NEW MEXICO CHURCH FIGHTS TO GET HIGH

Does a religious organization have the right to use controlled
substances? The question was before the Supreme Court recently.

O Centro Spirit Beneficiente Uniao Do Vegetal (UDV), New Mexico-based
church is currently fighting for their First Amendment right to
practice their religion freely. In the members' quest for spirtuality,
they consume a cup of hoasca tea, which only grows in the Amazon River
Basin, in a total of 32 ceremonies a year.

The tea contains the illegal substance dimethyltryptamine (DMT). DMT
is classified in the United States as a Section I illegal drug under
the Controlled Substances Act, and the import of the tea is outlawed
under the 1971 United Nations Convention on Psychotropic Substances.

Under the religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, not all laws
apply neutrally to the institution of religion specifically because
the enforcement of certain laws would interfere with religions First
Amendment rights.

Students have mixed feelings about possible outcomes. "The Supreme
Court probably will not allow this religion to exercise these beliefs,
because they feel that if they let this group do this, then an
infinite amount of 'religions' will come out trying to use
recreational drugs," said senior civil engineering major Julius Gamble.

He also spoke about the fairness of the case.

"I don't believe that its fair to legitimate religions such as this
one. They should rule on this religion in particular, and if other
cases arise, then deal with those individually as well," Gamble said

The Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993, has already been
applied in allowing Native American groups the use of peyote in their
religious ceremonies.

Students like Cherryn Wilder, a junior mathematics major, feel that if
the ruling applied for them it should be allowed in this case as well.

"There needs to be one stance-- either totally ban it, or allow both
groups to utilize their rights as religious groups and let them use
the illegal substances," Wilder said.

Students also believe that uniformly, any group that wants to use
illegal drugs even in their religious ceremonies should not be allowed
that use.

"I don't think that group should be allowed to use any hallucinogenic
because it allows more loopholes for access to that drug all over,"
said sophomore English major Whitney Wingate.

Many people believe that religions should exercise their First
Amendment rights. "As long as it isn't hurting anybody, whatever they
feel get them closer to God should be allowed," said junior
advertising major Terence Prudhomme.

However, people also feel like the UDV needs to find an alternative.

"While I understand the separation of church and state and I would not
like to see religions rights infringed upon, they also need to adhere
to our nations rules. There are other ways for the UDV to become
closer to God; people try meditation and contemplative prayer," said
Rev. Acker, program coordinator in the Howard Ministry of the Chapel.

If the Supreme Courts finds against the UDV, it could set a precedent
that erodes the First Amendment rights of other legitimate religions.
If the Supreme Court finds for the UDV, it could denigrate the power
of the government to enforce it drug policies.

Either way the conclusion of this case can have profound consequences.