Connecticut's governor, a cancer survivor, vetoed a bill that would have allowed people with certain serious illnesses to use marijuana, saying it was fraught with problems and sent a mixed message to children.
Huh? Mixed message to children? What exactly is that message? Could you elaborate? Apparently not. Even her press release doesn't actually address what that "wrong message" could be. For the life of me, I can't understand it. That occasionally, if prescribed by a doctor and registered with the state, marijuana use might help sick people? That's a bad message?
Because I have a really good example of a "mixed message". For example, saying that even under these socially harmless circumstances and under the care of a physician marijuana use is illegal, while running a government that willingly collects millions of dollars in taxes and fees on the sale of alcohol and tobacco? That, at least to me, is a mixed message. Because if you're protecting the kids from getting stoned, what are you doing to protect them from getting drunk or smoking Marlboro's?
