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=havanagila>havanagila</A> at: 2/22/06 3:47 pm<br></i>