Pubdate: Sat, 21 Feb 2009 Source: Colusa County Sun-Herald (CA) Contact: http://www.colusa-sun-herald.com/sections/letters-to-editor/ Copyright: 2009 Freedom Communications Website: http://www.colusa-sun-herald.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/4994 Author: Thomas Lucente Note: Thomas J. Lucente Jr. is a columnist with The Lima (Ohio) News, a Freedom Communications newspaper Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/people/Michael+Phelps SWIMMING AGAINST REEFER MADNESS I am very disappointed in Michael Phelps. I thought he was better than that. I really can't believe he apologized for exercising his God-given natural right to fly Mexican airlines, to fire it up, to get a gage up, to smoke the love weed, to take a hit of Mary Jane. When Phelps inhaled marijuana from that bong at a party in November at the University of South Carolina, he was simply exercising his right as a free human being. Apologizing made it seem as though what he did was somehow wrong. That's just (reefer?) madness. Nor should Phelps' behavior be surprising. I was shocked how many Americans seemed surprised to discover that a 23-year-old at a college party might smoke marijuana. Our last three presidents have admitted to drug use. Two of those three actually admitted to inhaling. When it comes to drugs, America is a nation of hypocrites. We permit alcohol and tobacco, yet we ban marijuana, even when needed for medicinal purposes. (California permits medical use of marijuana under the Compassionate Use Act, but a federal ban remains in place.) Apparently we would rather people suffer than have access to a plant. How regressive we can be. These athletes spend years training. It is natural, then, that after the Olympics, they want to take some time and unwind. While visiting a few bars in Atlanta with some friends the day after the 1996 Olympics ended, the athletes were seriously unwinding, getting drunk, dancing on tables, removing clothing. It was quite the spectacle. It was, however, a much-deserved break after years of hard work. So, rather than apologizing, Phelps should have told America to buzz off. The reaction to the photograph that appeared Feb. 1 in the British tabloid News of the World has been over the top. Marijuana is not banned under World Anti-Doping Agency rules. An athlete is subject to WADA sanctions only for a positive test that occurs during competition periods. Still, USA Swimming suspended him from competition for three months and cut off his $1,750 monthly stipend and other performance bonuses. "This is not a situation where any anti-doping rule was violated, but we decided to send a strong message to Michael because he disappointed so many people, particularly the hundreds of thousands of USA Swimming member kids who look up to him as a role model and a hero," the federation said in a statement. "Michael has voluntarily accepted this reprimand and has committed to earn back our trust." So, no rule was broken, yet he was suspended for three months? Also, officials in South Carolina said they were looking into filing charges against Phelps. Unbelievable. There is no evidence that any law was broken beyond the photograph. Heck, a person can peruse MySpace and Facebook and find all kinds of similar photographs. Should our law enforcers begin trying to prosecute people based on photographs that surface? Of course, if it were some unknown college student, it is unlikely police officials in South Carolina would care. The same day as the announced suspension, cereal and snack maker Kellogg Co. announced it wouldn't renew its sponsorship contract with Phelps, saying his behavior is "not consistent with the image of Kellogg." The swimmer appeared on the company's cereal boxes after his Olympic triumph. That is, of course, the company's prerogative. In fact, the only people who should be concerned about the photograph are Phelps, perhaps his coach, and those like Kellogg who pay him millions of dollars for endorsements. Beyond that, it is really no one else's business what Phelps decides to put into his body. Let's face it. Taking a drug is a personal choice. It is unjust and immoral to impose Draconian drug laws on society as a whole simply to "try" to protect a few citizens from making bad choices. In fact, legalizing drugs, as we learned from the alcohol battles in the 1920s, would reduce by half the number of prisons in this country and eliminate thousands of homicides every year. Despite that, however, the real reason drug use should be legal is because it is absolutely no business of the government what citizens put into their bodies. Only when we permit citizens to make such poor choices can we truly claim we live in a free society. - --- MAP posted-by: Richard Lake