Successful THC Ministry Motions - Michigan

[Stokes]

See this link for background: http://www.thc-ministry.net/forum/vi...053&highlight=

Here are the religious motions (Mostly constructed from the writings of Rev. Tom Brown and Carl Olsen. I definately recomend keeping Tabs on the Federal law suits by both of these wonderfull individuals). We also had a constitutionality motion in ( something Tom Brown advised against but we had already filed it.). Templates for it can be viewed at www.cannabiscounsel.com . On the right one of the choices will be cannabis constitutionality motion. The one argument that I think might be important to keep is whether or not the state can prove Sativa v Indica in instances where a states law defines marijuana as Cannabis Sativa L. Next are the exhibits. To these I would add

Introduction to the Semitic Languages; Text Specimens and Grammatical Sketches, Translated with Notes and Bibliography and an Appendix on the Scripts by Peter T. Daniels. (Translation and expansion of a German work by Gotthilf Bergstraesser (ae here represents the a with two dots over it.)) 1983 Eisenbrauns. 1995 Second Printing.

Etymological Lexicon of Classical Greek: Etyma Graeca by E. R. Wharton, Ares publishing Inc. Chicago, Unchanged Reprint of the Edition: London 1882, paperback ISBN# 0-89005-447-9

The New Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible, LL.D., S.T.D., Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee. 1995, 1996. ISBN# 0-7852-5055-7

http://www.ethiopianzioncopticchurch...exhibit_13.pdf

http://www.ethiopianzioncopticchurch...exhibit_14.pdf

http://www.ethiopianzioncopticchurch...exhibit_15.pdf

http://www.ethiopianzioncopticchurch...exhibit_12.pdf

at the bottom of this I am also posting my Etymology articles

STATE OF MICHIGAN

90th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT



PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Hon. Richard W. May

v. Case No. 06-1466-SM
JOSHUA J. SNIDER, Defendant. ________________________________________/
E. Michael McNamara P36224 VCSA
Assistant Prosecuting Attorney
Emmett County, Michigan
200 Division Street
Petoskey, Michigan 49770
231.348.1725
_______________________________________/
Matthew R. Abel (P38876)
Attorney for Defendant
450 W. Fort Street, Suite 200
Detroit, Michigan 48226
248.866.0864
________________________________________/



MOTION and BRIEF TO DISMISS FOR VIOLATION
OF RELIGIOUS FREEDOM RESTORATION ACT

1. Defendant is a member of the THC Ministry and a Reverend of that faith.

2. Defendant asserts that in his faith, THC, the active ingredient in Cannabis, is the container of the Holy Spirit through which communion with YHVH, the Prophets, Jesus The Christ, the Saints, and his fellow Christian Brothers and Sisters is observed and maintained, thus the use and consumption of Cannabis Sacrament is a mandatory religious practice.

3. Defendant asserts that in his faith, Cannabis is one of the original ingredients of The Holy Anointing Oil of Moses and The Christening Oil of Jesus The Christ (see Religious Practitioner of Cannabis Affidavit shown to officers upon initial search, accurate copy attached), and that this Oil is manufactured and used by the Ministry in Fire Baptism, Chrismation and prayerful healing of the sick as directed by Mark 6: 12-13 and James 5: 14.

4. Defendant asserts a prima facie showing that 1.) the laws against marijuana as applied to him substantially burden his 2.) sincere 3.) legitimate religious practice and that he therefore qualifies for protection under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

5. Under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the government bears the burden of establishing a compelling interest in maintaining the drug laws, that excluding Defendant from those laws is a threat to the public health and safety, and that there is no less burdensome alternative.

6. Defendant asserts that his use of cannabis is mandated by his religion, that the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States provides him protection under the Free Exercise Clause, and that this case must be dismissed.

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

United States law regarding the protection of religious freedom has recently been amended by the ruling by the United States Supreme Court in Gonzales v. O Centro Espirita Beneficente Uniao do Vegetal, 163 L. Ed. 2d 1017; 2006 U.S. LEXIS 1815; 74 U.S.L.W. 4119 (February 21, 2006) (UDV hereafter), which upholds the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(b)(b)(2004) (RFRA hereafter) restoring the compelling interest test abandoned by the United States Supreme Court in Employment Div., Dept. of Human Services of Oregon v. Smith, 494 U.S. 872 (1990) (Smith hereafter) (ruling that religious believers may not obtain exemptions to religion-neutral laws of general applicability that infringe on their religious practices).

In Smith, the United States Supreme Court avoided consideration of a claim for the
sacramental use of peyote by declining to apply the compelling interest test to the
sacramental use of peyote by members of the Native American Church as it had
previously applied the compelling interest test in Sherbert v. Verner, 374 U.S. 398
(1963) and Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972).

In Smith, Justice Scalia wrote:

If the "compelling interest" test is to be applied at all, then, it must be applied
across the board, to all actions thought to be religiously commanded. Moreover,
if “compelling interest" really means what it says (and watering it down here
would subvert its rigor in the other fields where it is applied), many laws will not
meet the test. Any society adopting such a system would be courting anarchy, but
that danger increases in direct proportion to the society's diversity of religious
beliefs, and its determination to coerce or suppress none of them. Precisely
because "we are a cosmopolitan nation made up of people of almost every
conceivable religious preference," Braunfeld v. Brown, 366 U.S., at 606, and
precisely because we value and protect that religious divergence, we cannot afford
the luxury of deeming presumptively invalid, as applied to the religious objector,
every regulation of conduct that does not protect an interest of the highest order.
The rule respondents favor would open the prospect of constitutionally required
religious exemptions from civic obligations of almost every conceivable kind –
[... other citations omitted ...] drug laws, see, e. g., Olsen v. Drug Enforcement
Administration, 279 U. S. App. D. C. 1, 878 F. 2d 1458 (1989) [... other
citations omitted ...]. The First Amendment's protection of religious liberty does
not require this.

In response to the ruling in Smith Congress enacted the RFRA. This law provides that
government action that substantially burdens religious exercise is invalid unless it is
justified by a compelling government interest and is the least restrictive way to achieve that interest.

Responding to the RFRA, in City of Boerne v. Flores, 521 U.S. 507; 117 S. Ct. 2157; 138 L. Ed. 2d 624 (1997) (hereinafter Boerne), the Supreme Court ruled that the RFRA, as applied to state laws that place incidental burdens on religion, exceeded Congress’ power to interpret state protection of fundamental rights.

In response to Boerne Congress then enacted the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act of 2000 (hereinafter RLUIPA), Pub. L. 106-274, 42 U.S.C. § 2000cc, et seq., and used federal payments to states under the Commerce Clause to force the states to protect religious exercise to a greater extent than interpreted by the Supreme Court under the Smith decision.

In 2005 the Supreme Court ruled that the RLUIPA is a valid exercise of congressional power, that it does apply to the states, and that federal payments to states do cause a contractual obligation on the state to perform to standards set in the Congressional / State contract in exchange for federal contributions to state managed programs. See Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709; 125 S. Ct. 2113; 161 L. Ed. 2d 1020 (2005).

In 2006 the Supreme Court ruled that the RFRA applies to the federal drug laws, invalidating them where the government cannot prove a threat to public health and safety caused by the religious exercise of a church. See UDV. The UDV Church imports, receives money for, transports, distributes and uses DMT, a powerful Schedule I hallucinogen.

The Controlled Substances Act of 1970 gives the Attorney General the power to reschedule a
controlled substance if that substance does not meet the criteria for the schedule to which it has been assigned. 21 U.S.C. § 811(a). The Attorney General has delegated this authority to the Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration (hereinafter DEA). See 28 C.F.R. § 0.100(b). In 1988, the DEA Administrative Law Judge ruled that the danger of consuming massive amounts of marijuana was less then the danger of eating 10 raw potatoes or taking a bottle of aspirin. Furthermore, the Federal DEA Administrative Law Judge ruled, “marijuana, in its natural form, is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known to man. In The Matter Of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition, DEA Docket 86-22, Sept. 6, 1988, at pages 58-59.

According to the federal drug law, it is the DEA Administrative Law Judge who determines the actual danger caused by medical use of a drug The DEA ruling on threat to public health and safety reached by the DEA Administrative Law Judge on the question of threat to public health and safety is authoritative as to the religious acts of growing and using marijuana. The findings of the federal DEA Administrative Law Judge on the matter of Rescheduling Marijuana for medical use is legally controlling. There is little, if any actual threat to public health and safety caused by growing and using the non-toxic plant marijuana. DEA Judge Frances Young stated that despite near universal use amongst all societies prior to US prohibition in 1937, there is no record of a single injury or death that has ever been caused by putting marijuana into a human body in over 5,000 years of recorded history.

In 2006 the Supreme Court ruled that states have the authority to set the standard for medical practice as defined by federal drug statutes. Gonzales v. Oregon, 126 S. Ct. 904; 163 L. Ed. 2d 748 (2006).

Eleven states have determined that marijuana has medical use. The State of Iowa is among these states. Iowa Code Chapter 204. Two of five people currently receiving marijuana from the federal government live in Iowa. These two patients have been receiving 300 rolled marijuana cigarettes each month from the federal government for the past 15 years. Letters from the Iowa Department of General Services say that these two patients are approved by the Iowa Board of Pharmacy Examiners to use and possess marijuana on state property. If medical users can use marijuana in public without any threat to public health or safety, religious use of marijuana is entitled to the same respect.

This appears to be a novel legal issue in Michigan. Defendant was not in public, but was ticketed while in the sincere practice of his religion in the sanctity of his own home, which was literally trespassed upon by the Officer. This court should follow the law and dismiss this case.

Respectfully Submitted,



Matthew R. Abel
Attorney for Defendant

December 25, 2006


STATE OF MICHIGAN

90th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN Case No: 06-1466 SM Plaintiff,
v. JUDGE RICHARD W. MAY
JOSHUA JACOB SNIDER, Defendant.
_____________________________________/
JAMES R. LINDERMAN
Emmett County Prosecuting Attorney
200 Division Street
Petoskey, MI 49770
231-348-1725

MATTHEW R. ABEL (P38876)
Attorney for Defendant
450 W. Fort Street, Suite 200
Detroit, Michigan 48226
248-866-0864
_____________________________________/

MOTION TO DISMISS FOR VIOLATION OF
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND TREATIES

The Defendant, JOSHUA JACOB SNIDER, by his attorney, Matthew R. Abel, moves to dismiss this case because the prosecution is in violation of international law and treaties, stating:
1. Where "fairly possible," a United States statute should be construed so as not to conflict with international law or an international agreement of the United States. See Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law § 114.
2. The United States is a signatory to the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ("ICCPR"), which ensures the freedom of everyone to "have or to adopt a religion of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in the community of others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice, and teaching." ICCPR, 138 Cong. Rec. S4781-84 (1992).
3. The United States has also endorsed the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which protects the rights of individuals not only to believe as they wish, but also to "manifest" that belief through practice, including "ceremonial acts" and "participation in rituals." See U.N. Human Rts. Comm., General Comment No. 22, p. 4 (1993).
4. Finally, the United States Congress has recently passed the International Religious Freedom Act ("IRFA"), Pub. L. No. 105-292, 112 Stat. 2788 (199, codified at 22 U.S.C. §§ 6401-6481. IRFA establishes as United States policy the promotion of freedom of religion and cooperation with foreign governments "that affirm and protect religious freedom, in order to develop multilateral ... initiatives to . . . promote religious freedom abroad."
5. Congress specifically approved the International Convention on Psychotropic Drugs, 21 U.S.C. 801a (2006), which includes an exemption for any plant being used for religious purposes. Article 32, Section 4,of the Convention on Psychotropic Substances states, “A State on whose territory there are plants growing wild which contain psychotropic substances from among those in Schedule I and which are traditionally used by certain small, clearly determined groups in magical or religious rites, may, at the time of signature, ratification or accession, make reservations concerning these plants, in respect of the provisions of article 7, except for the provisions relating to international trade.”
6. These laws make clear that it is not only "fairly possible" for the United States to permit the religious use of cannabis, but that domestic and international law, in fact, require such deference absent demonstration of a threat to public health and safety.
7. Under these circumstances, Plaintiffs’ interpretations of the Federal and Michigan versions of the CSA forbidding the Sacramental use of Cannabis by the Defendant in the United States clearly violates the treaties which the United States has endorsed, and domestic law.
RELIEF REQUESTED
For these reasons the Defendant, Joshua Jacob Snider, asks that this Court dismiss this case.


Respectfully Submitted,



Matthew R. Abel P 38876
Attorney for Defendant 2/19/2007

STATE OF MICHIGAN

90th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN Case No: 06-1466 SM Plaintiff,
v. JUDGE RICHARD W. MAY
JOSHUA JACOB SNIDER,
Defendant.
_____________________________________/
JAMES R. LINDERMAN
Emmett County Prosecuting Attorney
200 Division Street
Petoskey, MI 49770
231-348-1725

MATTHEW R. ABEL (P38876)
Attorney for Defendant
450 W. Fort Street, Suite 200
Detroit, Michigan 48226
248-866-0864
_____________________________________/


DEFENDANT’S EXHIBIT LIST
Defendant may introduce the following as Exhibits at trial:

PHOTOGRAPHS:
1. Multiple photos of house at scene of arrest

WRITTEN EXHIBITS:
BIBLES:
2. Targum (Chaldean) Bible. The Bible in Aramaic : Based on Old Manuscripts and Printed Texts. Vol. 1, The Pentateuch according to…. O.T. Pentateuque (arameen). onqelos by Alexander Sperber 1897,
1959,1973,1992., Leiden; New York; E.J. Brill
3. Peshitta (Syriac) Syrian Patriarchate of Antioch and all the East, Syriac Bible 63DC United Bible Societies 1979 UBS-EPF 1996-2M
4. The Kingdom Interlinear Translation of the Greek Scriptures, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York, Inc. International Bible Students Association Brooklyn New York, U.S.A.
5. The Interlinear NIV Hebrew-English Old Testament, John R. Kohlenberger III,1979, 1980, 1982, 1985,1987, Zondervan Publishing House, Grand Rapids , Michigan
6. The Living Torah by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan, Moznaim, Israel 1981
7. English language Bible, Authorized King James Version, 1970, 2001, Thomas Nelson Inc., Belgium
8. English language Bible, New World Translation of the Holy Scriptures, 1961, 1981, 1984, Watch Tower Bible and Tract Society of Pennsylvania, Watchtower Bible and Tract Society of New York Inc., International Bible Students Association, Brooklyn, New York

DICTIONARIES AND ETYMOLOGICAL AUTHORITY:
9. A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for readers of English by Rabbi Ernest Klein, Carta Jerusalem, University of Haifa 1987
10. Ben Yehuda's Pocket English-Hebrew, Hebrew-English Dictionary, Ehud Ben-Yehuda/David Weinstein, 1947, 1951, Pocket Books, a division of Simon & Schuster Inc.1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020
11. Aramaic; A Syriac-English Glossary With Etymological Notes by M.H. Goshen-Gottstein Based on Brocklemann's Syriac Chrestomathy 1970 Otto Harrassowitz - Wiesbaden.
12. Klugge Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache 1999 De Gruyter Berlin-New York (German)
13. Russisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. Heidelberg: Winter 1950-1959 (in drei Bänden- in three books) (German study of the Russian language)
14. Mishnah portion of the Talmud both Hebrew and English versions. Divre ha-Kongress ha-'olami ha-shish le-mada'e ha-Yahadut ha-Kongres ne'erakh be-hsut ha-akadamyah ha-leumit ha-Yisreelit le-mada'im ba-Universitah ha-'Ivrit,Yerushalayim, 15-21 ba-Menahem Av 1973, 13-19 Ogust 1973. volume 2. Toldot 'am Yisrael be-tekufat ha-Mishnah veha-Talmud.
15. Tracing One Word Through Different Languages by Sara Benetowa in The Book of Grass, Andrews&Vinkenoog 1968
16. Konopie W Wierzeniach Izwyczajach Ludowych by Sara Benetowa in Prace Etnologiczne Instytutu Nauk Antropologicznych I Etnologicznych Nakladem Towazystwa Naukowego Warszawskiego 2. Warszawa 1936 (Polish)
17. Text version of The Fire Baptism and the Lost Sacraments by Rev. Dr. Terry Winger www.freeanointing.org
18. Swedish Article; Sumerna och deras Kultur (The Sumerians and their culture), föredragvid finska vetenskapsocietiens sammanträde den 13 December 1943 av(by) Knut Tallqvist in Societas Scientarium Fennica Årsbok- Vousikirja 22nd band No: 3, Helsingfors 1944
19. Cannabis etymology articles by Rev. Joshua Snider.

EXHIBITS OF RELIGIOUS REFERENCES, TREATISES AND SACRED TEXTS:
20. Prayers of the Cosmos; Meditations on the Aramaic words of Jesus by Neil Douglas-Klots 1990, HarperSanFrancisco, an Imprint of HarperCollinsPublishers
21. Booklet of article on "The Oil of the Spirit" artifacts http://www.yourarmstoisrael.org/Arti...ientSymbol.php
22. Let My People Grow, witness Booklet
23. How to Apply the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to Federal Law Without Violating the Constitution," 99 Michigan Law Review 1903 (2001) by Professor Magarian.

OTHER RELIGIOUS EXHIBITS:
24. THC Ministry Documentation
25. Wikipedia definition of THC Ministry.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thc_ministry
26. Record of Ordination by Universal Life Church http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Life_Church
27. U.S. Army Military 214 Honorable discharge recognizing THC Ministry.

MEDICAL REFERENCE EXHIBITS
28. Marijuana and Medicine, Assessing the Science Base, Janet E. Joy, Stanley J. Watson, Jr. and John A. Benson, Jr. , editors, Division of Neuroscience and Behavioral Health, Institute of Medicine. Copyright ©1999 by National Academy of Sciences. (The full text of the report is available online at www.nap.edu. ISBN 0-309-07155-0
29. Handbook of Cannabis Therapeutics: from Bench to Bedside by Ethan B. Russo and Franjo Grotenhermen, editors. © 2006 by the Haworth Press, Inc. www.haworthpress.com/store/product.asp?sku=5741
30. The New Prescription, Marijuana as Medicine, by Martin Martinez, edited by Francis Podrebarac. Published by Quick American Archives, © 2000. by Martin Martinez www.quicktrading.com ISBN: 0-932551-35-1
31. Marijuana Medical Handbook by Ed Rosenthal, Tod Mikuriya and Dale Gieringer. © 1997. Published by Quick American Archives, Oakland, California
32 Therapeutic Uses of Cannabis. © 1997 by the British Medical Association. Published by Harwood Academic Publishers.
33. DEA memorandum by Administrative Law Judge Young, In the Matter of Marijuana Rescheduling Petition, Dkt. No. 86-22, Dept. of Justice, DEA, Sept. 6, 1988
34. Trends in Neurosciences May 2005.
BOTANICAL AND HISTORICAL REFERENCE EXHIBITS
35. History of Medical Marijuana by Dr. Lester Grinspoon, M.D. Harvard Professor
available on the web at http://www.maps.org/mmj/grinspoon_hi...s_medicine.pdf
36. Federal Department Of Transportation studies 1992 and 1993.
37. The Cannabis Companion
38. Peterson’s Field Guide to Medicinal Plants
OTHER EXHIBITS:
39. EEG Records
40. Records of federal marijuana patients.

Respectfully Submitted,



Matthew R. Abel P 38876
Attorney for Defendant
2/19/2007

Many people (even scholars!) speculate that the word cannabis moved to the Middle East and Europe from the Far East. Most English etymological dictionaries trace the word hemp-cannabis to the Scythians via the Greek historian Herodotus (approximately 500 B.C.). The word is however said to occur at least two hundred years earlier in the Assyrian tablet of Assur(i)banibal (in ritual use no less). The Assyrians were/are a Semitic people closely related to the Hebrew, Aramaic and Arabic peoples.
The leading authorities on the etymology of both the German and Russian languages list a Sumerian cognate (these are ,,Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache" Kluge 23rd edition by Elmar Seebold 1999 and ,,Russisches etymologisches Wörterbuch." Heidelberg: Winter by Max Vasmer 1950-1959 in three volumes (there is also an expanded Russian language translation of this). Beyond this an Article written in Swedish lists both kunibu-cannabis and gamun-cumin as Sumerian words. This article is ,,Sumerna och deras kultur(The Sumerians and their culture)" föredragvid finska vetenskapsocietens sammanträde den 13 December 1943 av(by) Knut Tallqvist in ,,Societas Scientarium Fennica Årsbok- Vousikirja 22nd band No: 3, Helsingfors 1944" See page 22. This is important not only because it places the word cannabis in the region approximately 3000 years prior to Herodotus but also because cumin is usually given as a word that stems from Semitic (and Hebrew in particular). The Hebrew word for cumin only occurs three times in the Old Testament (once in Isaiah 28: 25 and twice in 28: 27).
I hope that you may also find the following insightful as well as interesting. A quote from "A Comprehensive Etymological Dictionary of the Hebrew Language for Readers of English" by Rabbi Ernest Klein, Carta Jerusalem, University of Haifa 1987, runs as follows "Since early times, humanity has tried to find out why things are called by the words that denote them; The Hebrew Bible offers quite a few instances e.g. Genesis 2: 23. The Greeks called this: finding the true meaning of the word, "true" being etymos, literally "that which is", and "etymology" meant originally "using words in their true sense". This "truth" was found by deriving existing words from other words, in the same or in another language. The first known systematic attempt to use such connections not for speculation as to the true nature of things, but in order to discover the meanings of words, was made by Jewish scholars in North Africa, Spain and later in Southern France, between 900 and 1350 C.E. They deduced the meanings of difficult Biblical words from corresponding words in Arabic and Aramaic, applying rules for which consonants in one language corresponded to a given consonant in another." This was an ingenious and amazing achievement but the fact that Arabic and Aramaic could have easily, by this time, lost many of the subtleties accompanying a variety of words like bosem for example (subtleties which may still be reflected in Medieval and Modern Hebrew, for example Klein's dictionary gives Medieval and Modern Hebrew meanings which include spicing, perfuming, and becoming intoxicated or drunk, on the attached page (page 86) taken from this dictionary MH and NH stand for Medieval Hebrew and New Hebrew respectively ), this compounded with the inaccuracies contained in the long accepted Greek Septuagint could have very easily added an extra layer to the shroud covering the truth.


Peace, Love and Respect to all,
Humbly submitted by
Rev. Joshua Snider

In my previous article I suggested that Arabic and Aramaic may have lost much of the original color that the word bosem may have originally conveyed. This is probably true although it can be seen from the following page (page 9 with definitions of "enjoy oneself, delight", and "annoint") taken from “ A Syriac-English Glossary With Etymological Notes” by M.H. Goshen-Gottstein, based on Brockelmann’s Syriac Chrestomathy 1970, that at least Syriac Aramaic seems to have retained much of this ancient color.
The excerpt and reference below is taken from the article “Early Diffusion And Folk Uses of Hemp” by Sula Benet in “Cannabis and Culture” 1975

Another piece of evidence regarding the use of the word 'kaneh' in
the sense of hemp rather than reed among the Hebrews is the religious
requirement that the dead be buried in 'kaneh' shirts. Centuries later,
linen was substituted for hemp (Klein 190.

KLEIN, SIEGFRIED 1908 Tod und Begrabnis in Palistina. Berlin: H.
Itzkowski.

Peace, Love and Respect to all.
Humbly submitted with my deepest apologies for prior oversights,
Rev. Joshua Snider

Although gifted scholars have suggested that the m in kaneh bosem represents a plural, it can be seen from the above material that bosem appears to be one of two complete morphemes making up the compound word “fragrant” or “intoxicating hemp”. I do however feel that these scholars seem to be on the right track. The similarity of the m in bosem to the m of the masculine plural would seem to have led to the reanalysis of kaneh bosem as a plural, leading in turn to the loss of this m in the kanbos of the Mishna and the Scythian and Greek cannabis. It is unlikely, even on account of syllables, that the word cannabis consists of only one morpheme. So far as I have seen, no other theory has yet been advanced attempting to explain the meaning of the component morphemes of cannabis in any detail. Aside from no other theory being advanced, the weight of the above material suggests that this scenario is not unlikely.

Peace, Love and Respect to all.
Humbly submitted,
Rev. Joshua Snider

[Rev Sister Lilli]

We are sending you love and light brother where ever you are!!

[Spenser]

Sorry to bring up a dead thread like this but im so excited i am a new member from MI as well and well im just the kind of person that needs to be sure and i am now thourghly conviced that this is actually working. I have had a couple of experinces but just didnt want to go full blown but now i can!!!

Even after all this time it is still great news.

[Mystic]

Hello, Spenser -- welcome to the forums.

[Rev. Joshua Snider]

Louv man,

These motions were from my case, I have been collecting statutes and other material to build a civil case against the state of Michigan. I hope to update my links soon with that material.

I still have to be careful and I would advise the same to anyone else, but your best bet is to try and understand all of the legal arguments in Carl's case in the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Matt Abel is probably the best Cannabis Attorney in Michigan and Paul Youngs might be the second best bet, but hopefuly you won' get yourself in a predicament where you have a criminal case to deal with.

One louv,
Joshua

Petoskey Mi.

[Spenser]

Hopefully i wont. Thanks for the Welcome.

But if i do. your case is even more to bring up as ammunition.

Tho i do have some questions as to were to get the sacrament becuase i don't know if it's legal for me to buy it from someone who doesn't use it religiously

Peace and Love is all you need

[Rev Sister Lilli]

~~Bump~

[Rev Sister Lilli]

~~UP~~