https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/biden-administration-plans-reclassify-marijuana-easing-restrictions-na-rcna149424
Cannabis is currently classified along with drugs like heroin and LSD. The administration is expected to reschedule it into a category that includes Tylenol and steroids.
Plans sound great, but I'll be happy once it's actually reclassified. This is long overdue.
*descheduled entirely
There's no reason for this to be on the list at all, it's less harmful than beer and has actual medical uses. Alcohol has practically no medical use, kills thousands every year and leaves thousands more with life long debilitating health problems, but it's not even a controlled substance.
“The stuff they use to for sterilizing operating room… yeah, I’m pretty sure that’s okay mother.”
Prescription medications are scheduled. So medical uses isn't a reason to not schedule something.
Alcohol and tabacco were specifically excluded from the CSA. I'm pretty sure we'd need an act of congress to actually deschedule anything.
Alcohol makes more babies to keep the labor flowing so rich people can keep getting richer. Don't abort it, that's against religion. Just keep it alive until it can work. This is my tinfoil hat theory.
Agreed. We’ve been waiting on the DEA since HHS recommended schedule 3 in 2022. As soon as they make their formal assessment we can move forward.
Decriminalization requires congressional action. It’s currently a stalled bill in the Senate.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/4591/all-actions
I have a feeling he's waiting until closer to the election because the voters have such a short memory. Thats what I would have recommended if I worked for him lol.
"First, I must confess that over the last few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in the stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Council-er or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Do you have a source for that? As far as I can tell he supported decriminalization and allowing individual states to legalize but I don't see any sources where he supported full legalization.
The problem with a two party system - if you are politically engaged enough that Biden's stance on Israel is enough to change your vote, you probably also don't align with any of Trump's policies.
If you are a Democrat, your choices are:
America is not a democracy
Is no one going to acknowledge that a huge portion of the American electorate actually supports Israel's genocide? Part of living in a democracy is accepting that official policy reflects some mixture of the views of the electorate. If the US electorate is still mixed in its view of Israel then the official US policy should be mixed as well (which it is).
I will use my vote to push for an end to the genocide, the release of hostages, and a stable 2-state solution. But I will not abandon core democratic values just because I find myself in the minority.
If you vote for Trump over Israel, then you’re encouraging the eradication of the Palestinians.
That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t protest, but the options for Israel at the polls are support vs. encouragement.
Edit: It’s everything else that really differs, and should be taken more seriously.
If you vote for either of these candidates, you're encouraging the eradication of Palestine. We're currently funding and arming them in their pursuit of genocide.
Kinda funny to see this sentiment here right below the MLK Jr. quote calling out your exact point of view.
who constantly says "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I can't agree with your methods of direct action;" who paternalistically feels he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by the myth of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait until a "more convenient season."
As I wrote in a thread further down, discouraging people from voting is unethical disengagement. Trump’s base will vote for him even if he’s convicted of all 88 criminal charges, so your argument is falling on the ears of his opponents.
My point above is that the voting options are bad or worse for Palestinians. Worse also comes with harm to Ukrainians, Taiwanese, and Americans.
And Biden's base will vote for him regardless of the number of dead innocent men, women, and children killed with US funding and weapons, so that should cancel out any support from Trump's base.
Don't speak about ethics while demanding that we support slaughter.
There's no "bad or worse" here. If you vote for Biden or Trump, you're voting to make things worse for everyone.
Meaning as long as shitty Republicans are around, the Democratic party can count on your vote, right?
Do you not see how that gives them zero incentive to rock the boat or make any of the drastic changes that are sorely needed?
Do you think one day the Republican party is just going to evaporate leaving the Democrats to 'finally' start doing all that stuff they've been promising us in order to get elected?
I absolutely see the problem. That doesn’t mean I’m stupid or arrogant enough to sit out and make things worse.
You've misinterpreted this quote. This is about violent protest and Democrats unwillingness to engage or support them during trying to forcefully take back the rights.
However that's decidedly not the solution you have proposed. You've proposed inaction.
You've misinterpreted the quote here as King famously advocated for nonviolence, and at the time Democrats were the party of racists opposing integration and civil rights. In fact, this is so widely known that it now makes me question your motives here.
You may well ask: “Why direct action? Why sit ins, marches and so forth? Isn’t negotiation a better path?” You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and half truths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood. The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.
…We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct action campaign that was “well timed” in the view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word “Wait!” It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This “Wait” has almost always meant “Never.” We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that “justice too long delayed is justice denied.”
…I must make two honest confessions to you, my Christian and Jewish brothers. First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.
Actively choosing not to vote for one of two parties oppressing us and harming the nation is not "inaction." I'd argue that continuing the status quo is the very definition of inaction as not only are you doing nothing to change things, you're voting to perpetuate it.
Not voting does nothing. It doesn't show that you disagree, it doesn't prevent things from happening.
It is the ultimate inaction that agrees with the status quo. As fucked as the two party system we have is, not engaging with it still let's it perpetuate. You can't just wash your hands of the system with some dreams and wishes that inaction causes change. No one, and I truly fucking mean no one, is counting the people who don't vote.
If you want to cause change, then marches, protests, and disruptions are the tools. Not sitting idly by while others make their opinions heard. Until we have a voting reform, this is the tool we have. So work towards changing or replacing that tool with something better. But don't think not using it will somehow make a difference.
Edit: ah fuck, it's this right wing conservative account that keeps popping up. I should block you, but it's better to have opposing viewpoints and be able to respond than it is to allow you to speak without debate.
I sure hope that dude is a troll or a bot I really try to give most people benefit of the doubt but those might take the cake was the most insane takes I've ever heard.
Not voting does nothing. It doesn't show that you disagree, it doesn't prevent things from happening.
Voting for Biden didn't change anything in 2020 either as now in 2024, we're right back where we were in 2016 and 2020. Acting like we should just compromise our morals this time by supporting a guy funding and arming a genocide because 'the other guy is so much worse' is just a trap they've put you in because there is always going to be 'the worse other guy' so long as you help perpetuate this cycle.
Voting for Dems and Republicans is inaction as you're doing nothing but maintaining their positions of authority and maintaining the status quo. The only way this could be seen as 'action' is if your goal is keeping them in power.
No one, and I truly fucking mean no one, is counting the people who don't vote.
This is hilarious as the other guy replying just brought up the low Democratic turnout in 2016. People are absolutely counting this. The fewer people that support these two parties, the less power and influence they'll have. This opens up space for alternative parties, the same as it would if we were talking about businesses like Walmart and Target. You think they're behemoths that can just survive forever without any customers, but that isn't the case.
If you want to cause change, then marches, protests, and disruptions are the tools.
It's funny you bring that up because college students are currently doing that on campuses and college administrators along with Democratic and Republican leaders are siccing the police on them and disparaging them in the media.
Not sitting idly by while others make their opinions heard.
Are you not hearing my opinion here?
Until we have a voting reform
When will we have it? It sounds like you're passively waiting for it to arise by doing nothing other than electing the same people each election.
Edit: ah fuck, it's this right wing conservative account that keeps popping up.
🙄 typical misinformation. I challenge you to quote or link to even one right-wing viewpoint I've given at any point in time.
You're right upon submitting it to scrutiny of the source that had originally broke down that quote I believe I was incorrect about the part of the violent protests.
I'm very aware that it was about the Democrats lack of support for his movement and their inaction during that time. The failures of the democratic party are very clear.
I've never taken issue with what you're saying. You can repeat it as much as you want, not even telling you to delay action I wish you would take action right now. What you are encouraging though is absolutely inaction in every sense of the word.
To put your logic to the test please explain to me how the 20-year low of voter turnout for the Democrats in 2016 was able to meaningfully affect policy.
As I said before, both of these parties represent the status quo so there's no motivation for them to create any meaningful policy when they know they're still going to retain roughly 50% of the government at any given time.
Democrats have held a super majority multiple times over the years and the best we got from that was a Republican crafted healthcare plan that cemented the role of private insurers into law and ensured that there'd be zero political will to meddle with healthcare again for a very long time. That's the best we get from them even after being good little minions and ensuring they could control the whole show with our votes.
None of that addresses my critism of your point of view.
This is literally advocating for inaction. Not even local participation or groups they can support in the meantime to achieve your goals.
Well I think I've got as much out of this as I possibly can. At this junction I will agree to disagree.
I disagree. Trump said the problem with Israel’s actions in Gaza is that they keep recording it, and that they should just finish the job. Netanyahu is so fond of Trump, he inaugurated a town after him in Golan Heights.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/04/politics/trump-israel-comments/index.html
Biden should be acting on the genocide but he isn't and neither will Trump. The only two people capable of being in office in the next 4 years.
So pressure Congress, protest and do everything you can but in the meantime those two are nothing alike on most other issues and being a single issue voter has never made the system better.
Ah yeah, I forgot, being against democratic complicity in genocide is being a "single issue voter". I really need to get my priorities straight!
"Protest and do everything you can, just as along as you're not willing to back it up with action."
Let me ask this- Who do you suggest people vote for in order to not be supporting Israel?
Unfortunately, if you view a vote as being complicit you're complicit no matter what.
Because with the two party bias there are only two people capable of being in that office and not voting for either of them is still a vote in and of itself.
To be clear I don't care who you vote for but you need to accept the reality that you are choosing one of the two whether you mean to or not.
That's why Congress is the only realistic way we can pressure our political system to stop what's currently going on. The government doesn't stop at the president and plenty of our Congress supports it too which is what allows it to be the way it is.
Believe it or not US presidents have had blood on their hands for years. Even seemingly peaceful actions like the withdrawl from Afghanistan get blood everywhere. If elections could stop the bloodshed they would have.
The reality is voting does affect some things but its going to take far more than a vote to stop the killing.
Nobody here is stupid enough to fall for this bullshit... We all know how Trump feels about Israel, strongman leaders, and ethnostsates.
Trump takes office Jan. 20, and by the end of month, Netanyahu has a blank check to carry out his genocide.
But maybe that's what you want...
Netanyahu already has a blank check. They're sniping children in the streets you dolt.
Are you just simply incapable of imagining that but much much worse? Like seriously. I get it dude, what the Israeli government is doing is fucking monstrous. And anyone paying attention to anything knows that not re-electcing Biden will make the nightmare several orders of magnitudes more awful.
That's my whole point. Yeah it's bad right now, but it can and will get worse if Trump is elected. This is a fact.
In addition, this article is about his "plans" to do this. Not about his actions. Every election cycle around this time the incumbent president puts out articles about his (because there's been no her yet) "plans" to reclassify or otherwise loosen marijuana restrictions, but nothing ever happens.
Yep and then you'll get a bunch of people arguing "well the president doesn't really have much power to change things" in response to the criticism before immediately flipping to "well if [my candidate] doesn't win the next election, fire and brimstone will rain down from the sky and it will be hell on earth because the other guy will have limitless power!"
This is an argument coined by fascists that is now being used by party loyalists in both the Republican and Democratic parties because they want to maintain the status quo. This is what happens when you keep voting for one of two right-wing parties.
Yup, dangling the bait, same old bag of tricks to avoid just doing whatever they can to achieve the populist progressive policies they claim to support.