Whole Life Times: Beauty and The Weed

June 2005 | Letters from Readers

Beauty and The Weed

A huge thank you to our readers! We were so pleased to receive your interesting, thoughtful letters that we wanted to print as many as possible.

Marijuana Outcome

"Cannabis Crusader” (Michael Simmons, May ’05) while giving an excellent portrait of the plight of medical marijuana patients in the face of federal attacks, contained two passages which could mislead readers.

The suggestion that a Supreme Court decision in favor of the federal government “would override [medical marijuana laws] in federal court” is misleading. Such a decision, while leaving patients open to federal attack, would not overturn Prop. 215 or any state medical marijuana law. Indeed, the US Justice Department has never claimed it can overturn these laws or the protections they confer. And because federal authorities make only one percent of all US marijuana arrests, patients would still retain 99 percent protection from arrest, even in the event of a Supreme Court loss.

Second, I was a bit surprised to read that I am “hopeful about the possibilities of a Supreme negation,” which makes it sound like I’m rooting for such an outcome. While I do believe some good can be salvaged from a bad high court ruling, a decision in favor of the Justice Department would literally give the federal government permission to kill Angel Raich by putting her in jail and taking away the medicine she needs to live. To say that would be a tragedy is putting it mildly.
—Bruce Mirken, Director of Communications, Marijuana Policy Project

Seeing the Writing on the Bin

Enjoyed your article “Blue Bin Blues” (April ’05). Enjoyed meeting [recycling plant manager] Leonard Lang through you. As a fanatic recycler, I both commiserated and laughed at Leonard’s complaint that blue bins get 1/3 trash. The real problem is that THE BINS ARE VERY POORLY MARKED.

Leonard, I volunteer to assist with a redesign of the message material on bins so consumers can learn what you want and don’t want. The small sign, in small print, could only have been designed by a bureaucrat. Let’s get some talent involved for all new bins and re-signing old bins if cost-effective.

The best idea I’ve had is to mold the bins out of two different colors of plastic, one color—say green—on the right side of bins. The green side would have a LARGE PRINT list of items you want. The other side molded from red plastic—or any color other than green, would have in large print the items you do not want, such as film plastics. The top of the bin would say in large print sign what to do with metal poles, metal coat hangers, and other common items conscientious consumers know can be recycled but that you do not want.

Plan B for better signage is VERY LARGE PRINT self-adhesive signs to go on existing bins, one on each side and one on the top, with copy as above.

Leonard, this is a free offer of my labor to assist your team with this if my time and labor can be useful to you.
—Bruce Dickson, Mar Vista

Ed note and update: Leonard Lang does an admirable job of processing recyclables but is not involved with signage. Concerned readers should contact Ed Campbell at the Sanitation Department, click to email, 213.473.7882; or his supervisor, Pepe Garcia, 213.473.2766.

Officials at the department also alerted WLT that as of mid-April, we are able to deposit clean plastic bags (such as grocery bags) in the blue bins. We hope Lang has been informed!

Beauty In All Forms

I thought “When to Hold Back, When to Push,” in the April issue was beautifully done, well expressed and courageously stated.

By chance I happened to also notice some of the letters to the editor sharply criticizing the March issue. I feel compelled to make a few observations myself. The March issue was one of your best yet: wonderfully diverse, well-written, balanced and honest, informative, inspiring of reflection (which is possibly the most any writer could hope to achieve).

I’m a child of the ’60s. We walked our talk with integrity as I do today. What I noticed back then was how many were hypocritical, asking for others to have an open mind and not judge, yet they themselves would judge and condemn.

I make the same observation about some who expressed strong negative opinions about the March issue—within the same paragraph calling for WLT to be “high-minded,” while condemning the issue because of sex and beautiful women. Do they not see the hypocrisy in their own words? How can they use an expression like “high-minded” after just demonstrating their own narrow-minded, judgmental attitude?

Sex is natural. Sex is normal. By definition there is nothing wrong with sex, beauty, or beautiful men and women. I believe sex is our prime creative source and actually brings us closer to God.

Beauty comes in many forms. The March issue expressed beauty in many ways, some not so obvious as the wonderful model on the cover (who had the spark of beautiful intelligence in her eyes as well); like the article expressing views of those in Iraq. How is that beautiful? Because it demonstrated honesty, truth, growth from an individual perspective; about real horror, real duty, real experience.

In my small way, I hope to provide you with support. Encourage you to continue with what you’re doing by expressing my gratitude. Please put out more issues like the March 2005 edition.

I loved what you wrote in “When to Hold Back, When to Push.” From my heart thank you, it was inspiring for me. Seemingly, I fit your demographic; I’m a successful healer, believe we are all environmentalists regardless of politics as long as we breathe air, drink water, and enjoy pictures of America that include forested mountains and rivers with water, and I am deeply spiritual having personally experienced re-connection with source (God).

Thank you for the March 2005 issue. It was a refreshing change from years past, and a joy to read.
—Erik Fulkerson, Fullerton

I have been fascinated by your letters opposing the “babe” on the cover of your past issue (March). Since when does a beautiful woman in her prime not represent wholeness? The anger this caused is quite interesting and appropriate for the prominent puritanical climate in America right now. Why is a woman in her beauty, her godliness, her primal sexiness not considered spiritual? Who is separating the two, and why? They absolutely go hand in hand. I thought her presence was a beautiful reminder of nature, time, life and the Goddess. Thank you for her presence. I hope to see more and more beautiful “babes” on the cover in the future.
—Suzy Coyle, Burbank

Beach Access for All

At least David Geffen had the sense not to comment on the recent settlement of the lawsuit filed by the Coastal Commission over the public’s right to access the beach near his Malibu home. When a local TV newscaster asked one of his neighbors if she thought private property rights of beachfront homeowners should extend into the water, she replied, “They should extend to the middle of the Pacific Ocean.”

Such arrogance shows why the Coastal Act and the Coastal Commission are so important. Imagine the problems that would be created for maritime commerce and California’s $61 billion beach-related tourism industry (California Beach Restoration Study, 2002) if these “my-money-makes-me-special” attitudes formed the basis for managing the state’s coastal activities.

Even the deliriously successful of this state must have respect for its laws, whether or not they find them convenient. The Geffen settlement will help provide increased public access to the beach through the otherwise impenetrable wall of oceanfront homes that stretch for nearly four miles in eastern Malibu.

As the decision-making body that rules on all development permits along the coast, the Coastal Commission is always controversial. Both developers and environmental activists generally regard the rulings of the Commission as too lenient toward the opposing side. In that balance can be seen the wisdom of the authors of the Coastal Act and the voters of the state who passed the 1972 initiative that created it.

Without it there would be no coastal wetlands, no habitat for birds and other shore-dwelling species and few public access points to beaches other than in crowded metropolitan areas.

Unfortunately, there are still more than 100 other blocked access routes to the shore through residential communities in Laguna Beach, Santa Barbara, Mendocino and San Mateo counties. Coastal Commission Executive Director Peter Douglas said that the Geffen settlement “should send a signal to other holdouts. We are going after them with equal vigor that we did in Geffen’s case.”

Anyone who has attended a Coastal Commission meeting understands that the group’s work can be extremely complex—but few know that commissioners are unpaid volunteers who receive reimbursement only for travel expenses, as their meetings are held in different coastal cities each month. State budget cuts have whittled away at the Commission’s staffing resources, increasing the current staff’s workload at a time when such major issues as the Federal Government’s efforts to expand oil drilling off the coast demand immense staffing resources.

Many Californians list our beautiful coast as a primary reason they live here. Those who feel this way can do something of real importance to protect it. Call, write or e-mail the offices of those who appoint our coastal commissioners—the governor, the Senate Pro Tem and the Speaker of the Assembly.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
916.445.2841
www.govmail.ca.gov

Senate Pro Tem Don Perata
State Capitol, Rm. 205
Sacramento, CA 95814
916.651.4009
[click to e-mail]

Speaker of the Assembly Fabian Nunez
State Capitol
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento CA 94249
916.319.2046
[click to e-mail]

Tell them we need not only commissioners who will continue to act vigorously on behalf of the public and the environment, but also an adequate budget for Commission staff to do their jobs.
—Janet Bridgers, Founder/Director Earth Alert www.earthalert.org

Clarification

Regarding yoga discounts and insurance coverage referred to in our “Strange Bedfellows?” Yoga Works story (May ’05):

• PacifiCare covers yoga classes for employees only, four times a week at PacifiCare offices. Yoga is not a covered benefit under member health plans.

• Yoga Works offers a 20 percent discount for Blue Cross members on single classes and a 20 percent discount for new students on the first class series purchased.

• Yoga Works’ Huntington Beach studio charges new clients $40 for the first month, then $65 to renew monthly. Monthly renewal rate to go to any of the five Orange County studios is $85.

Recommend this page to a friend

Top Ten pages recommended to friends: