A defence to Cannibis charges based on freedom of religion

[Radic]

rocks matter is not the same

rock is claiming soverign rights that is in the bible too

but a different approch

[lightning]

torture,

 

As far as I know nobody has tried this defense, that includes Rock, my understanding is that his approach is to claim sovereignty of his own and to deny the right of the courts jurisdiction citing he is being discriminated for his beliefs because of a judeo/christian prejudice.

 

I argue that the Bible states I am oblidged to use cannabis as a Christian because the Holy Anointing Oil spoken of in Exodus must be used to anoint a believer into the church and it contains vast amounts of cannabis. This is the "Fire Baptism" spoken of repeatedly throughout the new testament, in fact the name Christian means anointed with the Holy Oil, the "Chrism"

The term Christ is from the Greek and means God's Anointed, ie the Messiah in the ancient Hebrew. Christians are also directed (not requested or recommended) that if they are sick they should go to the elders of the church for Prayer and annointing with the Holy Oil, The Chrism for healing. It is therefore not only an intrinsic part of my Religion but the essence, the cornerstone, of my Religion not an option extra as has been argued in the legal precidents mullray has quoted in the other thread. Therefore I contend the current legislation inhibits my free expression of my religion in both theory and practise, as it renders it a crime to make possess or use the Holy Anointing Oil rendering the law in contradiction of section 116 of the constitution. From what mullray has said it is going to be an up hill battle. The challenge faced is to put forward arguments that show the case law cited is inappropriate to this case as the claims made by the appellants in the respective cases are of a completely seperate nature being "aids" to worship and prayer rather than integral and required of the believer.

 

I greatly appreciate mullray's input in this excercise and I will endeavour to make his effort worthwhile by navigating through the legal maze he provides to attempt to find a path which overcomes all the current impediments to a finding by the courts of not guilty. Fortunately I really do believe, however nievely in some peoples views, that miracles do happen and truth and right will always prevail.

 

I consider I have no choice but to fight this all the way regardless the cost because in all good conciense I cannot plead guity to a crime for doing what I truly hold is required of me in my faith, belief, religion, call it what you may. The current position I find myself in is that I am being held out of work in my chosen field of expertise because of the pending charges (even though I am yet to be convicted, a complete breach of my right to natural justice) and have been already lost a 100kpa contract with a major mining company for my religious beliefs. yet appear to have no rights.

I am vilified by my own Government and called a criminal for my beliefs which are fully stated in the Bible they ask me to swear on to tell the truth, in the court where they will most likely convict me, (talk about Hypocrites R Us) yet the truth about the substance they are convicting me of having is not allowed to be used as a defence to having it. When in fact sitting on the main table of the Victorian Parliament is a Bible which is printed on paper made from cannabis.

 

we will continue to fight against their immoral war until they surrender and tell the truth about God's first gift to man of the plants of the field that were given to us to consume to nuture our bodies.

 

This is also reflected in almost every ancient manuscript of every major faith on earth that the "Deity" gave the plants to the people to use as they chose. no recognized scripture of any faith prohibits the use of ANY PLANT. a number even recommend cannabis for sacrament and to facilitate interaction with the respective Deity. The religous rite to use the plants is universal to most faiths and predates modern jurisprudence by several millenia yet is denied to many under the guise of public safety. lies damn lies and government policy

Edited April 7, 2008 by lightning

[Radic]

gotta love every word fe dat

 

 

froward ever

 

free cannabis

[Radic]

I and i rock (Child of god the son of man the living soul,

in Sovereign Being in the Sovereign Estate

in the Greater Universe Continuum, God)

Authorized, my property, goods, chattels the said PETER TILL or Peter

TILL to consume, carry use cannabis which is justified by the

Greater Universe Continuum, God

Genesis 1:12 1:29 1:31

 

1: Any human being who wishes to claim any authority

over me must first prove they exist above "God "

2. They are "God "

3. They are between I and i rock (Child of god the son of man the living soul the Sovereign Being living in the Sovereign Estate in the Greater Universe Continuum, God)and "God ";

4. Or they have a document upon the face of which

can be found the verifiable signature of "God”.

Failure to first do one of the above mentioned things means

all claims to authority is abandoned or is unlawful.

Attempting to exercise any authority over I and i rock

a free human being without first fulfilling one of the four

above mentioned requirements is an unlawful act of fraud and/ or extortion

 

 

Sign by the said

 

Sign by the said

 

Sign by the said

 

 

Date month 2008

 

......................................UCC 1-207/1-308..............................

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

In the book os Psalms, one of the verses declares me (a spiritual adopted son of God) as a "small" God myself. Will that do?

 

The problem you'll face with all this is that in spite of anti-christian, anti-bible people's belief the world revolves around christians controlling the world...etc etc and the mistake that by trying to undermine that auhtority by use of biblical beliefs is clear. That clear problem is the judges, cops and politicians are just as dis-interested in God and what the real meaning of the bible is than everyone else is.

 

Plenty of times I've heard people come on here and ramble on about rhe Judeo/Christian (no such thing) people of the world are controlling everything, when in fact those who are in control have less appreciation for the bible than any member or other dis-effected person has whom I've met. They (the authorities) have no more interest in God, the bible or righteousness than anyone. They don't represent god, or the bible, most likley dont go to church and are more than likly more atheistic than the people I've read for years who hold some belief the world is controlled by christians.

 

it;'s just not so, and no matter of amount of dicovery of ancient writings you pull up, anyone who has no interest in God is going to consider it all just ancient fables.

 

I sincerely wish you the best mate, but before you can discuss this kind of matter with a person, the grounds of refernce have to be drawn up, as in what is valid legal grounds etc, and they just arent going to accept it. For myself, I'd accept it for the most part, but even then not all of it.

 

How about if you figured you wanted the right to abuse children, and wanted to cede the gov rule of law we live under and exersize sovergnity for that? they just wont swallow it mate. You won myheart for trying but, honestly.

 

rob

PS. as for the oil being "Holy" in and of itself, I'm afraid this is a misundersatding. First, a chrstian isn;t bound by any rite, law or observance. Read Galatians. Indeed, for a christian to look to any rite, rule or observance as a means that keeps him/her in connection with God has "fallen from Grace". This is where the classic line "falling from grace" comes from,a nd has nothing to do with someone doing something bad or wrong. it's a term Paul wrote to people who had lost sight of the freedom they are as Christians, uncontrolled by rules. these people (the Gallatians) had begun to believe in rules and observances to justify their postion before God (that is to say they did good things believing it made them good, or they observed certain rituals and practices, beleving this would make them accpetable before god). Without rules we consider our approval from God to be by "grace" meaning free and given unreservedly.

 

So if a person tris to sustain their belief in God by the actions they perform, by doing "good" things. obeying rites and obserances as if they are essential to a christan faith, , anyone who is sitting in judgment on this issue in a legal 21st centruy case will simply quote the bible back at you from gallatians 5 v 4. It speaks of a person who believes in the rules and rites of ancient beleifs being important to their faith,a nd is answered by the appostle PAul (saint Paul) by him saying-

 

"you have become estranged from Christ, you who seek to be justified by law (anything ritual). youhave fallen from grace"

 

This is the only place in the bible this term "falling from grace" appears, and is confused by the public at large and many, many people who seek to become chrisians. they think it means to have done something wrong. In fact it means a person is doing something, a rite, law, a certain practice...which they believe makes their faith valid. Faith by grace is trust in God's love in spite of what you do. To try and secure your conscience by actions, even using a specific oil, is to refute that and to seperate yourself from God's grace. In essence it is to say I don't believe God loves me withoume doing something. i will (insert some act of ritual here) to make him loveme. this seperates the person from grace, the onlymeans of accpetance with God according to the bible.

 

So either the people behind the desk at court will dismiss it all as fringe stuff (becuase they have no interest int he bible and see no relevance in it regarding the law of prohibition of restricted drugs), or they willknow their bible and view what you claim the need for certain specific oil for; is to in fact belie the very principle of christinaity. It would reduce your faith to a single inert substance and demean 9to them) the declaration of faith in the God of the bible in wholeness. Simply because if read in wholeness, the claim to need the very original recipe for god's approval is to denounce so much more of the bible than your request.

 

Hey, for my part, if you want to form a religion that depends on a certain blend of oils to make it right, go for your life, and fight like mad for your right to do it. but it isn't going to float under the name "christian". In fact, when facing this very issue, jesus asked his followers "what makes the offering holy, the gift itself (the oil) or the alter it is placed upon?

Seeing we use no alters, it's metaphorical, meaning it's the heart's intent, not the actual specific make up of the oil which makes it holy. No inert object can in itself be holy anyway. Jesus was dealing withthis very issue, declaring no specific "thing" can be of value, only hwat it represents.

 

I'm on your side (getting pot freed), I'm just trying to prepare you for what you're going to confront.

 

best of luck all of you.

 

rob

 

PPS. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings by using words like "bbile", "faith", christian" etc. if by using these words I've insulted your sense of being able to be free from religion, I am truly sorry. The subject matter of the attempt to free the prohibition hold on pot took this course and I simply replid with what knowledge I have on the subject.

It's not my intention to convert, guilt or control anyone with majical words of religion.

 

cheers

[mullray]

Lightening, I wish you the best and stay strong and optimism is always good.

 

It's religion though that is largely responsible for the drug war. Odd isn't it??

[larfin1]

I

best of luck all of you.

 

rob

 

PPS. I don't mean to hurt anyone's feelings by using words like "bbile", "faith", christian" etc. if by using these words I've insulted your sense of being able to be free from religion, I am truly sorry. The subject matter of the attempt to free the prohibition hold on pot took this course and I simply replid with what knowledge I have on the subject.

It's not my intention to convert, guilt or control anyone with majical words of religion.

 

cheers

 

 

AAAAAggggggghhhhhhhh Bloody hell i am gunna have to smoke more, much more weed to remove those evil words from my memory

 

uh ok apology accepted

 

i too have great knowledge of the fraud called religion but frankly i am to stoned to even consider a reply.

 

Logic dictates to me that if the bible humpers can have their religious rights we as pot smokers should have ours.

 

My apologies if that offends anyone.

[RobbieGanjaSeed]

But that's just it, the bible, christians, budists, whatever have nothing to do with the prohibition of drugs.

A cop from the 20s and 30s (he's famous, but I cant remember his name), invented the hysteria against pot for job security. Du-pont pushed it along to be rid of hemp and varrious other drugs have been banned by essentiallyill-informed racists who had their own agendas. If you read the history of drug prohibition, you'll find zip from any religous bible thumping.

 

The entire premise this arguement is based on (religous fighting) is ill-informed and has no future as a means to ending the nightmare.

 

Drugs of different kinds suffered the fate they have for various social/political/industrial reasons. they continue to be kept illegal for similar reasons some of which have been touched on in other threads, such as entire industries set up to make money from the problems prohibition causes (lucrative problems), including prisons being lucrative sources of cherap labor and great incomes in their own right. Pharmacutical companies have huge, I mean fucking HUGe political clout and also keep drugs listed as controlled substances so they get the dealing rights. Booze provides the single largest tax revenue than any other product, you think religion is keeping them from loosing that tax? They don't want people staying away from booze and sucking down smoke they can grow for free. religion?

 

These and other reasons for drug control have nothing to do with religion. Just because some religous nut case periodically says somthing aloud backing the ignorant laws against drugs gives no credability to the belief he (he loud mouth religous zealot) had anything to do with the bans, or has any power to increase, or reduce such bans.

 

Read some history, in fact apart from a few dumb arsed women protesting booze many years ago,the only significant input from religions regarding prohibition was the salvation army, who protested the prohibition of booze and was partly responsible for that prohibition ending! They saw the way it was becoming a black maket paradise, cuasing more booze addiction than the misguided fools who implimented it, and made loud calls and aided the end of prohibition. They had slogans like "protect familes, end prohibition now!"

 

today many religous organisations still support the end of drug prohibition.

 

I think you'd have to go long and far to find laws in this day and age that are supported purely on religous grounds. it's all money, industry, power, corruption. it's no moral crusade, and anyone believing it is has over-simplified it in their minds.

 

In a documentary I watched the other day, the list of monetary contributors who pump money into the continued war against drugs include alcohol companies, tabbaco companies and pharmacuetical companies. they were right at the top of the list. i saw no religous institues on the list what-so-ever. It reminds me of the jews in germany. Blame it all on the jews. Germany invades Poland, Hitler blamed the Jews. A fire starts in the parliment, blame it on the jews. it's good old fashion basic bigotry.

 

Even IF every religous person in the world believed in the war on drugs, it makes no connection to them being the source of the ban in the first place. And that's conceeding "If". They're just sideliners watching on, and a handy group to blame because it's imposible to fight huge industry, so go the religous instead.No matter what they (the religous) thought, the politicians will do as industry tells them, and the list of industry telling them what to do is already mentioned.

 

We havent even had a religous member in parliment until recently (and even now he's a crony for the libs), yet the laws have been mantianed and amended for years without any religous input. it's pure politics and economics and religion is just a handy whipping boy for people that don't get it.

 

rob

[mullray]

What I meant was the drug war largely stems from a pseudo Christian ethic of the pleasure principle and sin. If it were up to the Buddhists I'm sure there would be no drug war due to their live and let live ethic. Catholicism and Christianity are largely about sin and punishment - of course its all quite hilarious and for the most part they're a pack of hypocrites but that doesn't stop them from jumping on their high horses about anything they find immoral.

 

The bible itself is just a book - one that is philosophical and ambiguous in many respects. Humanity has a long track record of using the bible (Koran etc) to incite hatred against others.

[Radic]

If it were up to the Buddhists I'm sure there would be no drug war

 

right on

irey mulle

 

i duno where youz all live

but i live in a christian society under christian based laws

so

we figer if the morles and justification for making drug war come from the bible

then we might find a loop hole or or even a way to legalize thu the bible

that why rock is taking this apporch

i can dig where hes comming from

if a christian did get regligous imunity to use cannabis like rastas then this would cause a big problems

cause all christians would have the same rights

imagine if the pope said all christians have to be baptised and anoited with cannabis oil

how long would cannabis be prohibited after that

i am not a christian or rasta

dont get me wrong

but if there is a way thu the bible to achieve cannabis legalization

then i will check for it

and anyone who is brave nuff to walk this road i will support

seen