trainwreck2 wrote:I think the supreme court keeps striking down laws allowing religious use of drugs, which is pretty much unconstitutional...so its probably not legal even for religious rites...
as far as crackers go its certainly not legal...
You guys crack me up how comfortable you are talking completely out of your asses. This shit's not that hard to research. The Supreme Court's decisions are pretty well documented, ha ha.
Interestingly, this type of case just came up in the news again last week: Supreme Court hears hallucinogenic tea case
The Supreme Court has dealt with religious drug cases before. Justices ruled 15 years ago that states could criminalize the use of peyote by American Indians. But Congress changed the law to allow the sacramental use in tribal services of peyote, a bitter-tasting cactus that includes the hallucinogen mescaline.
O'Connor pointed out during Tuesday's argument that Congress changed the rules. She interrupted the Bush administration lawyer in his opening statement and peppered him with difficult questions.
Other justices also seemed concerned by the government's claim that an exception could be made for peyote, but not for hoasca tea.
"That is a rather rough problem under the First Amendment," said Justice Stephen Breyer.
Justice Antonin Scalia, who wrote the 1990 peyote opinion, said tribes have been using peyote -- "a demonstration you can make an exception without the sky falling."