Its not marihuana, its cannabis, get it right

[jd4083]

Nah, I'll keep calling it "smoke" and "reefer" and "pot" and "dope" and you go with the feel-good politically correct term.

Got some bad news for ya though...if you think that the vernacular used to describe pot is the largest issue this "movement" has, you are sorely mistaken and in for a big surprise.

 

[jd4083]

Have you ever talked to a doctor about using cannabis for a given problem and have them just quit listening to what your actually saying and fill in some blanks for them selves? It is the same way with most people that aren't aware that the propaganda that has been fed to them their entire lives are at least 90% lies and the rest is twisted to put fear into the subject so they would accept the lies without question. We need to get past that mentality to get the truth across. Reffering to it by its true name has a better chance of getting past that blind spot than all the "nicknames" it goes by. It's simple if you'll open your eyes. Keep them closed and you may be the next to feel the wrath of the drug warriors.

playing devil's advocate here, but that's probably because the vast majority of people who go to a doctor and try to get MMJ are scamming the system anyways, and everybody knows it -- docs and patients...

 

[Highlight]

Deleted

 

[Hank Hemp]

I like reefer too, I mean cannabis.

 

[Midnight Rudy]

its a word, referring to a plant, that has no conscious thought.

I doubt it'd be offended at us calling it marijuana.

though I do understand and appreciate the sentiment...I just don't think it matters, really.

Actually they DO get offended, but they call each other marijuana and it is OK. WTF?

Ha ha!

 

[gingerale]

It's kinda like the gay rights movement. For a long time "gay" was a slur. Gays knew that it wouldn't help anything to just call themselves "homosexuals" or some other politically correct sounding name to avoid the slur. It's the idea that was being attacked, not the word. If they ran from the word they would acknowledge and legitimize their attackers' position. Instead they confronted the word head on, took the term back, publicly proclaimed loudly that they were not ashamed, and made the term theirs. Now the word "gay" has pretty much zero power over anyone.

Same will go for "pothead", "marijuana", "dope", etc if we embrace it instead of trying to hide from it. I *like* the word marijuana. How many other words in the english language are as exotic and different?

 

[Pinball Wizard]

I consider Cannabis the proper noun...but, it ain't got much hip-hop to it!.....

 

[OjoRojo420]

I like reefer too, I mean cannabis.

Have you ever met that funny Reefer Man...?

Cab Calloway - Reefer Man:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D44pyeEvhcQ

Let's smoke some reefer... LOL

Ojo

 

[dddaver]

My personal opinion on slang words, and this apparently isn't very popular, is that their use usually just weakens our language, because slang words are most often used mainly to demean something. A gay dude used to be a happy dude, now it's a homosexual. So who wants to be labeled gay now, unless you really are homosexual. Used to be a good thing to be called gay. Today young people sometimes say, "That's so gay." I think they're trying to say that is a bad thing. So when the term marijuana was only started to put the people who smoked mota down and scare the hell out of everyone else, that was to demean. So that's why I usually don't like slang. But again, that's my personal opinion but the fact is I don't really give a shit. Just gimme some mo

I'm sorry, I missed the part where somebody said using the term marijuana was the biggest problem the "movement" has. I suppose you expect my dumb ass to read all 5 pages? Madness I say. Simply madness. Of course it isn't. That's not the point at all. BULLSHIT and mean intent is a little closer to it I think. Sorry about bringing bad news.

 

[NiteTiger]

Doh, internet went flaky on me.

To clarify, I did mean that you should use the word Cannabis when discussing the plant with a non smoker about legalization.

Sorry for any confusion, my bad.

Basically, what we are talking about is, in marketing parlance, a re-branding. Corporations use this tactic with their products all the time. If we want our product to be considered on it's merits, then we need to have those average, everyday Joes willing to at least look at our product in a proper mind set.

Using a word the government has spent billions poisoning in the US american conciousness is obviously counter-productive. Unless, of course, you have 80 years and billions of dollars at your disposal. Then, maybe, you could fight this fight on the government's terms.

Until then, "marijuana" is, and will forever be, a drug in the minds of your average US american. It's the bill of goods they have been sold for over 70 years. Like it or not, right or not, that is the reality in our world. Marijuana is a dirty, dangerous drug. Like Stalin said, tell a lie big enough, for long enough and loud enough, and it becomes the truth.

Simple truth, Stalin was right, and you're witness to the proof.

What this means is that when people hear "marijuana", they think "drug". This means, by simple inference, you're trying to justify legalizing something dangerous. That is your chosen position, exemplified by your own words.

Cannabis is a different word. Marijuana means getting stoned. Cannabis means food, fuel, jobs, medicine, recreation and, king of all, cash.

Quite letting them pretend the buds are all that matters.

Instead of trying to legalize a drug, try demanding an explanation for your states decision to opt out of the safest source of revenue since water. Force people to look at the plant as whole by using its proper name. Make people look at the whole plant on its own merit, not through the published bias they've learned over 2/3 of a century.

Dihydrous monoxide made the news a decade or so ago. A politician, based on facts, tried to pass a bill outlawing dihydrous monoxide. On the surface, it looked like a good idea. After all, dihydrous monoxide kills tens of thousands of people a year. In its gaseous form, it creates a deadly environment of high pressure and extreme heat (enough to drive nuclear reactors). In its liquid form, just a few teaspoons will cause asphyxiation. In its solid form, it can cause death and dismemberment after just a few minutes exposure.

Thankfully, disaster was averted when an aide pointed out the esteemed legislator was trying to outlaw water.

Tell me again how the name means nothing in our fight for freedom?

PS: Yes, Med states should change the laws to say Cannabis. Currently, the US does not have a legislated official language. Should that change, as many states have taken upon themselves to do, then, technically, those laws are based on foreign slang for official wording, and would no longer be applicable.

Do you think that in todays climate, it would be hard to get US Americans to vote for English as the official language? Because you'll see that on a ballot faster than you'll see anything with the word "marijuana" on the national ballot.

Stop asking legislators to vote for marijuana, and start asking why they oppose Cannabis. Stop asking them to legalize a drug, and maybe they'll legalize a multi-trillion dollar industry.

Maybe we can save our world by using a word that forces truth instead of a word that divides common sense from reality.

 

[Jellyfish]

If we want our product to be considered on it's merits, then we need to have those average, everyday Joes willing to at least look at our product in a proper mind set.

I don't care if MORE people smoke ____, especially if they're going to be pussies about it. Basically, I feel if you're too good to be called a doper, then you're too good to smoke it, so go home. Thank you.

 

[huligun]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNVNiMJ0S3c

 

[NiteTiger]

I don't care if MORE people smoke ____, especially if they're going to be pussies about it. Basically, I feel if you're too good to be called a doper, then you're too good to smoke it, so go home. Thank you.

You prove my point:

Cannabis has many merits in a vast number of industries.

Marijuana gets smoked.

I didn't say a thing about more people smoking.

On a side note, you're buying into the propaganda. A legislators knee jerk reaction is always to proclaim usage rates will go up, but that is incorrect. Studies have shown that usage rates are pretty much the same, regardless of legal status.

In other words, everyone who wants to smoke does so already. By assuming an increase in use, you assume that our current laws are working in some fashion. But they don't work now, haven't worked in the past, and won't work in the future. The usage rate argument inherently gives credit to the government for a success that it has never actually achieved.

 

[mintz]

So, we all grow weed.

Buy do you grow marijuana?

The correct answer is no.

Understand that every time you use the word "marijuana", you are accepting the mentality of racism, hate, and fear that resulted in the prohibition of our beloved plant.

Marijuana was the name given to a faceless foreign threat, specifically to make the plant a foreign and faceless threat. The spanish word was used specifically to incite racist fears to pass corporate legislation. The spanish word was used so people wouldn't really know what was being outlawed.

Had you proposed the same ban on hemp,a crop nearly every farmer was growing, that would probably get you tarred, feathered, and strapped to a rail.

Negro is the spanish word for black. It is used openly as a descriptive. In todays america, that word has so many deep historical connotations of hate that it is no longer used in todays american society.

The same should be true for the word marijuana. While it is accurate to say you are merely using the spanish name, in american society, the word was turned to evil uses by evil men. It means that that word has now become an embodiment of codified racism, fueled by, and targeted against, american citizens.

Every time you use the word, you are tacitly agreeing with this policy.

Quit enforcing the indoctrination, and you'll succeed in countering that indoctrination.

Using this tainted word poisons the stream of knowledge you are trying to create.

The plants name is Cannabis.

Get it right.

If your Greek,im not Greek ,im west African and i call it GAMBA,so call it what you want or what its called in your NATIVE tongue or land and enjoy it.

 

[Dirty Harry]

I agree with you. Marijuana was initially slang for cheap ass Mexican tobacco.
Without reading all replies, I do have a question.
For medical cannabis we have Indica and Sativa. I always thought hemp was just hemp.
A lot of reading hemp seems to be called hemp sativa. How the hell are we going to get industrial hemp to be seen as different from medical cannabis when it share a common strain name of medical cannabis?
On farms there is hay and straw. Hay is used for animal food while straw is used for bedding. It all looks the same in a bale, but it is totally different. One will feed your cattle to keep them alive while the other (straw) will not.
The tomato plant is a relative of the weed Deadly Nightshade. You eat a tomato your good to go. You eat a deadly nightshade plant, you are DEAD. Remember back in time tomatoes were called love apples and were thought to be poisonous until a brave sole ate a bunch and survived.

 

[Jellyfish]

I didn't say a thing about more people smoking.

Excuse me, I think you did. When you say you “want our product to be considered on its own merits” by, presumably, “average, everyday Joes willing to at least look at our product in a proper mind set”, then the presumption is that you are marketing to NEW consumers.

“everyone who wants to smoke does so already”- well then, why are you trying to get average Joe to at least look at (your) product? Can’t be both ways.

I know about the statistics on (okay) CANNABIS use, but do you really think they are very reliable? For example, if someone comes to my door and wants to know how many times a week I smoke CANNABIS, I’m gonna say zero.


Thank you.

 

[RudolfTheRed]

Marijuana is just a term of endearment

 

[NiteTiger]

Excuse me, I think you did. When you say you “want our product to be considered on its own merits” by, presumably, “average, everyday Joes willing to at least look at our product in a proper mind set”, then the presumption is that you are marketing to NEW consumers.

“everyone who wants to smoke does so already”- well then, why are you trying to get average Joe to at least look at (your) product? Can’t be both ways.

I know about the statistics on (okay) CANNABIS use, but do you really think they are very reliable? For example, if someone comes to my door and wants to know how many times a week I smoke CANNABIS, I’m gonna say zero.


Thank you.

Actually, I think you're missing my point entirely. Cannabis, the plant, has many many uses beyond the buds. We will not be able to move legislation forward in this country by allowing the focus to remain on just the buds.

New consumers would be people who have never thought about cannabis as anything but the buds. The ones who realize, hey, there's an entire industry were not capitalizing on for no good reason. New consumers of cannabis materials, average Joe's like carpenters using cannabis building products, average Joes like farmers using land unsuitable for other crops, average cooks using food oils from cannabis, the Average Joes who could have cheaper bio-fuels, and those millions of average Joes that would be employed bringing these products from field to consumption.

Those are our new consumers. Those are the ones we need to reach. And if we keep talking about marijuana, the buds, instead of cannabis, the entire plant, they'll never hear the message.

We need the message to be heard that this plant is not a bud, it is an entire plant, a new industry, and a new economy.

People will support new jobs, cheaper fuels, and new revenue. They will not legalize for a new way to to party on a Saturday night.

So if we want it legal, we have to make the adjustment too. It's not about the buds, it's about the plant. It's not about Marijuana, it's about Cannabis. It's not about getting high, it's about common sense.

Regarding the use stats, the numbers don't matter particularly to the point I was making. The point is, everyone who wants to smoke is already smoking. Whether you lie to a pollster or not, you're still tokin' it up, legal or not.

Sorry for any confusion.

 

[Jellyfish]

You're the one who is confused.

 

[NiteTiger]

You're the one who is confused.

Quite the intelligent and thought provoking response