home

High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogenic Tea

By Jeralyn, Section Court Decisions
Posted on Tue Nov 01, 2005 at 04:55:24 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

The Supreme Court heard arguments today in the case of a New Mexican religious sect that wants to be allowed to drink a hallucinogenic tea at ceremonies twice a month.

The justices were critical of the Bush administration's position that drug laws forbidding such use trumps the right of the sect to practice its religion. John Roberts and Sandra Day O'Connor seemed particularly harsh on the Government. Nancy Hollander of Albuquerque argued for the sect.

The AP notes that Justice O'Connor may be gone from the bench by the time the vote is taken in the case. How would Alito rule? That's anybody's guess. But if it comes down to a 4-4 split, it could be important.

ScotusBlog has detailed coverage of the arguments and case. The case is Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal, 04-1084. TChris wrote about the case here.

< Jamie Olis Sentence Reversed | Trent Lott and Karl Rove: Karma Time >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogenic Tea | 14 comments (14 topical)
    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#1)
    by Peter G on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    As I'm sure you realize, TL, before Alito could vote on this or any other case being argued this fall -- assuming he is confirmed -- the case would have to be reargued.

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#2)
    by scarshapedstar on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Peter, I think you missed the point by the smallest of margins. Anyway, the Strict Constructionalists sure like to throw in a lot of asterisks in the Constitution, don't they? Evidently these tools believe that it actually reads Freedom to Worship*. New government, please. *Jesus

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#3)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    "For with what judgement ye judge, ye shall be judged." The splinter in the eye of the ayahuasceros is NOTHING compared to the roofbeam blocking the eyes of the justices who condone the unconstitutional Drug War on substances NEVER linked to social problems of any sort. Indeed, participants in the NAC (and especially the Christian verions, the Crossfire Way) are uniformly benefited by these ritual purifications, and their society benefits as well. What isn't noted is that depression is a fatal illness among First Peoples, and Grandfather heals this disease. The ayahuasca is less well known, but even minor social damage cannot be trumped constitutionally by statutes or treaties. Alcohol, alone, gives the lie to these fake statutes that imprison the innocent. Not going to be banned --ever-- and yet linked definitively to major social problems, addiction, disease, and suicide. So arguing over and trying to ban healthy use of 'entheogens'* is RIDICULOUS. *The term 'hallucinogen' is a false category. Lack of sleep is a hallucinogen, but something like Grandfather cannot be reasonably or sacramentally considered in terms of this meaningless concept, that of producing 'hallucinations.' The difference between a VISION and a hallucination is the very difference between religion and watching tv (whose images do not really move or have life -- it is a hallucination).

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#4)
    by Johnny on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    religious tolerance wrong-wing style...

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Nurse Ratched, I'm ready for my medication!

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    I wouldn't say a parallel case, but similarities to Timothy Leary claiming acid as a sacrement for whatever religion he was the self anointed high priest. I wonder how that was dealt with?

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#7)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:38 PM EST
    Is this a revisit of the peyote case?

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:39 PM EST
    Posted by oscar wilde at November 2, 2005 03:28 AM I wouldn't say a parallel case, but similarities to Timothy Leary claiming acid as a sacrement for whatever religion he was the self anointed high priest. I wonder how that was dealt with?
    You are probably referring to Leary's "League of Spiritual Discovery" or L.S.D. which was more of an advocacy group for LSD use, rather than a true religious movement. Nevertheless, it never got off the ground. The UDV ayahuasqueros have a lot in common with the Native American Peyote Church. The main difference being that the UDV actually is comprised of people of many different races, which is probably what really scares the status quo to death.

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#9)
    by SeeEmDee on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:39 PM EST
    Labyrinth13 is largely correct, but the problem will be with the 'culture warriors', mainly of the Protestant sect of the Christos Cult who will be in full hue and cry against this heresy of seeking God via direct experience rather than through pay-as-you-go-preaching. Their "Law 'N Order!" allies will no doubt weigh in with their platitudes about 'saving the chil-drunnnn!' from this heathen scourge. Expect to hear from the p*ss-bottle wielding Order of the Golden Flow to add their two cents about maintaining bodily purity. Chances are, you'll see most of them over at the Ye Olde Watering Hole to plot strategy while swilling various forms of alcohol...which used to be used in Dionysian ceremonies thousands of years ago to achieve the same effect of the 'hoasca' tea of today. "The more things change..."

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#10)
    by roger on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:39 PM EST
    We must preserve our precious bodily fluids!

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#11)
    by Patrick on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:39 PM EST
    Past practice of the Supreme Court has been the artful dodge. Decisions that clarify nothing are all to common. How does this argument stack up against the Rastafarian use of marijuana? I wait to see how they decide, but not hopeful that they will resolve anything. No matter which side of the argument you stand, a decision settling the matter once and for all would be nice.

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#12)
    by pigwiggle on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:39 PM EST
    “Anyway, the Strict Constructionalists sure like to throw in a lot of asterisks in the Constitution, don't they?”
    Then they aren’t constructionists, are they? These kinds of wishful constitutional caveats are just a bit more evidence that conservatives and liberals differ only in the minutia. That is, neither has a problem using the extreme power of the federal government to compel other folks to ‘do as I do’, they just disagree about what is appropriate moral behavior. My favorite constructionist is Justice Thomas; in fact I’m hoping Chief Justice Roberts and the soon to be minted Justice Alito are in the mold of Justice Thomas, and not Justice Scalia.

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#13)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:41 PM EST
    Seeemdee: "this heresy of seeking God via direct experience rather than through pay-as-you-go-preaching." Just to split the hair a bit, vision is not necessarily of God, and taking Grandfather is not necessarily seeking 'God.' Visions in these ceremonies generally has to do with the person, and restoring their sense of the wholeness of life, which repairs, to some degree, their emotional damage. Funny thing, one of the main uses of NAC meetings is to CURE alcoholism. The religious aspect of NAC Crossfire meetings isn't per se about seeking God. It's about seeking health and wholeness. That may be a parallel path, but this is not Tim Leary and LSD, seeking something like God. The ritual use is not for that purpose (since after all, God is already known in any religion), and the mind-expanding aspect is not indulged beyond the actual purpose of healing. It is a heresy to suggest that religion 'seeks' God. Religion generally KNOWS God, and seeks the path of religion in order to enhance their personal ability to follow in faith. Comparisons to drug culture or shamanism are misplaced.

    Re: High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogen (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:05:42 PM EST
    Couldn't those individuals who want to use this illegal substance as part of their religous practice be granted the same exemption that Christians received during prohibition?

    High Court Hears Religion Case on Hallucinogenic Tea | 14 comments (14 topical)