[HN Gopher] Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new...
___________________________________________________________________
Shifting views about psychedelic drugs require a new category for
them
Author : benbreen
Score : 74 points
Date : 2023-06-29 17:54 UTC (2 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.washingtonpost.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.washingtonpost.com)
| TaylorAlexander wrote:
| About two months ago I was at a festival with friends and a I had
| a psychedelic experience. What's funny is earlier that day I had
| just told my friends "I know this sounds boring but I don't like
| dancing that much." Then while I was tripping I found that I was
| really enjoying the dancing. I felt like I was tapping in to a
| part of myself that had been dormant for a long time. I felt
| really confident and cool and sexy dancing to the music, and had
| a wonderful time. The thing about this is that in the subsequent
| weeks and to this day the confidence is still here. I have come
| to realize that the pandemic messed me up in ways that I hadn't
| even realized! I'm pretty in touch with myself - I go to therapy
| once a week but I'm usually talking about work and relationships.
| Dating in particular felt hard and I didn't know why, but since
| rediscovering my confidence dating has been going very well for
| me. Now when I talk to people I like I'm finding them asking me
| for my number or asking me out. I had a cute friend I've been
| crushing on for a while nervously ask me for a kiss!
|
| The point is that there are parts of us that are nearly
| accessible but our brain pathways need a little temporary
| loosening to strengthen some of those pathways, and psychedelics
| can do just that. They're no panacea and it takes some experience
| to really gain the desired effects. But they can also just be
| enjoyable and they're generally harmless, and it's such a shame
| that they're so stigmatized. I live in Oakland where they have
| decriminalized mushrooms and I'd like to see more
| decriminalization and ultimately legalization of mushrooms, LSD,
| and more.
|
| I have a friend who has been doing legal ketamine therapy under
| the care of their therapist and it has helped them realize the
| ways in which they had been hanging on to old relationships which
| were holding them back. They're finding out how to advocate for
| their own needs and they're much happier for it.
|
| We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and psychedelic
| therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could use to help
| people find themselves.
|
| Though I should say, probably because I just listened to a bunch
| of Noam Chomsky last night, that allowing broad swaths of the
| population to become more deeply in touch with their core needs
| threatens the status quo and current power dynamics. Honestly tho
| the structures of power are so solidified I'm not sure there's
| really much actual risk to them from drug legalization.
| ernst_klim wrote:
| I don't think there's any kind of global anti-drug conspiracy.
|
| Anti-drug fear mongering is a byproduct of few factors:
| ignorance (people confuse crack, LSD and say MDMA, labeling
| everything as drug), valid fears (LSD was legal while being
| underresearched and that lead to few terrible events), self-
| propelled drugwar cycle (drugs caused wave of fear, became a
| good target for politicians, that caused even more fear
| mongering and the cycle is closed), and valid historical
| concerns (many drugs are very bad and caused pretty terrible
| historical precedents like opium abuse in China).
|
| People are getting more educated on drugs these days, and more
| questions arise in the society regarding if certain kinds of
| drugs like LSD should be more available. Though it would be a
| long road.
| chiefalchemist wrote:
| > We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and
| psychedelic therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could
| use to help people find themselves.
|
| While I agree with everything else you said, this bit concerns
| me. I'm certainly in favor of using these tools to help anyone
| who needs help. But maybe we should start with a mirror, and
| collectively ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?"
|
| These psychedelics can help resolve the symptoms, but what are
| we going to collectively take to address the root problem(s)?
| And when?
| golergka wrote:
| > But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively
| ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?"
|
| Because that's the default.. People haven't evolved to be
| happy; we have evolved to barely survive to have kids and
| care for them so that a few become adults. Being happy is the
| exception, you should ask how anyone manages that.
| nemo44x wrote:
| I sort of agree with this. We've been marketed to that we
| should be happy and that buying <thing|experience> will
| make us happy. These <things|experiences> will bring
| pleasure but they don't create meaningful happiness. As if
| pleasure and happiness are the same thing. But they are
| often conflated.
|
| I can't tell or teach people "how to be happy". I'm not
| even sure that's possible or if it's something everyone can
| do or would really want to. But I do know that being hooked
| on a treadmill of pleasurable experiences isn't it.
| newacct3 wrote:
| > But maybe we should start with a mirror, and collectively
| ask, "Why are so many so unhappy?"
|
| How is this even supposed to be determined? It isn't like you
| can test for happiness like you test a pool for Ph levels.
| Assuming we can is optimistic
| dr_dshiv wrote:
| Thanks for sharing. Great example.
| slibhb wrote:
| For everyone who has an experience like you, there's someone
| like this guy: https://www.ecstaticintegration.org/p/dmt-
| derealization-and-...
|
| Anyway, since you were dancing, I assume you used MDMA which is
| much "less psychedelic" than acid or DMT (and much more of a
| stimulant). There's also more potential for misuse and
| addiction. Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by
| the way.
|
| It seems clear that psychedelics are going mainstream and,
| unlike the 60s and 70s, they will be legal in some places. I'm
| not convinced that ths will be a net good, partly because it's
| not clear that it was a net good in the 60s and 70s, but we'll
| see.
| knightofmars wrote:
| You are implying a 1:1 relationship with good experiences and
| bad experiences. That's not how drugs work. It is important
| to know the actual reality of this type of ratio so that
| individuals who are looking to use a drug of this nature can
| be well informed.
| slibhb wrote:
| No, I'm positing a 1:1 relationship between "holy shit I am
| a new person" in a good way and "holy shit I am a new
| person" in a bad way.
|
| That's not the same as good/bad experiences.
| marcod wrote:
| > Ketamine, too, turns out to be quite addictive by the way.
|
| https://medicalxpress.com/news/2022-07-ketamine-
| addiction.ht...
|
| I have done the medically assisted Ketamine trips. No sign
| them being addicting to me whatsoever. It didn't do a whole
| lot for me, but some of the other peeps in my cohort had
| amazing results working through old grief.
| slibhb wrote:
| It's well known that ketamine is addictive. Just google
| "ketamine addiction". It's an effective antidepressant for
| many people but you can't take it long term because
| tolerance develops quickly.
| golergka wrote:
| There's nothing stopping you from dancing on acid or shrooms.
| In fact, that's the whole point of psytrance.
| jagaerglad wrote:
| I have been struggling a lot with dating. Despite being a quite
| social, and often popular guy to be around, there has been some
| block/hump that always stood in the way of dating. Funnily
| enough it struck me some weeks ago that I probably have to go
| on a psychadelic trip to rewire my brain to be able to show my
| interest romatically to others. What I'm scared of is the
| possibility of it having some other undesired effect though
|
| I had a similar experience with dancing though. Thought I hated
| it, and I always had to force myself to do it, until I started
| (modestly) drinking alcohol. My body would dance for me and I
| would enjoy it. The effect more or less stuck around and I even
| genuinely have days of more confidence after a night with
| alcohol.
|
| All of this is mildly depressing though. It feels as though we
| are just our brains (maybe obviously), but just that we're the
| strange effects of the functions of a non-magical/soul-less
| organ in our heads primarily just meant to steer our bodies.
| Those thoughts make drugs both existentially liberating but at
| the same time also "imprisoning" for me
| [deleted]
| kortex wrote:
| > All of this is mildly depressing though. It feels as though
| we are just our brains (maybe obviously), but just that we're
| the strange effects of the functions of a non-magical/soul-
| less organ in our heads primarily just meant to steer our
| bodies. Those thoughts make drugs both existentially
| liberating but at the same time also "imprisoning" for me
|
| That is certainly one way of looking at things, and one of
| the more frequent perspectives I harbor. But I've also had
| enough trips down the rabbit hole to realize there's more to
| it than that. _Way_ more to it.
|
| We are definitely strange effects for sure. We are haunted
| atoms that formed in the core of a dying star. Weird, right?
| If you find that worldview imprisoning, I encourage you to
| question it. Magic is often simply what you need it to be, no
| need to get hung up on whether magic is "real" or not,
| because that doesn't actually matter.
|
| Check out Discordianism if you haven't already. It's kinda
| like hot swapping reality tunnels. No need to commit to one
| ontology all the time :).
| mahathu wrote:
| >I have been struggling a lot with dating.
|
| >I probably have to go on a psychadelic trip to rewire my
| brain to be able to show my interest romatically to others
|
| u wot m8
| __MatrixMan__ wrote:
| I totally agree that:
|
| > We've got a crisis of unhappiness in this country and
| psychedelic therapies are absolutely a powerful tool we could
| use to help people find themselves.
|
| But our blues haven't appeared from nowhere. We have
| significant cultural institutions that function primarily by
| dividing the populace against itself. Getting healthy likely
| means waking up to the fact that we're under attack and doing
| something other than "self care" about it.
|
| So I disagree with:
|
| > the structures of power are so solidified I'm not sure
| there's really much actual risk to them from drug legalization.
|
| They seem pretty shaky to me. Which is for the best. Being
| powerful _should_ come with a fear of the people you have power
| over. If you 're one weird trip away from a revolution then
| it's probably time to start treating your people better.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| >Getting healthy likely means waking up to the fact that
| we're under attack and doing something other than "self care"
| about it.
|
| I pretty strongly disagree with this sentiment. The vast
| majority of misery in this country is self-inflicted from
| buying into a worldview and lifestyle that is inherently
| unfulfilling. The self care of conferring oneself from that
| mindset goes a long way.
| webnrrd2k wrote:
| There is some history in the US with regards to power
| structures, getting needs met, and psychedelics. Mostly in
| the late 60's and early 70's there was a big counterculture
| movement that focused on exactly those things, and the power
| structures at the time were certainly threatened, and created
| things like cointelpro.
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO#:~:text=Overall%2.
| ...
| coder4life wrote:
| https://archive.is/XCkZD
| triyambakam wrote:
| > I have met others who only stand and look at you blankly, who
| have lost their desire, even their self-respect. They have lost,
| shall we say, the structure through which their mind force
| previously flowed, and it has not been replaced.
|
| > What happens to a Hindu yogi when he enters a superconscious
| state of bliss in which his mind opens up, turns to light, and he
| sees the world revolving below the state of his suspended
| consciousness? He has arrived at this state through many years of
| practice in concentration, meditation and contemplation, many
| years of building strong nerve fiber. But in a momentary high on
| LSD or any other powerful psychedelic, such as mushrooms, peyote,
| ecstasy or DMT, the nerve structure is strained, in a sense which
| we can best describe as abnormal, to allow the individual to
| reach this exalted consciousness. Coming out of it, the result is
| often a kind of shock in which the person has a great difficulty
| in readjusting to any kind of normal routine. [1]
|
| [1] Living with Siva, 79
| jokoon wrote:
| Whatever you do please don't advocate to replace ssri with
| psychedelics. Listen to a doctor or psychiatrist, just like it
| was for vaccines.
|
| And avoid personal anecdote, they have little value compared to
| what a doctor says.
|
| Thanks in advance.
| bigyikes wrote:
| I agree with your main point, but the bit about anecdotes is
| tricky. We live in a society where research and information on
| these substances has been suppressed. As a result, anecdotes,
| to a large degree, are all we have.
|
| This is gradually changing as we see new studies emerging with
| the relaxation of regulation. However, the picture the data
| paint is still quite limited compared to the wealth of personal
| experiences that have been recorded over the decades.
| yieldcrv wrote:
| I agree, I sometimes run into people - usually corporate
| employee, college educated people - "straight edge" people that
| are just getting around to experimenting with psychadelics and
| say things like "I'm not really into _drugs_ " and treading
| carefully for that reason
|
| Its a smart approach
|
| But being unable to distinguish between "drugs" is sad
|
| Its a categorization problem, its a anti drug education problem
| that also categorized everything together and conflated
| everything with wild rumors. Its a supply chain problem as
| substances do need to be tested to ensure you are only getting
| your psychedelic.
| benbreen wrote:
| I'm the author of the OP. Happy to talk more about the history of
| psychedelics.
|
| I also wanted to flag that if anyone is interested in some of the
| historical sources I cite here (such as the Jesuit talking about
| ayahuasca in the 18th century) I go into more detail in this
| journal article, which is open access:
| https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/historical-journal/a...
| ImAnAmateur wrote:
| I've got a question for you. Some people are very carefree with
| their use of psychoactive drugs. I'd say nearly everyone I've
| ever seen post online about trying mushrooms, LSD, etc. has
| done it for fun (or the experience) instead of spiritual,
| psychological, or medicinal reasons.
|
| What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to have a
| friend hurt themselves.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > What risks are they exposing themselves to? I'd hate to
| have a friend hurt themselves.
|
| Have your friend research Erowid, a place where people have
| posted all possible sorts of information about mind-altering
| substances and their risks.
| ImAnAmateur wrote:
| That is a good source. I've forgotten about that site for
| years. Thank you.
| colecut wrote:
| I would imagine the same risks as someone doing it for
| spiritual, psychological, or medicinal reasons
| operatingthetan wrote:
| Right, I'm confused what they are trying to accomplish
| gatekeeping others intent.
| ImAnAmateur wrote:
| How is that gatekeeping? I'm trying to ask about what the
| risks are for people who take it at a party or a festival
| or at home for fun.
|
| >Psychedelics like psilocybin have a remarkably benign
| safety profile relative to other Schedule One drugs, not
| to mention very different social, cultural and historical
| roles. Lumping psychedelics together with powerful
| opioids like fentanyl misdirects resources, diminishes
| buy-in from the public and undercuts the legitimacy of
| federal drug laws.
|
| The author of the article does not specify what risks
| these drugs have. Simply that they are relatively less
| dangerous than synthetic opioids.
| otherme123 wrote:
| There are some studies, and LSD is quite safe. Way safer
| than alcohol, for example.
|
| But being on a very tight Schedule I (like MDMA, also
| quite safe), worse even than morphine, good luck
| researching the risks. It's a catch 22: we don't know the
| risks, so we ban studies about the substance. We don't
| have studies about the risks, so we cannot unban it.
|
| When LSD was liberally consumed (1960's), there were
| almost no deaths related to it. And the very few reports
| are suspiciously "suicides" or "near suicides", which all
| of them seems to be accidents while tripping, like any
| drunk commit everyday (and not like LSD makes you
| suicidal by choice). More serious reports have found
| _zero_ deaths directly linked with LSD toxicity:
| https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29408722/
| umanwizard wrote:
| Sadly, "LSD is safe" doesn't mean "things sold as LSD and
| that feel similar to LSD are safe". Lots of research
| chemical LSD analogues feel very similar to LSD but are
| dangerous. Just wanted to leave that disclaimer in case
| anyone on the fence about trying it reads this. Be
| careful.
| emptysongglass wrote:
| MDMA is not quite safe. We have decades of research to
| prove otherwise now. r/DrugNerds have been putting out
| study after study pointing this out. The protocols
| required and safety measures for how often to dose are
| not what folks are going to be doing generally. It is
| neurotoxic.
|
| LSD on the other hand, yes quite safe (and even good) for
| _your brain_ , unless you're prone to mental illness or
| currently suffering from mental illness.
| nemosaltat wrote:
| Since we're speculating. I would imagine like just about
| all human experience, framing, priming and setting matter
| quite a lot.
| renewiltord wrote:
| Given that, it seems like fun and pleasure are probably
| safer than medicinal.
| bozhark wrote:
| Recreational will happen despite the restrictions. Why
| not tax it an apply the funds where socially needed?
| colecut wrote:
| I agree that set and setting are huge factors in your
| psychedelics experience. I am 'speculating' but also do
| have a lot of experience in a variety of psychedelics.
|
| I'm not sure where "intent" falls on that spectrum. The
| vast majority of my experiences have been "for fun" or
| "for the experience" at music festivals, concerts, or at
| home..
|
| I have also taken ayahuasca and changa with a shaman. I
| was doing it "for the experience", but how is that
| different from someone else who was in the same room as
| me doing it an attempt to treat depression or anxiety?
| How would the risks be different?
|
| Being an anxious or depressed person in general may
| increase risk factors of negative experience. This is
| still not related to intent.
| bozhark wrote:
| Anxious or depressed people benefit from the experience
| more so than someone of speculatively sound mind.
| colecut wrote:
| I think by the nature of their position, they have more
| to potentially benefit.
|
| But it's totally possible for an anxious person to end up
| worse.
| [deleted]
| coderintherye wrote:
| Erowid is a great resource for these sorts of questions:
| https://erowid.org
|
| In fact they have an answer specific to your question on
| mushrooms: https://www.erowid.org/ask/ask.php?ID=1606
|
| In short, there is very little risk but whether or not
| someone should choose to take something should still be an
| informed choice. As far as risk to life, there's been few or
| no reported deaths purely due to ingesting psilocybin.
| However, there are small risks around operating heavy
| machinery (e.g. driving) after as well as small risks around
| ensuring you are actually ingesting a safe psilocybe mushroom
| as opposed to a different toxic mushroom.
| s1artibartfast wrote:
| I think there's a lot more nuance than even that. Many
| psychedelics can trigger or exacerbate undesirable mental
| conditions that persist for the rest of your life.
| bozhark wrote:
| Nah, they don't cause undesirable mental conditions that
| persist for the rest of your life. Your "trip" is about
| 6-8 hours on a typical 3.5g dose.
| kayodelycaon wrote:
| That's not what they said, psychedelics can trigger
| preexisting vulnerabilities to mental disorders. A
| psychotic break can do enormous damage.
| bozhark wrote:
| Caffeine is a psychoactive drug.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| As far as the cover photo, I don't think ketamine (a
| replacement for PCP) and MDMA (an analogue of drugs like
| Adderall (amphetamine class)) qualify as psychedelics. It makes
| more sense to classify psychedelics as 5-HT2A partial agonists,
| meaning LSD, psilocybin, DMT and analogs like bufotenin, and
| mescaline, from a pharmacological perspective. See:
|
| (LSD, mescaline, psilocybin)
| https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5756147/
|
| (DMT) https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9768567/
|
| Ketamine and MDMA in contrast act through different pathways,
| the former being a dissociative anaesthetic acting via the NMDA
| receptor, and MDMA acting as much via dopamine receptors
| (though unlike other amphetamines, it also increases serotonin
| levels significantly). In popular use, these are so-called
| party drugs, and users often have no idea what they're taking
| (amphetamines and ketamine have been commonly sold as MDMA). I
| don't know why they've been lumped in with true psychedelics so
| frequently, but they're much more likely to be used
| recreationally as a replacement for alcohol, cocaine, etc.
|
| Secondly, I think naive users should be aware that the true
| psychedelics are indeed dangerous if not treated with caution
| and respect, in the same sense that a motorcycle is. Drive a
| motorcycle too fast, bad things happen. Ingesting a large
| amount of psychedelics is similar. There are at least two
| particular dangers: immediately, a psychedelic overdose leaves
| the user ambulatory, so they can end up falling off cliffs,
| walking into traffic, and otherwise oblivious to dangerous
| situations. Secondly, some people have traumatic responses to
| very large doses of psychedelics that can take months to
| recover from (dissociation from reality, paranoia, etc.).
|
| Still, I think these drugs can be immensely beneficial and
| people should be able to access them, much as people should be
| able to drive motorcycles. Perhaps one solution is that they
| should only be supplied in low dosage packaging (aka microdose
| amounts), such that people don't accidentally take large doses
| with the common unfortunate consequences. It's generally not a
| good idea to think of them as 'recreational' either, although
| many people are going to use them that way.
| jokowueu wrote:
| What a weird thing to gatekeep.
|
| What you have mentioned are called classic psychadelics .
|
| Something being a psychadelic has nothing to do with it's
| pathways.
|
| Let's take a look at the definition .
|
| Psychedelics are a subclass of hallucinogenic drugs whose
| primary effect is to trigger non-ordinary mental states
| (known as psychedelic experiences or psychedelic "trips")
| and/or an apparent expansion of consciousness
|
| This fits ketamine perfectly, I have tried many substances
| and ketamine is one of the most powerful substances I have
| tried .
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| Just because they act through different pathways doesn't mean
| they're not psychedelics.
|
| They're not Tryptamines, sure, but they _are_ psychedelic
| even if they act differently from "classical hallucinogens"
| (to borrow a similarly strange term I've read in scientific
| literature).
|
| Salvia is also not a 5-HT2A agonist, does that mean it's not
| a psychedelic?
| cies wrote:
| The categories law has for drugs suck, psychs dont need a new
| category, they simply need to be unscheduled. Like daffodils.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| I'm curious why you're dissatisfied with the organically
| arrived at "folk taxonomic" category: _psychedelics_. Are you
| looking for a new classification in law?
| JadeNB wrote:
| The article specifically refers not just to the cultural, but
| also to the legal and medical, thinking about psychedelics.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| From the article:
|
| > this new landscape demands more than just new laws. It
| also requires a new category for psychedelics. Are they
| recreational drugs? Are they medicines? Are they religious
| sacraments?
|
| I'm asking why we can't just answer this question with
| "They are psychedelics".
| crazygringo wrote:
| Because legally, that's as meaningful as saying "they are
| quooquaquams".
|
| The entire point of categorizing them is to answer
| questions around:
|
| - Should they be sold to take recreationally, like
| tobacco and alcohol? Should there be limits, like tobacco
| packaging and taxes, or rules similar to drunk driving?
|
| - Or should they only be prescribed by doctors for mental
| health reasons, and not allowed recreationally or in
| religious ceremonies?
|
| - Or should there be exceptions for certain religious
| ceremonies as well? Is this open to anyone (so Catholics
| can invent a ceremony) or only ones that have
| traditionally used it? Does it require licensing or
| authorization?
|
| By categorizing them, we come to answers on these
| questions. If they fit into existing categories, we don't
| have to write many new laws except to state the
| categories. Or if we decide they don't fit into existing
| categories, we come up with a new category with its own
| set of answers and new laws to write, but part of this
| whole process is determining if that's necessary or not.
| And even if it is, the name of the label may not be
| "psychadelics" because we realize there's another set of
| non-psychadelic compounds that make sense to be included
| as well (e.g. empathogens like MDMA).
| PragmaticPulp wrote:
| > Because legally, that's as meaningful as saying "they
| are quooquaquams".
|
| I don't see how this is at all equivalent, given that
| "psychedelics" is a well-known term that can be found
| throughout decades of literature and that gibberish word
| you just made up has no attached meaning.
|
| If you're equating random gibberish words to well-known
| words in literature then why does anything have any
| meaning? Why would a new word have meaning?
|
| Regardless, the laws generally don't refer to
| "psychedelics", they refer to specific chemicals by their
| name. There are numerous compounds that would be
| considered psychedelics that are, nevertheless, not
| illegal because they're not covered by any laws
| (including analog acts)
| crazygringo wrote:
| Because the term found through decades of literature
| isn't attached to legal categories, as I explained. It's
| the same way the term "drug" doesn't have much legal
| distinction, as I can't think of any legal commonalities
| spanning coffee, alcohol, Lipitor, cannabis, and heroin.
|
| > _Regardless, the laws... refer to specific chemicals by
| their name._
|
| Not directly, very often. I doubt there's any specific
| law around Lipitor. Rather, drugs are grouped into
| categories and then the laws that permit or restrict them
| are mostly around those categories. Otherwise it would
| all be incredibly redundant (with exceptions for certain
| incredibly common drugs like alcohol). And the question
| here is how to categorize pyschadelics for legal
| purposes. And saying that we just call them psychadelics
| answers as many legal questions as saying we call them
| quooquaquams -- i.e. zero.
| ttctciyf wrote:
| So, short answer, "yes a legal category is what's being
| asked for".
|
| Got it.
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Is there a downside to totally deregulating them?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| Is there a downside to deregulating them? (Like
| supplements.)
| bozhark wrote:
| There is not licensing or authorization for religion.
|
| There is no application for approval required to be a
| "church", ie: religion.
|
| Thinking there could be some "authority" for a religious
| institution's practices is beyond measure.
| crazygringo wrote:
| There absolutely is both for tax purposes as well as for
| legal religious exemptions.
|
| You can't just arbitrarily call your house a church to
| avoid paying property taxes. Government authorities have
| to make decisions all the time over what they deem to be
| a legitimate religious organization.
|
| You obviously don't need a license or authorization to
| engage in otherwise legal religious practice, but as soon
| as you want legal exemptions, the government most
| certainly has a say. And the ritual consumption of
| otherwise illegal drugs couldn't be a more perfect
| example.
| [deleted]
| refurb wrote:
| Many drugs are already all of those.
|
| Opioids are both recreational drugs and medicines.
|
| Peyote is a recreational drug and religious sacrament.
|
| This seems to ignore this fact.
| jimbob45 wrote:
| Do you have any data on the level of criminality of those on
| psychedelics versus a control group?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-01 23:00 UTC)