Saturday, August 29, 2015

Native American Church






From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Native American Church insignia
The Native American Church (NAC), also known as Peyotism and Peyote Religion, is a Native American religion characterized by mixed traditional and Protestant beliefs and by sacramental use of the entheogen peyote. The religion originated in the U.S. state ofOklahoma in the late nineteenth century after peyote was introduced to the southern Great Plains from Mexico.[1][2][3] Today it is the most widespread indigenous religion among Native Americans in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, with an estimated 250,000 adherents as of the late twentieth century.[4][5][6][7]

History of the peyote religion[edit]

Peyote road
Peyote use originated in pre-Columbian Mexico as a medicine and a means of mystic revelation. The tradition spread north to tribes in the United States in the mid-nineteenth century and acquired its present form around 1885 and thereafter began its wider spread.[3][7]
The two current, major NAC chapters in the United States showcase this dichotomy: the Native American Church of the United States, the original umbrella incorporated church birthed in 1918 from which many other chapters are tied to, allows non-natives to participate, in regulation with state law. On the other hand, the Native American Church of North America, incorporated much later in the 1950s, only allows Native Americans with a 1/4 native blood quantum and CIB certificate to participate (Omer Stewart - Peyote Religion).

Development of the movement[edit]

Quanah Parker clasping a peyote feather fan
Peyote Rattle, late 19th-early 20th century, Brooklyn Museum; This peyote rattle was played during Native American Church ceremonies. The gourd symbolizes the world and the sound it makes represents prayers. The gourd’s zigzag decoration symbolizes Christ’s crown of thorns. The handle’s beaded lightning design, which signifies people's ability to ascend from earth to heaven, is encircled by a red horsehair fringe that represents the rays of the sun at sunrise, the hour when Christ rose from the dead. The medal attached to the handle reads “Behold the heart of Jesus is with me.”
Quanah Parker, along with other prominent roadmen, was influential in the adoption of the Native American Church by tribal entities in the United States. Even though historically ceremonies are much older, the NAC movement started generally in the 1880s and was formally incorporated in 1918 in Oklahoma. The genesis of modern NAC ceremonies have deep roots in both Mexican and Native American culture and ritual, due to the natural locality of peyote and the dissemination by Parker to theComanche and other plains tribes located in Indian Territory.[8][9]
Though there are many variations, the main two ceremonial styles of the NAC are the "half moon" fireplace and the "cross fire" fireplace. Parker learned the "half moon" style of the peyote ceremony from the Lipan Apache leader Chevato. The Lipan Apache learned the ceremony from the Comecrudo tribe of Southern Texas (Peyote Religion by Omer Stewart). The "half moon" fireplace hallmarks include the use of tobacco throughout, with very little to no use of the Bible in the ceremony. This does vary tribe-to-tribe. The "cross fire" ceremony (originally called the "Big Moon" ceremony) became prevalent in Oklahoma (initially among the Kiowa) due to the influence of John Wilson, a Caddo man who traveled extensively around the same time as Parker during the early days of the Native American Church movement. The "cross fire" ceremony has elements that separate it strongly from the "half moon". Usually, there is no tobacco used in the meeting and the use of the Bible is used extensively. Therefore, it is a merger of both indigenous ritual and Christian doctrine and belief.

United States law[edit]

A peyote set such as this is used by the medicine man during the peyote ritual.
Peyote ceremony tipi
As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Employment Division, Department of Human Resources of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990), which, among other things, put the legal use of peyote by American Indians into uncertainty and potential legal jeopardy, Congress passed an amendment to the American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 (42 U.S.C. § 1996), i.e., the American Indian Religious Freedom Act Amendments of 1994 (42 U.S.C. § 1996a), pertinent excerpts of which are given below:
Use, possession, or transportation of peyote
Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the use, possession, or transportation of peyote by an Indian for bona fide traditional ceremonial purposes in connection with the practice of a traditional Indian religion is lawful, and shall not be prohibited by the United States or any State. No Indian shall be penalized or discriminated against on the basis of such use, possession or transportation, including, but not limited to, denial of otherwise applicable benefits under public assistance programs.
—42 U.S.C. 1996A(b)(1).
Definitions
For purposes of this section (1) the term “Indian” means a member of an Indian tribe; (2) the term “Indian tribe” means any tribe, band, nation, pueblo, or other organized group or community of Indians, including any Alaska Native village (as defined in, or established pursuant to, the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (43 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.)), which is recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to Indians because of their status as Indians; (3) the term “Indian religion” means any religion (A) which is practiced by Indians, and
(B) the origin and interpretation of which is from within a traditional Indian culture or community; and (4) the term “State” means any State of the United States, and any political subdivision thereof.
—42 U.S.C. 1996A(c)
Protection of rights of Indians and Indian tribes
Nothing in this section shall be construed as abrogating, diminishing, or otherwise affecting (1) the inherent rights of any Indian tribe; (2) the rights, express or implicit, of any Indian tribe which exist under treaties, Executive orders, and laws of the United States; (3) the inherent right of Indians to practice their religions; and
(4) the right of Indians to practice their religions under any Federal or State law.
—42 U.S.C. 1996A(d)

Instruments[edit]

Shawnee altar cloth, ca. 1940,Oklahoma History Center
Native American Church instruments used in the peyote ceremony are as follows:
  • The peyote gourd rattle (also used in the Gourd Dance ceremony) consists of a hard wooden stick, with a vegetable gourd cut in half and affixed to a wooden or other hard stopper. It has a horsehair top with usually intricate threadwork that is removable at top. Leather fringe tassel affixed to the bottom of the gourd stick. It can be beaded or carved depending on the artist's taste. Finally, inside of the gourd is filled with stones, pebbles or other material to produce a special sound. This rattle is used to sing peyote songsduring the NAC ceremony.
  • The water drum is an iron kettle, with ears cut off, that is tied down with a deer, caribou, or other animal hide. It is tied down with stones or marbles along a certain formation along the side. It is filled with water halfway and produces a special, deep sound when played with a drumstick. It is played by the water drummer during the ceremony while the singer sings songs with a peyote rattle. The tempo played by the drum is usually rapid and quick.
  • The peyote drum stick is a single hard wooden stick used to play the drum during the ceremony. It is usually made from dense wood to produce a more satisfactory sound when played with the water drum.
  • The peyote staff is a wooden staff that is passed around with the water drum and peyote rattle. It is representative of holy god and is held up right during the ceremony. The staff is usually beaded or carved to match the gourd. Like the peyote rattle, it usually has a horsehair top affixed and removable.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. Jump up^ http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/jms089/Z-Unpublished%20Work/Shields-Christ%20&%20Cactus.pdf
  2. Jump up^ Catherine Beyer. "Peyote and the Native American Church". About.com Religion & Spirituality. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  3. ^ Jump up to:a b "Native American Church". Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  4. Jump up^ "Native American Church". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  5. Jump up^ "World Religions & Spirituality - Native American Church". Retrieved 5 March 2015.
  6. Jump up^ "University of Virginia Library". Religiousmovements.lib.virginia.edu. 2006-09-07. Retrieved 2011-07-09.
  7. ^ Jump up to:a b "'A Brief History of the Native American Church'". CSP. 1996.
  8. Jump up^ Stewart OC. 1989. Peyote Religion: A History. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press. ISBN 0-8061-2457-1.
  9. Jump up^ Alice Lee Marriott, Carol K. Rachlin, Peyote: An Account of the Origins and Growth of the Peyote Religion, New York: Thomas Y. Crowell Co. (1971), 111pgs.

Bibliography[edit]

  • Hayward, Robert. The Thirteenth Step: Ancient Solutions to the Contemporary Problems of Alcoholism and Addiction using the Timeless Wisdom of The Native American Church Ceremony. Native Son Publishers Inc., 2011. ISBN 0983638403. -- Describes the Native American Church Ceremony.

External links[edit]

Wikimedia Commons has media related to Native American Church.


at No comments:

Thursday, August 20, 2015

What Bernie Sanders’ Election Would Mean for Legalized Drugs

from golocalprov.com



Wednesday, August 19, 2015
Brendan Murray GoLocalProv News Team
Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders; Photo courtesy of wikipedia
Democratic Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders has called America’s “War on Drugs” a failure and has promised to transform America’s drug policy if elected to the White House.
So what would that look like?
Sanders has said he plans to end the program that has spent more than $51 billion annually and more than $1 trillion since 1980, according to a report by the Drug Policy Alliance.
The independent Senator from Vermont says its time to stop spending money and resources punishing and imprisoning non-violent offenders. He’s proposed treating the underlying mental health issues that cause drug addiction and legalizing marijuana use.
“Millions of lives have been destroyed because people are in jail for nonviolent crimes,” Sanders’ campaign website reads. “For decades, we have been engaged in a failed ‘War on Drugs’ with racially-biased mandatory minimums that punish people of color unfairly. It is an obscenity that we stigmatize so many young Americans with a criminal record for smoking marijuana, but not one major Wall Street executive has been prosecuted for causing the near collapse of our entire economy.”
DC Track Record
Sanders’ voting record backs up his stance on drugs.  During his time on Capitol Hill, Sanders made a number of votes against the enforcement of America’s drug policies.
As a Representative in September 1998, Sanders voted against subjecting federal employees to random drug tests. He voted to legalize medical marijuana in July of 2001, and voted against military border patrol to help battle drug trafficking in September of the same year. After being elected to the Senate in 2007, Sanders voted twice to exempt industrial hemp from marijuana prohibition, once in August of 2012 and again in March of 2013.
The election of Sanders, or any candidate who backs the end of the federal War on Drugs, would be a “welcome change” to the country’s drug policy, according to Chris Brown, press secretary for Americans for Safe Access.
“It’s a failed policy,” Brown told GoLocal. “Repealing the War on Drugs would allow the public to see marijuana, and all drugs, in a nonidelogical view and allow them to analyze it for all its properties.”
Brown also said the repeal of the War on Drugs would ensure that patients who depend on the drug to treat legitimate maladies, particularly pain relief, can receive their medicine without fear of becoming an outlaw.
Paul Armentano, deputy director of NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws, told GoLocal the criminalization of cannabis is a “disproportionate response to what is at worst, a public health issue, not a criminal justice issue.”
Armentano also said that those prosecuted for cannabis-related crimes are disproportionately minorities and young people. This can cause them to distrust government and law enforcement agencies. “This disenfranchises entire cohorts of U.S. citizens who, rather than see law enforcement agencies as protectors, see them as instruments of their oppression.”
He also responded to critics’ claims that legalization will allow teenagers and children freer access to marijuana. He said that criminalizing the substance had not proven effective, and it was time for new techniques.
“Alcohol and tobacco use in teenagers was not driven down by illegalizing these substances for adults, but by educating the target audience and imposing and enforcing age requirements,” he explained. “I don’t see why that would not work when it comes to cannabis.”
‘Not so fast’ say critics
Ron Brogan, a spokesman for the Drug Abuse Resistance Education, known more commonly asD.A.R.E., told GoLocal that despite the assertion by legalization advocates that prohibition has failed, drug use is declining.
“The story that’s not really told is that the drug policing efforts in place are working,” he said. “Cocaine use is down nearly 85 percent since its peak, and drug use in general is significantly down. Prohibition is working.”
Calvina Fay, executive director of the Drug Free America Foundation, echoed Brogan’s claims.
“Alcohol is legal for adults and society has done a dismal job of keeping it from our young people, and the same can be said for cigarettes,” she told GoLocal. “Advocates like to ignore that when this country really went after drugs in this country, overall drug use fell by more than 50%. That is not a failure”
Brogan also said that the prohibition of marijuana is the best way to keep drugs like marijuana from falling into the hands of children.
“When the United States government puts an age-restriction down on something like that, the message that is sent is, ‘this is not that bad,’” he said. “That it’s okay for everyone except teenagers, and that does not prove to be effective.”
Fay also addressed claims that drug enforcement laws are used to target minorities and young people. She admitted that there are times when laws are used to target those groups, but said drug laws are not to blame.
“If you look at who is and isn’t in prison, you’ll see that there are not thousands of minorities rotting away in prison because they had a small amount of marijuana,” she said. “That’s a myth.”

Related Slideshow: The Highest Marijuana Prices in 2015 in New England by State

Forbes.com recently released a graphic that looks at how much an ounce of marijuana costs in every state in America, as well as the District of Columbia. The national average is $324.
Below is a look at where New England states fall in the rankings, as well as where marijuana is the most expensive and least expensive nationally. 
PrevNext

#6 Maine

$305
The Pine Tree State is 19 dollars below the national average. 
That is the 38th highest in the country. 

Related Articles


Enjoy this post? Share it with others.




at No comments:

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Causes of Addiction

from ted








at No comments:

Tuesday, July 21, 2015

The War on Drugs Has Failed. Let’s Legalize and Regulate Drugs Instead.

from tapinto.net
By JILL LAZARE
July 21, 2015 at 5:01 PM

Jill

CRANFORD, NJ - Heroin overdose deaths in the United States have quadrupled since 2002. If that weren’t alarming enough, New Jersey’s rate of heroin overdose deaths is more than three times the national average and drug overdose is now the leading cause of accidental death in New Jersey. If it were not already clear, this recent surge in heroin deaths show that America’s drug laws are in need of drastic reform. We need to stop treating substance abuse as a criminal act and start treating it as a medical issue. We should end the War on Drugs and instead legalize and regulate the sale and use of narcotics.
I’m proud to say I have already been part of the fight to change New Jersey’s drug laws. In 2013 I testified to the legislature in favor of what is now the New Jersey Drug Overdose Prevention Act, which authorized paramedics and police officers to carry and administer the overdose prevention drug naloxone. I’m pleased that overdose deaths have declined since the law went into effect. Lives are being saved because our leaders realized that our drug laws were foolishly hurting vulnerable people instead of seeking to help those in need.
But there is still much work to be done. An obvious first step would be the legalization of marijuana. The success of legalization in Colorado and Washington should serve as a model to the rest of the country. Legalization will save millions of dollars in police and court costs, keep thousands of people out of jail and prison, and bring millions of dollars in new tax revenue into our state’s coffers. Simple possession of small amounts of more dangerous drugs by adults should be decriminalized immediately. Prohibition has only empowered drug dealers and organized crime.
Our drug laws should focus on treatment instead of punishment. We need to expand drug courts and alternative sentencing programs so that people whose crimes were a result of their substance abuse problems are not sent to prison to become career criminals. But we also need to get tougher on doctors who abuse their prescription writing power by overwriting scripts for pain relievers without seeing the patients in any meaningful way and then simply cutting the patients off without treatment or a plan to wean them off of the pain medication.  Such doctors create the addiction without liability or consequences to themselves. That is where the focus of the authorities should be, rather than on the people suffering from addiction.
The recent prison escape of Mexican drug lord Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman demonstrates the futility of an enforcement-only approach. This is the second time he has been able to escape from prison. How can you build a prison that will hold someone who has limitless resources? To me, it makes much more sense to cut off his source of wealth by legalizing and regulating narcotics. Prohibition has only empowered criminals like Guzman. We have tried every enforcement mechanism possible, and none of them have succeeded.
We will look back on the War on Drugs as one of the great follies in American history, alongside the prohibition of alcohol. The trajectory and failure of the two policies is strikingly similar. The prohibition of alcohol empowered bootleggers and the mafia much the same way the War on Drugs has empowered drug cartels. After 13 years of Prohibition, America came to its senses and legalized and regulated alcohol. It’s now time we do the same with drugs.
There is increasing bipartisan consensus for reform of our broken drug laws. While I have disagreed with Governor Christie on many issues, I was proud to work with him on the Overdose Prevention Act and have been heartened by his comments on drug policy reform. As a member of the New Jersey Assembly I will make reform of our state’s drug laws a top priority. I stand ready to work with members of both parties to help bring common sense and compassion to this issue. The War on Drugs has failed. It is time to bring it to an end.
-Jill LaZare is a candidate for New Jersey Assembly District 21
 
The opinions expressed herein are the writer's alone, and do not reflect the opinions of TAPinto.net or anyone who works for TAPinto.net. TAPinto.net is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information supplied by the writer.
at No comments:

Saturday, July 11, 2015

We're losing the war on drugs - U.S. should legalize their sale and then tax them: PennLive letters

from pennlive.com


By PennLive Editorial Board 
Email the author 
on July 10, 2015 at 8:30 AM, updated July 10, 2015 at 8:34 AM

The number of people murdered in the drug war in the United States is larger than the death toll of our military in Iraq and three times greater than the death rate of our soldiers killed in Afghanistan.
Mexican drug cartels kill more people than ISIS and they proliferate mainly in the United States - killing teens and adults indiscriminately.
The U.S. is on the verge of legalizing pot in many states. Why not all? In fact, why not legalize the sale of all drugs and tax them?
The U.S. is losing the war on drugs. Terrorists are using drug trafficking monies to fund their activities. Giving Afghanistan millions of dollar each year to stop growing poppy is just going toward making them cultivate and traffic more poppy, which becomes cocaine and heroin. This money is funding the Taliban, ISIL, al-Qaeda, Hezbollah, etc.  
If drugs were legal, the U.S. could license industry to sell them and then tax the profits. Some of the money could be used to rehabilitate addicts, and some could be used for internal needs. Addiction would be treated as a medical problem and not as a criminal problem. Jails would be less crowded. It is cheaper to pay for rehabilitation than it is to incarcerate someone for 10 or more years.
Alcohol and cigarettes were at one time illegal. This does not ensure that they run rampant now. Should we criminalize glue-sniffing?  
Stop the war on drugs, decriminalize them, and stop funding terrorism, all with one swift blow. 
ROCHELLE S. CLEAVER, Dillsburg 



at No comments:

Thursday, July 9, 2015

Why Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas thinks drugs should be legalized

from reuters


By Ricardo Salinas

July 9, 2015


A group of protesters set fire to the wooden door of Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto's ceremonial palace during a protest denouncing the apparent massacre of 43 trainee teachers, in the historic center of Mexico City
A group of protesters set fire to the wooden door of Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto’s ceremonial palace during a protest in Mexico City, November 8, 2014. Protesters were demanding justice for 43 students who were abducted and apparently murdered and incinerated by corrupt police in league with drug gang members in September. REUTERS/Edgard Garrido
“When Prohibition was introduced, I hoped that it would be widely supported by public opinion and the day would soon come when the evil effects of alcohol would be recognized. I have slowly and reluctantly come to believe that this has not been the result. Instead, drinking has generally increased; the speakeasy has replaced the saloon; a vast army of lawbreakers has appeared; many of our best citizens have openly ignored Prohibition; respect for the law has been greatly lessened; and crime has increased to a level never seen before,” John D. Rockefeller Jr., letter to Nicholas M. Butler, 1932
Did we learn anything from Prohibition?
Prohibition was a failure in the 1920s, and, for similar reasons, the so-called war on drugs has been a disaster. Forty years after Richard Nixon declared this war, consumption worldwide is up, violence has increased and the rule of law has collapsed, especially in Latin America.
Basic economics tells us that when there is artificial pressure on supply, prices go up and margins increase — the perfect incentives for criminal activities. The same mistake was made in the United States almost a century ago with Prohibition. As early as 1925, some observers started to see that this policy, far from stopping crime, was leading to the formation of large networks of well-funded crime syndicates.
Franklin Roosevelt was elected in 1932 partly due to his campaign promise to end Prohibition. People who originally favored Prohibition, such as John D. Rockefeller Jr., later fought for its repeal because of the devastating effects it had on agriculture and industry.
A world of crime
The dire results of the war on drugs are clear. Mexico is paying a very high price — a pound of flesh multiplied by a million– for a policy dictated in Washington with the clear support of the United Nations. At least 50,000 people have died in my country as a consequence of this policy in the past decade alone.
In a recent global report on homicides produced by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, it is suggested that poverty and inequality are the main factors that explain the increase in crime rates across Latin America. Curiously in Africa, a region much poorer than Latin America, homicide rates have not shot up and the U.N. report does not offer a coherent explanation why this is the case.
Nevertheless, the report offers valuable information. For example, in 2012, almost half a million people were murdered worldwide. More than a third of the killings took place in Latin America; Europe, by contrast, accounted for only 5% of the homicides. In most regions around the world, violence is decreasing, but not here.
The war on drugs is a war on Latin America
A great deal of the violence that is bringing down our region is a product of the war on drugs The criminal justice systems throughout Latin America and the United States have been undermined as the courts are clogged with victimless crimes such as drug possession. The prisons are overcrowded with victimless criminals. The United States, in particular, is a clear example of this phenomenon, with a quarter of the world’s incarcerations, almost half of them a product of drug-related felonies.
This generates impunity for criminals. They can’t all be caught, and they can’t all be prosecuted with criminal justice systems and law enforcement agencies that are so overwhelmed.
The U.N. report correctly points out that there is a clear correlation between levels of impunity and homicide rates, a phenomenon that is unmanageable in some regions of Mexico and Central America. It should be noted that seven of the eight most violent countries in the world are located on the cocaine route to the United States.
Countries such as Honduras, Venezuela, Belize and El Salvador reported rates of 90, 54, 45 and 41 homicides per 100,000 inhabitants, respectively. These are intolerable levels. The inability of the state to bring murderers to justice is a key factor in explaining this violence. Something is definitely and fundamentally wrong in Latin American criminal justice systems, and this subversion of the justice systems is corroding everything else in its wake. The war on drugs is sustained by a circular logic in which the damage generated by this policy is attributed instead to drug-related activities in order to justify it, a perverse inference that generates never-ending violence.
We need to move on
It’s been more than 40 years since the war on drugs was declared in Washington. Mexico has blindly followed the lead of its northern neighbor throughout this period, and there is little to show for it beyond the rise of violence and the steady decomposition of society. The economic forces are too vast. This is a multibillion-dollar industry that has subverted social order and the rule of law. Prohibition only means that the state has renounced its right to regulate narcotics by leaving this activity and its enforcement at the sole discretion of the drug lords.
This war is ravaging our hemisphere. Many know this. But few have the courage to speak up. So here it is: Let’s legalize drugs and regulate them, starting with cannabis. It should be noted that campaigns against tobacco, which is more addictive than cannabis, have been successful. Let’s redirect scarce resources to healthcare and education to highlight the dangers of substance abuse and free up our law enforcement and judicial institutions to focus on violent crime, corruption and the enforcement of property rights, gradually reestablishing the rule of law.
The United Nations promised decades ago a “world free of drugs.” This never happened. Many more people are dying as a consequence of this policy than by consumption of illicit substances. Let’s face it, the war on drugs is a fiasco.





at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)