QUOTE(Cadence @ Apr 5 2009, 07:21 PM)

It would be interesting to find out about the cannibis flower, because isn't it the leaves and stem and sometimes buds that are used to smoke?
If that is the case, the cannabis flower may not have a narcotic effect and may not be part of the law.
I have no idea, I'm just speculating if you're writing a paper on it - sounds interesting.
I think you'd need to look very carefully at the law. My guess is that it is the active ingredient - THC - that is the target of the law, so it might depend on whether the flowers contain THC. After all, THC-free hemp is widely and legally available in trousers, shirts, ropes, wallets etc.
Still, this is only my guess.
When you refer to 'Hindus' I guess you're thinking of the availability of bhang (yogurt with cannabis) at some Indian sacred sites (this used to be a government monopoly, might still be)? if so, then since bhang is a narcotic, there would be little point in selling or imbibing it without the narcotic element. Ergo, if it contains only flowers (I have no idea whether it does), then the flowers are narcotic.
However, as far as I know imbibing bhang is not a religious duty, so one would be hard pressed to run that defence. And as I recall, Rastafarians who tried to make a case for smoking dope as a religious duty were given short shrift by the courts!