Medical marijuana lawsuit: State says no one in Colorado has fundamental right to MMJ

kathleen chippi photo-thumb-250x211-thumb-140x118.jpg
Kathleen Chippi.
On June 30, Kathleen Chippi and supporters filed a lawsuit claiming that medical marijuana regulations violate the state constitution, which made MMJ legal in Colorado.

Now, the state has responded by arguing in part that patients don't have a fundamental right to use medical cannabis.

This argument appears based in part on the case of Jason Beinor, a medical marijuana patient who was fired from his job as a street sweeper after failing a random drug test.

Afterward, Beinor filed for unemployment benefits, and a hearing officer eventually ruled in his favor because there was "no reliable evidence to suggest that... claimant was not eligible for a medical marijuana license" or that his use of the marijuana negatively impacted his job performance. But his employer appealed the decision, and a panel ruled in the company's favor, citing Article XVIII of the Colorado constitution, which states that an employee who tests positive during working hours for "controlled substances" that are "not medically prescribed" doesn't qualify for benefits. The Colorado Court of Appeals concurred by a 2-1 margin, with the majority finding that patients don't have carte blanche to violate firms' policies and practices.

Beinor, who represented himself in the case, wasn't surprised by the ruling and doubted it would have significant repercussions -- but he appears to have been wrong. Shortly thereafter, the decision was mentioned by town attorneys while successfully defending Longmont's medical-marijuana-retail-business ban. And Chippi believes it's the foundation of Attorney General John Suthers's take on her suit, filed under the name Patient Caregivers Rights Litigation Project.

john suthers facebook portrait.JPG
John Suthers.
"The State responded by saying none of the plaintiffs have standing, because no one has a fundamental right to medical marijuana in Colorado," she says. "They responded to every single paragraph in our lawsuit by saying they're ignorant as to how to respond, since no one has standing. And that's a reference to the Jason Beinor case."

How is Chippi responding? On two fronts. "When I realized how important the Beinor case was, I spent a month e-mailing him," she notes. "Last week, he finally responded, and I was able to guilt-trip him into appealing." The complaint is expected to be filed next week by Chippi's attorney, Andrew Reid, with the Patient Caregiver Rights Project picking up the tab.

Meanwhile, Chippi and company have until October 3 to respond to the State's latest filing, and a large part of its counterattack will hang on the argument made by the dissenting Colorado Court of Appeals judge in the Beinor case. "His dissent covers almost everything in our lawsuit, and Andrew is running with it," she says. "He told me he feels pretty good about us being able to prove that we have fundamental rights."

Of course, Chippi's suit goes beyond that issue "to address patient privacy and caregiver rights to sell for profit," she acknowledges. "So we're going forward with our response as if Jason's case doesn't exist."

Nonetheless, there remains the possibility that the Project's suit will be tossed on the same grounds used to withhold unemployment benefits from Beinor. If that happens, "we would appeal our case directly to the state Supreme Court, too," Chippi reveals.

"I'll be honest: The Beinor case came out of nowhere," she goes on. "He didn't realize what was going to happen, and since he got another job, he wasn't even planning to follow through on the appeal. But right now, it's the strongest case in Colorado on this subject, and it says no one has a fundamental right" to medical marijuana.

Potentially pursuing two Supreme Court cases simultaneously won't be cheap, and Chippi says, "I hope that once the centers find out what's happening, they might be more supportive of the lawsuits moving forward, and financially help us out. There's already a 50 percent decrease in red card applications from last year, and once patients realize that the cards won't protect them from anything, I don't see a lot of them signing up. People called me a fear-mongerer six months ago when I said, 'You're going to lose all your patients,' but that's what's happening."

Page down to see the State's answer to the Project's lawsuit; it can also be accessed by clicking here.


My Voice Nation Help
75 comments
Jer
Jer

Certainly!. . . Presently, many medical practitioners confess that grass medication is highly effectual in a multitude of sicknesses--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Semi di Cannabis

scandal
scandal

Suthers looks like a big creep.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Disqus is crap! It confuses replies with new comments, and will not allow them to be deleted -- this was one such; now it's a complaint about disqus.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Robert, what is wrong with Discuss?  You can delete comments if the Admin lets you, in this case Westword....  Do you have a better suggestion than Discuss?  It seems to work for a lot of people on here!  Adobe's Digital Enterprise and other platforms may look more appealing, but are harder to implement and cost a small fortune.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

This is way off topic -- the only reason I brought it up is because disqus misplaced my reply as a new comment and because it does not have a delete option as far as I can determine -- I am signed-in, on top of previous episodes of not posting my comments at all.  Will Breathes had exactly the same problem -- see:  http://blogs.westword.com/late....

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

It's way on topic as it's the entire platform on which these conversations take place. Personally I'd like to see Westword create a video virtual P2P 420 lounge for us all to face to face stream chat.

Breezy Kiefair
Breezy Kiefair

There is so very much so very wrong with this ruling that it makes me sick! DIG DEEP INTO THIS ONE> How long will Colorado chip away at MMJ rights in back rooms? come on Colorado, we got MMJ on the ballot for the state constitution and voted it in (took several tries, but we did it) THE SOLUTION TO ALL OF THIS IS THE SAME>>> GET IT ON THE BALLOT AND LEGALIZE IT... they cannot rob and abuse medical patients if everyone can grow/buy it for whatever reason they choose 

Shabong Mmj
Shabong Mmj

Thank you Kathleen for your tireless patient advocacy. Myself, the Shabong Community and patients throughout Colorado appreciate your efforts!

http://www.shabong.com/communi... - Shabong.com A Medical Marijuana Community

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Why have compassion for the loosing team?  Did you read the courts decision?  They tore this lawsuit to shreds!  None of the Kathleen Chippi crap ever stood a chance.  She keeps loosing over and over and stating that she is going to continue down the loosing path.  That is the definition of insanity.  Chippi is a nut case, hasn't done a damn thing.  It's like the nut case on the corner with the megaphone, good intentioned, but just annoying and should find a different corner to scream on. 

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

 Also, can you site any instance in where I have caused harm to any patient or caregiver?  Please.  For all the shit blowing out your mouth, you should at least be able to show how I have caused harm once.Pretty Please.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Loosing all of theses battles is just stupid.  The case write up from the AG shows you don't have a rats ass chance in hell of making a difference.  Sometimes being really stupid really does cause pain down the line like to patients and caregivers.  Can you on the other hand show me anything good that you have done for patients and caregivers?  We are both only good at making a lot of noise and getting nothing done, but I'm not acting like I'm helping people, medical marijuana is a lost cause, we need to shove it all down the toilet and move on to making cannabis as legal as tomatoes for everyone.  The medical bullshit that you fight so hard for is just the biggest road block to legalization right now.  Medical marijuana was the flavor of 2009 and 2010.  The new flavor is legalization, get on board.  Medical marijuana is dead!  Quit beating a dead horse!

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

 High country--God Damn your ignorance is truly unbearable. 

Please SITE a single case I have lost,  Cause there is NONE.  I petitioned the Supreme Court to hear my arguements in Jan.  They chose not to hear the case, which is the same response 98% of the people who petition the Supreme Court directly get.  They only hear 3-5 cases a year if you petition the directly instead of going through the lower courts.

The Beinor case that lost in Appeals Court referenced above had nothing to do with me or it would have my name in it, not Jason Beinors.  I did not know about this case until Aug 19th and I found out about it when the court ruled against the Longmont centers siting the Beinor ruling the day before, Aug 18.  I spent time trying to locate and contact Jason Beinor as he only had 31 days to appeal from the ruling.  I accomplished that. 

Without an appeal of the Beinor case--currently the highest case law in the state--every judge in every court room in Colorado would being ruling AGAINST patients and caregivers.  The appeal also is the exact same fundamental right issue I have been perusing.  Why would I (or anyone interested in their rights) ignore the Beinor case that is headed to the Supreme Court now, only to wait around for my district case to get there? And as far as the district filing I currently have did you expect the defendants to agree with the plaintiffs arguments?  Do you understand that the AG's office is not the judge?  Do you understand that defendants usually don't agree with the plaintiffs? 

justsayin
justsayin

i believe the diference is that oxy can be prescibed and the mmj is recomended.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

I stand by what I last wrote -- the finding in Beinor that patients have no right to cannabis is inconsistent with the intent of the Constitution.  The issue of whether Jason Beinor is due unemployment compensation is a separate one.  You are writing about the fact that Colorado supports employers (who already hold the power in the relationship) over employees -- that is a different injustice than the decision's broad denial of patients' rights to cannabis.

Monkey
Monkey

If your employers policy doesn't allow OXY or THC in your urine at work it doesn't matter what your doctor says, you get fired. You make it sound like you can have a prescription drug in your urine at work even if the employer policy forbids it. Doctors opinions mean nothing in the workplace. I don't trash people who know, I trash people like you. You can't protect the right to marijuana by taking away the right for employers to create policy. Employment is a privilege not a right, choose your job carefully.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

"A judge did not rule that marijuana is not a constitutional right" -- you're only half-right; this finding was made by two of three judges on the appellate court.  They dance around the issue, drawing an irrelevant distinction between an "authorization to use medical marijuana" and the prescription of medicines in the pharmacopoeia -- the Amendment makes reference to the physicians' recommendations, which ARE analogous to their prescriptions of other medicines.  By stating:  "we do not read this as creating a broader constitutional right than exemption from prosecution", Judges Richman and Furman deliberately subverted the clear intent of Article XVIII, Section 14, that physicians' recommendations of cannabis be treated like prescriptions under State law.  Why don't you get a clue before trashing people who know?

Monkey
Monkey

She confused you like she often does. Creating a problem and then claiming you are the only one trying to fix the problem strokes the ego, makes a nobody feel like someone important. A judge did not rule that marijuana is not a constitutional right, a judge ruled that employers do not have to change their drug policies to accommodate MMJ users. Her issues are with employee drug testing not marijuana testing. She wants to take away the right for employers to make their own policies. Everyone has the right to accept or decline a job based on the employers policy and employers have the right to make drug policies. You have a constitutional right to use marijuana, you don't have a constitutional right to break employer policy and stay employed or collect unemployment. All prescription drug users have had to deal with this since the inception of employee drug testing, this is not new but it adds to her marijuana crusade of saving us all. I'm sorry a weed smoker lost his job, mandatory drug tests are a violation of your rights, but he chose to work for a place that violates his rights and in return, lost his privilege to be employed.

ReRe25
ReRe25

WOW. This is really uncalled for. I have had the pleasure of speaking and working with Kathleen on this suit. I feel she has worked really hard for all patients rights. While all the centers refuse to donate to the lawduit as they feel that HB1284, HB 1043 will keep them out of the State Pen. These house bills do not protect disspensary owners. The prior model was perfect. I can can say this as a center owner. We were able to support many small caregiver in a bad economy. All these people were trying to do was support their family. What the hell is wrong with that. Instead these new rules pushed people back underground. The dispensary model is no longer profitable unless you have a shit load of money to throw up 80 plus lights and sell it at $150 an ounce to push out the small guy. In Boulder it is a joke with the price wars and places like Top Shelf who spray toxic chemicals on the plants and then turn around and sell it at $50 an ounce. Tell me what centers out there can support their expenses on that. I would venture to say it is coming from out of state.

Back to the suit: What is wrong with people.... Making it legal does not solve all the problems. Medical use is a better way to protect yourself from the feds. I believe they will have a hay day if it is just legal. As a mother I do not want my children using marijuana like alcohol. Eventhough marijuana is not nearly as dangerous. The suit is not about winning or losing. It is about standing up for your rights. In this country we just lay down and take it from the government. Every generation should have an up rising. Now is the time to say. No you can not take my constitutional rights away!!!! The judge rules that marijuana is not a constitutional right. What the heck is that. Then why did we amend the consitution. 

Kathleen I hope you win.... But if you do not I will always respect you and your passion to fight for the patients. Keep up the hard work. There are some center owners that do support you and will continue to. 

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Kathleen, you are the patient who needs help, and I am the caregiver trying to help you.  Quit beating the dead horse, medical marijuana.  It's over!  Patients are treated like drunks, and caregivers and dispensaries are like drug dealers.  We lost.  It's time for a new battle.  I'm trying to rally the troops.  This is anarchy, you won't get what you want by asking nicely.  Put on your war paint, smoke a joint and laugh at it all!

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

High Country has a website to call out the pot clowns http://420.co and a marijuana fun photo sharing website http://marijuanaphotos.co.  Also I built a website where you can build your own marijuana website free http://inhale.co.  Furthermore I love smoking pot!  What else can a guy do?  Don't say I'm doing nothing please.  I think everyone on earth should be able to smoke pot.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Right on, Kathleen!

P.S.  Just one annoying correction:  it's "cite", not "site" (they're homonyms).

P.P.S. Michael, I really, really hate DISQUS -- the damned thing does not work!

scandal
scandal

I wonder what high country is doing for the cause.You keep on marching on and don't give up the fight.The people of this state are behind you not high country and his spewing of crap.That is all i see come from him.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

"loosing" means letting something go -- you meant "losing".

Kathleen has spent many thousands of dollars of her own money making arguments against the unconstitutional laws in court; she has not lost, is not losing, and alone is doing what every other profit-taker in the industry should be doing.  I would say that attacking the only person to stand up for your rights in court is a whole lot crazier than anything I've ever heard out of Kathleen.

As for the megaphone, I don't have one.  I have used a bullhorn at various times in the past (not for several months), and mostly to exhort traffic passing by the monthly rally against Prohibition in front of the Capitol -- we get a very good response from motorists (but you read here once similar, inaccurate criticism and are repeating it).  Today there will be two rallies at the Capitol -- Occupy Denver starts at noon, and the pro-cannabis rally runs from 3-5; come on down and judge for yourself!

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Tell that to Fred Wegener -- the State, the Law, the prison-industrial complex -- these are NOT products of your mind, but an oppressive, pervasive, shared reality!

No patient should name a caregiver, and patients patronizing MMCs are giving up confidentiality, but possession of a red card prevents many arrests -- absent direct evidence that the confidentiality of the patient register itself has been compromised, I would not advise patients to boycott it.

You know what I look like -- come down to the rally and say hello.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

right, losing, thanks!

I argue against the unconstitutional laws too!  The current mmj laws and those who wrote them should be burned.  Doesn't cost money to make the argument.  What should happen is no patient should send paperwork into the CDPHE, the argument is free!  The results will trample the current unconstitutional laws and the 'profiteers' as you say.  Down with medical marijuana, let's just all know the use of cannabis and leave the State and their hoopla behind.  It's all in the mind!

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Everyone in the state of Colorado, Mr Beinor included, are VICTIMS.   We are victims of poorly written language.   The state didn't care if it was Mr. Beinor or Sally Sue.  They do NOT LIKE CANNABIS.  As the registry grew, the state panicked.  Is is permissible NOW to bring up the fact that Sen Chris Romer promised to write language (hb1284) that would close down 80% of the marijuana businesses?  Why are we here? is the question we need to be asking ourselves.The reason we have the state challenging our rights to mmj eleven years after passage of A20, is because A20 is so poorly written. The PCRLP also wants Coloradans to understand that constitutional amendments need to be written clearly and concisely. Even the dissenting judge in the Appeals Court, who agrees with our interpretation of the constitution 100%, acknowledges how poor the language in A20 is.  The authors of A20 (Drug Policy Alliance, DPA) refused to make corrections to their language in 1997 at the request of local activists before it was submitted for title.  DPA is currently part of the Safer/Sensible/MPP/NORML coalition working on the Regulate Marijuana initiative drive for 2012.  Local activists again have warned that the language is flawed and will bring more harm and confusion than good, just like their language for A20.

Stop talking and do something
Stop talking and do something

They don't even know the Constitution and laws you have to request the courts to allow you to educate the judges as they as stupid as they come I know this for a fact when dealing with a 15yr case against me you either speak and educate them with out being a dick about it and they just may run your way .One of my buddies got a ticket from a cop and to show at court the judge started putting him down till he presented his red card then said this case must be tossed but yet took his pipe and gave him a ticket for that yet if my buddy would of heard me out and took the black and white A-20 to the judge and highlighted patients rights to medicate the judge would of had to swallow his pride and tell the DA to stop flooding the courts with stupid cases like this period !!!!

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

The language of Amendment 20 was so poor it passed -- had it stated that caregivers' responsibility was the provision of cannabis to patients, it might not have.  I agree that more explicit wording should have been used, but this is crying over spilled milk -- it is our shared contention that the State is now violating Article XVIII, Section 14 of our Constitution.  If all the depredations made against it are allowed to stand, the Establishment has overborne the will of the People and succeeded in nullifying the Constitution.

As for Initiative 30, no (pro-cannabis) opponent of Initiative 30 is going to try to explain how a measure which eliminates several laws penalizing people for using cannabis (under which people are convicted every day) is bad for cannabis-users, because it cannot be done.  I am able to separate my consideration of its merits and deficiencies from my disgust with the way it was drafted -- barely.  All other considerations aside, on November 6, 2012 we likely will have a choice between voting to eliminate many crimes associated with cannabis and reducing overall criminal liability for those offenses statewide, or not -- nothing I have heard, read, or thought about the defects in Initiative 30 inclines me to believe that we would be better off retaining all our present laws against cannabis rather than fewer.

You, Corey, Laura, Timothy, Michelle, and I have all stood up for patients and caregivers.  We have tried to inform patients, dispensary owners, and the public, and we have confronted the prohibitionist scum at every turn.  I share much of your antipathy for the drafters of Initiative 30 and, especially, for the unconstitutional scheme on which it was based.  I respect each of you for your commitment to the truth and to patients.  The prohibitionists may well defeat Initiative 30, but if you want people who use cannabis to oppose it as well, you should be able to put into words what about the Initiative is bad enough to outweigh the invalidation of (some) of the laws against cannabis under which we suffer.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Robert--Ask the Attorney's Guild  if they support this language.  If you can't understand whats wrong with it maybe you should have them explain it to you.  Ask them why it's racist, continues to harm the people who are most charged with cannabis  violations 16-20 year olds, enshrines DUI marijuana into our constitution.  Take Beinor case and put it on a state level for recreational users.  No cannabis user will be protected from losing their jobs for 'hot' tests.  I guess if you don't have a job to lose, it doesn't matter.  I guess if you don't drive a car it doesn't matter. 

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Wrong -- I do drive.  Your repeated suggestions that I ask various people and groups something is offensive and irrelevant -- you know that I myself am an opponent of the DUID language, and that I objected to it at the first Title Board hearing.  I know all about the issue; I don't need to ask anyone anything about it!

I directly addressed the issue of the likely effect of the DUID language:

    "The reference to DUID is unfortunate but it does not create a new crime or a new penalty.  In the far off, enlightened world of imagination, that provision could create a problem for reformers seeking to legalize driving unimpaired under the influence of cannabis, but I do not anticipate that this will occur during my lifetime -- is that provision what outweighs no longer being able to charge people who grow six or fewer plants or possess indefinite amounts of cannabis at home?"

I suppose my question blotted the first part of that sentence from your mind.  Let me make it even more explicit:  there are no prospects for legalizing unimpaired driving under the influence of cannabis, therefore the DUID language in Initiative 30 does no harm.  It is there (as we both know) as a sop to all the supposed voters-in-the-middle in a (very likely doomed) attempt to allay their fears of stoned driving.  You all (generalizing -- just talked to Corey at the rallies today) have convinced yourselves that there really aren't that many prohibitionists in Colorado, but people with a negative attitude towards cannabis are the ones who will kill Initiative 30, if anybody does.  I do not agree with the approach taken in the Initiative and I have been one of its most vocal critics (remember?), but there is every reason to expect that it would reduce criminal liability, and that is the reason to vote for it.  As for other initiatives, I might yet volunteer to collect signatures for Initiative 40 or another if and when its title is set -- we can even vote for conflicting initiatives, because the one which receives the most votes will prevail on the conflicting particulars (under C.R.S. 1-40-123).

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

"Driving while under the influence of marijuana shall remain illegal" being enshrined in our constitution , FOREVER.  Go ask attorneys what "shall remain" means.  What "under the influence" means.  How much it costs to amend the constitution? 

Ya, that alone is a reason I will not be supporting this initiative.

Robert, you've heard my arguments regarding their language and you refuse to respond any differently than you are now.  You think I am full of it.  So I am telling you to go ask others who disagree with the language, why they do cuase clearly your not hearing it when it comes from me.  But since your not a minority, you do not drive a car and have no W2 job--I'm sure this language sounds good to you. 

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

I am a socialist!  I do not give a damn about the Libertarian's opinion of the Initiative either, except insofar as it bears on its chances.

Kathleen, Initiative 30 would eliminate some criminal laws and penalties for the use of cannabis -- you don't seem to be able to respond to this point

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

No, you can't.  What purpose would be served by posting stuff I wrote to Russ?  I have indicated what is wrong with their language over and over and over again, including in the post to which you are supposedly responding.  I am not interested in whether the Attorney's Guild supports Initiative 30 -- it is irrelevant.  If you could identify what justifies voting against removing some of the criminal laws and penalties associated with the use of cannabis, you would have a long time ago.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Also, ask the state Libertarian party if they support the language?  I have been contacted by them and many in the party do not support this language.

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Robert, I can not continue to debate you on this.  I also do not have time to post links or emails containing your feud with Russ B. (national NORML) where you are against their language. And Brian Vicente and Sean McAllester are in the Guild--ask them if the guild supports their language.  Ask them for the response from the guild. 

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

You're off -- almost none of what you wrote has the slightest bearing on what is in Initiative 30 -- you are mostly riffing off of what is not in it.  Why should I inquire of the Attorney's Guild when I have you? The reference to DUID is unfortunate but it does not create a new crime or a new penalty.  In the far off, enlightened world of imagination, that provision could create a problem for reformers seeking to legalize driving unimpaired under the influence of cannabis, but I do not anticipate that this will occur during my lifetime -- is that provision what outweighs no longer being able to charge people who grow six or fewer plants or possess indefinite amounts of cannabis at home?  Your rhetoric is so extreme that it cannot admit that the Initiative would reduce criminal liability -- if you were trying to persuade, you would instead cite negative aspects which outweigh what are inarguably improvements in the laws regarding cannabis.

P.S. Please send me a link to the Attorney's Guild -- I don't see it in Google.

Áine MacDermot
Áine MacDermot

So if I am an employer, I can make up any sort of policy for my employees and if they don't comply, I can fire them? I don't think so, but this is what the courts seem to be telling us. Does this also apply to public service employees? If so, we're their bosses, so we can make all sorts of ridiculous demands on them.

Denying patients a medical marijuana defense is a denial of due process, a violation of law.

High Country Caregiver
High Country Caregiver

Colorado is a per se employment State.  You can fire someone because you don't like the way they dress.  You can fire someone for showing up 2 seconds late.  Colorado is a great place to be the boss because in Colorado the boss is in charge, not the winy ass employees who think they can get away with murder and the State will protect them.  NOT!

Colorado Mmj Patient
Colorado Mmj Patient

I would have said "at will" but the point is the same.  Employers have more rights than employees in Colorado.

Corey's Mom
Corey's Mom

Wow... How many points were brought up in Chippi's suit? 90,100,100+???

All of them were shot down.

Doesn't that tell you something?

@c31ac3c1e8b3c489cc95ef139bd1889e:disqus Please stop hurting others with your good intentioned, but ill resulting actions. How many times do you have to hurt us before you stop?

Urban Farms
Urban Farms

how did she hurt us ????? isn't this suit to protect the constitution amend amendment  20. And protect are rights. please clarify!!!!!

Yzquierdo
Yzquierdo

how did she hurt us ????? isn't this suit to protect the constitution amend amendment  20. And protect are rights. please clarify!!!!!

Kathleen Chippi
Kathleen Chippi

Please identify what harm I have caused anyone.  Please....show me some god damn evidence.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Kathleen, remember that you are addressing an anonymous poster -- most of them are all about raising false accusations -- over and over again (because somebody's dumb enough to believe them).

Please don't trouble yourself over the likes of "Corey's Mom" -- we just have to rely on readers' ability to discern the truth.

Corey Donahue
Corey Donahue

Wow... how many of you are are lawyers?

Kathleen ignore the anonymous neigh sayers.  I mean this guy is probably a cop or some bald retard sitting in his basement and complaining because he is to retarded to go out and actually advocate for something. I mean what kind of retard still makes yo mama jokes?

Respect All
Respect All

yo mama jokes are nothing compared to "retard" jokes.  you preach equal rights then insult a minority group like that?  bullshit hypocrite. you are.  you should know that "retard" is pretty offensive to people who may have siblings who have disabilities as well as those people themselves. I hope your children are not born with the disabiliity you have to be so disrespectful.

justsayin
justsayin

Well if it's a joke then who are you to tell me what's funny and what's over the line? Are you the joke police?fuck man my bad..... i guess you must be the petition police.

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

Corey did not set the "movement [to re-legalize] back by at least 5 years" by lighting a joint onstage -- that is an absurd accusation!

The J
The J

I know kids with Down's Syndrome who have more sense than Corey, here.  Corey, wasn't it you who lit up a joint in the middle of the Great Legalization Debate?  Way to act the fool when it is most inappropriate.  Your irrational behavior has set your own movement back by at least 5 years.  Douche.

Respect All
Respect All

Justify it all you want, the term "retard" is still insensitive to people with disabilities and their families. You show how truly uneducated you are by using it as a term to put down someone else with by separating people with disabilities out from the rest of "humanity" and implying they are inferior.

To quote you: "But hey that's what bad cops and hateful people do separate groups from their identity as one humanity so they can claim they are different and futher promlagate the stereotypes that are so damaging."

Corey Donahue
Corey Donahue

Well if it's a joke then who are you to tell me what's funny and what's over the line? Are you the joke police?

I don't preach anything and I view disabled people in the same groups as Black people, Muslims, Christians, Gays, Women... all part of one Humanity.  I feel bad that you have such a negative view of disabled people that you have to separate them out and make them of a lesser humanity with the rest of us. But hey that's what bad cops and hateful people do separate groups from their identity as one humanity so they can claim they are different and futher promlagate the stereotypes that are so damaging.

But it's not like Respect All has done anything to help the disabled movement just some anonymous person that wants to fake anger to attack people. If Respect All actually cared he would use his real name, but Respect All does not, I wouldn't be surprised if Respect All actually uses the anonymity of the internet to do exactly what he is chastising me for.

Like all words the definition can change and be malleable. So you, Respect All, are doing something pretty offensive assuming I was disparaging the disabled community and saying they are any less then full humans like the rest of us. And what about the bald part I said bald am i taking a crack at the hairless members of humanity, or pointing out that it's not hard to figure out who this anonymous jerk off is and that I know what will bring about the response I was looking for? 

To help

Retard:1. A slowing down or hindering of progress; a delay.2. A person considered to be foolish or socially inept.

Guest Who
Guest Who

if Retards are offended they should defend themselves

Robert Chase
Robert Chase

You industry nits are projectile vomiters of ignorance.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

Loading...