I've heard of this religion before, but only yesterday did I read a
Wikipedia article and realised I have ideals quite similair to their's:

The use of (all) entheogens(natural & semi-natural) as a sacrament in
a spiritual/therapeutical setting, under the protection of Religious Freedom.
And a view that psychedelics in such a context can allow access to the divine/higher
self.

These 2 points that are clearly states on their website resonate very strongly
with my own beliefs concerning Psychedelics, however their website is very short,
vague & unfinished. It sais under construction: Hope they finish it soon.

http://psychede.tripod.com/

I would like to know more about this Religious organisation. Things like:
-They're based in Manhatten. Does anyone here have any experience with/knowledge of them?
-Does anyone know if they have any branches/temples in other countries? If so where?
-Does anyone if this religion is officially recognised & as such allowed to legally
posses/extract/synth/ingest psychedelic plants & compounds?

they read you the bible as you are blasting off..thats enough to put me off.

You have to be Christian to participate from what I understand.

Doesn't this church claim itself as an offshoot of the Native American Church?

I've always wanted to visit and certainly will when I find myself in Manhattan.

christian dogma and related bullshit in the realm of psychs?

eh, i'll pass.

Maybe they're just playing the game. "If we aren't using drugs FOR christianity, people will assume we're using them against christianity."

..i've never met them, but my understanding is that they are based specifically around DPT, and were formed in the late 80s/early 90s principally as a legal situation for DPT (before it was well known..i guess it still isn't, really)
.

..here you go: http://csp.org/nicholas/A58.html

They get right to the rules don't they? and sounds like they assume much .

Quite a turn off indeed. How narrowminded to only
allow Christians to participate; How discriminative.
How naive and how far from enlightenment.

More and more a desire in me grows to start a new religious movement.
Not because I am such a fan of religion, but because I am a fanatic persuer
of human rights & freedom. I can understand why you would somewhat play a
religious game, but this really puts me off.

It's the same reason why I'll never completely feel at home in the Santo Daime community,
even if I had an amazing Ayahuasca experience with them; To join them requires the acceptation
of a rigid, scriptural doctrine & that always rubs me the wrong way. I prefer freedom to form
my own little, more flexible doctrine & I think everyone deserves the freedom to their own
doctrines.


However to form a Religion & be legally recognised as such a group of people will have to document
some of their shared ideals & beliefs. Temple of the True Inner light folks appear to be stuck on
the bible & even only the christian interpretation of it. I think it's fine to extract bits & pieces
of wisdom from old doctrines like the bible, but to copy it whole & live a slave to a disempowering,
freewill-oppressing control system. Wisdom in holy scriptures is rare, but Ignorance & madness are
alot more common in "holy scriptures"


I would prefer to join or found a "Religion" with much more sober principles.
Something like this perhaps:
Our Religious(read"Common") Principles/Beliefs:




That sounds like the kind of Religion I would found.

I understand the point of trying to use freedom of religion to bypass prohibition, but I don't know if the principles you propose fit with the idea of "Religion". You need a belief system in order to define a religion, and those principles are basically stating facts (psychedelics are tools, bad mental health and sociopathy do not get along with them, etc.) and declaring rights for the members. But there is no "belief" in a religious sense.

That's why the Native American Church or the Temple of the True Inner Light are religions, and besides the circumstances and reasons why every one of them was declared as such, it's difficult to reconcile a religious structure with the entheogenic experience. Entheogens give you a direct experience, middlemen are almost redundant.

So either you are belong to a cultural, historical community that might ask to be protected, or you declare a particular belief system. And if you do this, you're closing doors.

The other options, of course, are social clubs, foundations, research centers, etc...

Are there any social clubs, foundations or research centers where members use
entheogens & are exempt from persecution?

I too dislike the idea of a rigid doctrine and therefor Religion would not be my first choice.
But considering quite a few religions have become exempt from persecution... That's the only way
that worked as far as I know. Perhaps Dr.Strassman and others have gotten green light for experiments
with DMT, Psilocybin & other tryptamines...But only for the duration of the research...

Would a human rights organisation have a chance to exempt it's members from legal persecution for
possession, cultivation and/or extraction/synthesis of Psychedelics intended for personal use?
It would feel much closer to my heart than the religious path. But has it got a chance?

I'd certainly join a Human Rights organisation that fought for the freedom of adult people
to choose what drugs to put in their bodies and what drugs to avoid if I ever ran into one.

There are enough scientific organisations like MAPS and Stichting Open(Dutch), Trimbos institiute(Dutch)
and more that have common sense and advocate more liberal druglaws & policies aimed at harm reduction.
But just advocating & pleading isn't enough when the opposition does not listen to reason at all.


How about taking this Human rights violation to existing human rights organisations?
Have none of these organisations ever been concerned with protecting the freedom to
decide what drugs to put into your body & mind? Seems so fundamental a human right.

Not unless specific exceptions are granted, of course. I was mentioning these examples because they seemed to fit more with the principles you wrote, not because they are feasible alternatives. Unless you live in a place where possession for private use is tolerated, and you can create a private association whose members can appeal to that tolerance. Like in Cannabis Clubs.



Human rights organisations are not above the law of each country, so the above applies.



We may see it as fundamental, but in the Universal Declaration of HR it's nowhere to be seen. The closest is Article 18, covering freedom of thought and religion.

I can vaguely remember having heard of a Human Right named "Self-Souvereignity",
which basically implied that legally seen your body is a freestate of which you
are the authority. But I cannot recall wether that was a Law of the UN, the EU
or of the Netherlands alone. I'll look into it.

This human right seems to be exactly the human right that I feel, should include
an individual being free choice & full authority over what drugs & foods are
allowed to enter their body(their freestate) and which ones are not allowed.

If a government or any other institution takes away this freedom of choice of people
it is clearly in violation of this human right. Could this reasoning not be used in
a court of law, to challenge the existing druglaws & policies & suggest new, more
reasonable druglaws & policies to replace them? Surely Laws are not impervious to
being challenged & changed if a rational & convinving enough case against it is
organised & better alternatives persistently offered?

Any lawstudents, lawyers or Judges in the Nexian House?