Supporters of so-called "medical marijuana" have little to go on. They want the government to approve the drug despite a lack of any credible science and despite a lack of support from the Food and Drug Administration.

Now they want the U.S. Supreme Court to put its stamp of approval on buyers' cooperatives that distribute the drug to people in need, arguing that a medical necessity ought to outweigh federal laws. Judging by their comments at a hearing this week, most of the justices don't appear to buy the arguments. We hope that's the case.

Former federal drug czar Barry McCaffrey has called medical marijuana "Cheech and Chong medicine." That's an apt description. While we sympathize with people who are suffering with terminal illnesses and feel a joint is the best way to relieve pain, the buyers' cooperatives are excellent tools for distributing the drug for less noble causes, as well. Society has good reason to be concerned about that.

So far, nine states have passed medical marijuana laws. Unfortunately, the court's ruling, expected sometime in June, will not negate this. The case at hand arose out of a Clinton administration lawsuit that specifically targets the buyers' clubs. If the court rules against those clubs, people in those states still would be free to grow and cultivate marijuana for their own use, but at least the distribution method, which has the ability to proliferate consumption, will be stopped.

It may be true that marijuana plants contain chemicals with medicinal value, but credible science has yet to make that determination or to decide on the best method of delivery. We cannot imagine a state approving the distribution of any other drug that had not passed scrutiny. And we certainly cannot imagine any other drug — particularly one that was proven to cause harm to its users, as marijuana does — being legally distributed by anyone other than a competent physician.

Marijuana is treated differently only because it has the support of a loyal and vocal group of recreational and habitual users whose ultimate aim is to be able to use their drug free from the fear of prosecution.

We will grant them this: medical science ought to determine whether marijuana has any useful medicinal value, and then decide on an effective delivery method that keeps users as free as possible from the harmful side-effects. But the rush to legalize the smoking of marijuana and liberalize its distribution ought to be seen clearly for what it is.

Join the Conversation
We’re testing some changes to our moderation system. You’ll see two changes:
  1. Fewer comments automatically sent to moderation (we hope).
  2. Lower tolerance for uncivil comments. If you encounter a warning that your comment will be sent to moderation, try revising before you submit for the best chance of approval.
Your feedback is welcome and can be submitted here.
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.