We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Cannabis Act 022240
Details
Submitted by[?]: Liberal Democrat Party
Status[?]: defeated
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: January 2243
Description[?]:
| To rid the country of this terrible drug. This doesnt help a patient in any way.. it makes it worse as cannabis IS addictive. |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change The use of cannabis for medicinal purposes.
Old value:: Cannabis is legal as a sedative for patients in pain.
Current: Cannabis is legal as a sedative for patients in pain.
Proposed: The medicinal use of cannabis is illegal.
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 01:00:48, June 13, 2006 CET | From | Segue Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | Yes cannabis is addictive. But so is heroin (morphine), Valium, anti-depressants, Ritalin. In fact virtually any pharmaceutical substance is addictive if overused or used unnecessarily. If we were to stop prescribing meds on those grounds, doctors would be very limited in what they can give their patients. And that is a key point: It is doctors who should decide who gets access to treatments, not MPs, not bureaucrats, not police. We trust our medical personnel to obey their hippocratic oath, and we have a system to deal with them when they don't, see previous Bills on torts. The use of any drug for any patient should be a clinical matter between themselves and their family. For the vast majority of the population, cannabis has a purely harmful effect. However for the mercifully small proportion of people suffering such diseases as MS and Motor Neurone Disease, the use of marijuana can help alleviate their suffering and control their agony. Surely we must afford every opportunity to alleviate their suffering. Whether it is appropriate or not for a particular patient is not a matter for this House. We notice another LDP bill on the table concerns euthanasia. By denying patients the relief from pain that marijuana does deliver in some cases, we could be driving more terminally ill people towards euthanasia. The House would do well to bear this in mind when voting on this measure. The LDP seek to rid the nation of 'this terrible drug'. This Bill will not accomplish that. It will have a negligible effect on lowering cannabis use, if indeed it has any effect at all. Meanwhile, suffering will be exacerbated for some of Vanuku's most wretched. We implore the house to vote against. To truly rid Vanuku of the scourge of drugs, we need to combat drug dealers, ensure that young citizens have positive routes through their youth that are free of drugs, and ensure that drug users are rehabilitated and treated for addiction as well as punished. That would be a prescription we could support. |
| Date | 01:40:42, June 13, 2006 CET | From | Social Devolutionist | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | I am prepared to accept that cannabis is addictive, but as the SDA points that is hardly a novelty when discussing drugs. As for ridding the nation of it, this act will not see that happen. It may rid paliative wards and doctors surgerys of the drug, but it will not rid the nation. It will still be bought by those who seek it, sold by those who seek to profit from it, and grown by those who seek both. It is not for the LDP or any of us in this parliament to comment on whther this drug helps patients, we are not patients. Does it heal them? no. But there are many ways to help beyond healing, and the reduction of pain is one of them. It is called palliative care and a civil society provides it to its dying citizens. Unfortunately it appears our presidents party has decided to wage war on the dying and the infirm, those in pain or dying are perhaps unlikley to vote in 2243, so need not be protected. How else can one explain that on one hand he wants to end a patients right to euthanasia thereby keeping them alive and in pain, but at the same time wants to deny them a possible source of pain relief. Dealing with fatal conditions is about choice for the patient. The choice to use cannabis in a controlled way, overseen by a doctor, as with the choice to choose euthanasia, must remain. |
| Date | 12:26:08, June 13, 2006 CET | From | dAda rEvoluTion | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | no support. |
| Date | 13:59:51, June 13, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | Well for a start look at the medicianl facts behind the medicinal use of cannabis. It is not proven to help a patient in any way shape or form. That is medical fact and also the reason for it not being medically avaliable world wide. Doctors dont belieev that cannabis offers any greater help than morephin as you have stated. Cannabis and morphine dont have the same addicitve properties. Cannabis is twice as addictive than morephine, and smoking cannabis which is the only way it can be taken correctly to get the most benefit from the drug, only causes further problems down the track. Smoking, whether it be cigarettes or cannabis both cause lung cancer.. so why not encourage our sick to rid themselves of one condition only to give themselves another.. and you say you';re trying to help the sick. What a joke! |
| Date | 14:06:34, June 13, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | The President also wishes to point out that former President Josiah Bartlet (the original President Bartlet) was a suffer of Multiple Sclerosis and indeed was the cause of his death. The late President was against the use of cannabis also as it didnt offer any greater value to his quality of living that any of the other drugs he could be prescrived (including the most common MS drug Bater Seron) could offer him. The President acknowledged that allowing more drugs into the community was more detremental to the community than it did good. The drugs we have now ease the pain as much as cannabis can, and pose less of a risk to the patient and to the public, and that is why the LDP and the late President Bartlet are all in favour of this bill. |
| Date | 15:26:49, June 13, 2006 CET | From | Segue Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | OK, the late President may not have found cannabis to have been beneficial, but thats not to say other people would not. Moreover, respected as he undoubtably is, he is not infallible. It is a cheap political trick to invoke the name of one who lived many years before this debate to bolster your case. We do not deny cannabis has its side effects, especially those associated with smoking. We would say that this is not an issue when dealing with the already terminally ill, with a hosrt time left live, the risk of developing long term health problems is not such an issue. You stated that cannabis is twice as addictive as heroin, that is misleading. Both drugs are addictive in different ways, heroin is a physical addiction whereas cannabis is a psychological one. The addictive effect would be different for different individuals, in the majority of cases however morphine presents a greater risk of immediate dependecy. The reason medicinal cannabis use is rare worldwide is not because opinion is divided on its efficacy - that applies to plenty of therapies that are widely used. The reason is one of simple politics. By cracking down on medical uses, governments have a cheap and easy way to appear hard on drugs without having to go to so much trouble to crack down on real drug abusers. Let us avoid more unnecessary government interference. Let us allow doctors the clinical freedom to carry out their work effectively. Let us promote palliative care for some of Vanuku's most wretched. Let us reject this proposal. |
| Date | 17:28:43, June 14, 2006 CET | From | dAda rEvoluTion | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | the use of cannabis in medical treatment must be guaranteed by a psychologic care and attention as the DR stated in the VSLA 3 bill. Anyway the dAda rEvoluTion will propose to legalize Cannabis for medicinal use or not. |
| Date | 13:58:03, June 15, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | You state and I quote: "We would say that this is not an issue when dealing with the already terminally ill" Well unfortunately this bill covers all people who are being treated in hospital not just the terminal patients. And to say that we dont care what people put into there system if there terminally ill is an insult, especially if as you have acknowledged it will make you sicker. Why in good conscience would you give a drug to someone that will make them sicker.. that doesnt sould like health care.. health care implies looking after the sick.. that isnt looking after the sick. And to say that Governments only do it so they look tough in drugs is crap. If governments only did something to look tough than explain to me why America, the only "superpower" left in the wrold hasnt wiped everyone else off the face of the earth? I mean thats showing you strong on defence. Governments dont act or rather not act on an issue to look strong. Believe it or not Governments do act in what they believe to be the nations best interests. An example is Canada enacting Civil Unions. The vast majority (well over 50% of Canadians) are agaisnt Civil Unions. Governments dont act just on the results of polls, they act on what they feel to be essentially the best interests of the people of the country. A study rescently conducted in the United States of America shows that cannabis is twice as addictive as regualr drugs to treat patients (which would include morephine) and that the risks of using cannabis for medicinal purposes do not in anyone equate to the benefits. If anybody wishes for me to send them a link to the finsings I am happy to. The LDP are as always looking after the best interests of the citizens of Vanuku, and to hell with the poll results as dAda and other parties have suggested. The people will realise what is good for them. If anybody wants to check another example try Australia at the moment and there Industrial Relations laws. Unions went up in arms that exployees were losing rights, yet employees wages have gone up by minimum 3.5% and unemployement has dropped. The reason I mention this is because polls and popularity dont always show the true indictaion of whether something was successful or not |
| Date | 11:24:29, June 16, 2006 CET | From | Segue Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | I'm not sure whether the LDP really understand what doctors do in hospital. They don't go around prescribing new drugs to all patients wily-nilly, they are not going to start using marijuana routinely where it is not called for. If the medical evidence really is so strong against marijuana use, then doctors will not use it, except in the most desperate cases. Of course we care what the terminally ill have in their system, and moreover doctors care too. We feel however that there is not point considering long term repercussions of treatments and therapies for the terminally ill when they, their families and their doctors know that they have likely not got much longer on this earth. With all drugs there is a trade-off between side effects and benefits, that is one of the reasons why doctors and pharmacologists have such thorough training. We do not expect cannabis use to become widespread in our hospitals following the passage of this bill, we may however see more of it used in our hospices, to better aid palliative care. Incidentally, this may reduce the attractions of euthanasia. Of course governments want to look tough on drugs, because drugs and the crime associated with it is one of the things their citizens fear most. Unfortunately, it is the politics of fear that dominate drugs policy. Now here's the good bit..... Why hasn't America nuked everyone else? Well firstly, they need the rest of the world. They need resources and trade with the rest of the world, because no nation, especially one as vast and complex as the USA can exist in isolation. Secondly, the American people and most of the government would be revolted at the idea of the widespread destruction that such an act would cause. Americans are invariably sensitive to the areas that their forbears came from, hence the tacit support for the IRA shown by many previous administrations. Thirdly, American wouldn't actually find it that easy to wipe every other country off the map without affecting their environment with nuclear winter. And just using ground troops wouldn't be much good, look at the trouble they are having in Iraq! At the SDA, we do not support government by polls or government by focus group. After all statistics can say anything you want them to! That is also why we are skeptical of the studies that you cite as evidence in your speech - there are many European studies that lean more positively toward the medicinal use of marijuana. |
| Date | 12:01:05, June 16, 2006 CET | From | dAda rEvoluTion | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | OOC: this is a fictionnal game, we are role playing. References to real life should not be here. |
| Date | 15:39:51, June 16, 2006 CET | From | Liberal Democrat Party | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | OOC: I know exactly what happens inside a hosptial, having a kidney disease i have been there alot thanks. My statistics and reports are proven medical facts I offered the links if you were interested. And America dont need the rest of the world, if there is nobody inhabiting another continent they can take it for resources, they wouldnt even have to trade something for it.. And most americans are arrogant enough to not have a problem with blowing every other natrion up! |
| Date | 16:28:57, June 16, 2006 CET | From | Social Devolutionist | To | Debating the Cannabis Act 022240 |
| Message | the current law is to us cannabis as a sedative, if a particular and qualified doctor is of the view that it can be helpfully used as a sedative for a particular patient then we see no difficulty with that. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||
| yes | Total Seats: 113 | |||
| no | Total Seats: 178 | |||
| abstain | Total Seats: 269 |
| Random fact: Particracy has been running since 2005. Dorvik was Particracy's first nation, the Dorvik Social Democrats the first party and the International Greens the first Party Organisation. |
| Random quote: "Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite." - John Kenneth Galbraith |