Pubdate: Thu, 04 Apr 2013
Source: Reno News & Review (NV)
Copyright: 2013, Chico Community Publishing, Inc.
Contact:  http://www.newsreview.com/issues/reno/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2524

JUST LEGALIZE EVERYTHING

This sudden spate of liberal legislation feels surreal.

This newspaper has been advocating for the gay community, 
legalization of marijuana, increased taxes on foreign-owned 
businesses (like corporate casinos and mining), and a path to 
citizenship for immigrants for as long as we can remember.

Unfortunately, because we've also been advocating civil disobedience 
in the case of marijuana legalization, we can't really remember when 
that started, but trust us, we were for common sense reform of 
fascist laws long before anyone else thought the idea was cool.

However, since none of this stuff-pot legalization, gay marriage 
legalization, mine tax reform or immigration reform-has actually 
passed, please allow us to add our voice to the freedom-loving cacophony.

Nevada should join Colorado and Washington in making recreational use 
of marijuana legal.

At the very least, this state should make it easy for sick people to 
get their medicine.

Reno should be prepared for the land planning issues of dispensaries, 
and we should go these other states one better and create a 
reciprocal agreement that enables card-carrying individuals to 
consume their medicine here, and people who are state-recognized 
medical marijuana producers elsewhere should be able to sell their 
produce here. It's good business, good civic planning and good karma 
to help sick people.

People should be able to marry who they want. That seems obvious. 
After the Supreme Court enjoyed the oral ... arguments ... on the 
topic last week, it also seems as though that court is unwilling to 
make sweeping changes to the laws of the land. We'll know soon 
enough, but we were also disappointed that one argument near and dear 
to our hearts wasn't made. In the Nevada Constitution the prohibition 
reads like this: "Only a marriage between a male and female person 
shall be recognized and given effect in this state." Shouldn't this 
sentence at least be modified to include non-hermaphroditic men and 
women? Something like "Only a marriage between two people shall be 
recognized and given effect in this state"? How much more logical can 
we be, for pity's sake? If we're going to restrict definitions, it 
seems clear we should restrict the meaning of "person" to mean one 
individual. And that'd also proactively prohibit polygamy (although 
to be truthful, we're not altogether sure that polygamy should be 
forbidden among people older than 18).

As far as a path to citizenship, again, we're only looking for 
reason. Why isn't there a statute of limitations for illegal 
immigration? In the vast majority of cases, these individuals that 
the haters among us want to send away have never been formally 
accused of a crime.

All other things aside, aren't people with a demonstrated ability to 
be law-abiding citizens the very people we want at the front of the 
line? If the law was broken when they illegally passed into this 
country, can't we accept that after seven years, enough time has 
passed in a common law definition of statute of limitations? In other 
words, you may have demonstrably broken the speed limit seven years 
ago, but nobody would say it is just to cite you now.

Finally, with regard to the mines.

No business deserves a constitutionally established exception to 
being responsible citizens. Nevada has been treated as a colony to 
railroads, corporations and foreign-owned mining interests long enough.

We want corporations who treat our land like a $2 whore to pay their $2.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom