Question: Should Cannabis Be Available as a Medical Treatment?

The legalization of medical and recreational marijuana should be implemented across all U.S. states. The debate over the legal status of medical marijuana is significant due to various reasons. Currently, 23 states have laws permitting marijuana, albeit with varying degrees of restriction. While this is a significant advancement, I argue that all states should emulate Alaska, Colorado, Washington, and Oregon by legalizing cannabis for both medicinal and recreational use. Before delving into the reasons, let's clarify the definitions of marijuana, medical marijuana, and recreational marijuana to avoid confusion. Marijuana is a commonly used illegal drug derived from the hemp plant, also known as cannabis, hemp, or weed. Medical marijuana refers to the use of marijuana for medical purposes, while recreational marijuana is any drug used for its psychoactive effects without medical justification. Despite the existence of various strains of marijuana for different medical needs, I suggest focusing this debate on the definitions provided. Firstly, the classification of marijuana as a Schedule I drug lacks scientific evidence. Schedule I drugs are defined as having no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse. However, marijuana has been used for centuries for medical purposes with positive effects. The National Institute on Drug Abuse also acknowledges the medical benefits of marijuana. The reasons for marijuana's classification are complex, but they do not justify its harsh classification. Secondly, legalizing marijuana would benefit the U.S. economically. The country spends significant resources on dealing with illegal marijuana sales and consumption. Legalization would eliminate the need for these expenditures and generate revenue from the marijuana industry. Oregon, Alaska, Washington, and Colorado have implemented different laws that suit their needs, providing a good starting point for other states. Lastly, I support the legalization of marijuana for recreational use, emphasizing individual autonomy in health decisions. Smoking tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death in America, yet it has no legal restrictions, while marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug. Cannabis should be legalized for medical and recreational use, with approved salespersons ensuring safety. This will not eliminate illegal sales but will reduce their prevalence. The current laws regarding marijuana are illogical and unjustifiable in a well-educated country in the 21st century. Sources: [1] http://www.governing.com... [2] https://www.vocabulary.com... [3] http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com... [4] https://www.leafly.com... [5] http://www.merriam-webster.com... [6] http://www.dea.gov... [7] http://medical

Actually, they have not yet proved if marijuana reduces lung cancer or not yet. They tested it, but then found out that the testers might have been too young to develop lung cancer. Also, just because there have been made laws to have smokers stay away from buildings, does not mean that the smoke is still in the air. Anyone can breathe it in and harm their body with the smoke. Now there might be some good things about marijuana that we don't yet know about, but what about the bad things? Your blood pressure dropping? Heavy coughing? Stinging and burning of the mouth and throat? Death? I don't think people want to go through this, just to have a quick high. It doesn't make sense. As I said before, the government is protecting us, and protecting future generations. Now, you can go against it, but there will be consequences. I'm pretty sure some scientists are able to test marijuana because how would they be able to test the lung cancer situation? I do not think marijuana should be legal, because it harms our bodies, for NO apparent reasons. We don't need to be ruining the bodies, that God Himself created for us.

Thank you for your opening argument! Firstly, I would like to talk about the negative health effects of marijuana. Marijuana has several short term negative effects which include- panic attacks, anxiety, depression, sleepiness, restlessness, lowered reaction time and increased heartbeat by almost 50%- sharply increasing the risk of a heart attack However what makes the effects of smoking marijuana even more severe is the length of time that the drug stays in the body. In one smoking of marijuana- the drug stays in the body for around to 14 days and in smokers who smoke marijuana more often and more intensely, the drug can stay in the body for up to 3 months. This means that one smoking of marijuana stays in the body 56 times longer than 3 pints of beer, which is usually removed from the body within a maximum of 6 hours. There are also several long term effects of marijuana which include-Respiratory issues such as- Reduced resistance to bronchitis, rapid destruction to lung tissues and fibres, potentially causing lung cancer. Marijuana also affects the immune system, causing abnormally low or high activity and in some cases the body begins to fight off its own "good" cells. It also causes abnormal growth in teen users, brain disorders and abnormal cellular structures, sometimes even the complete destruction of cellular matter. Marijuana negatively affects the urological system, it reduces male sex hormones, and can cause erectile dysfunction. Marijuana is also shown to cause testicular cancer in some cases. The most overwhelming negative effects of marijuana lie in the brain, it can cause permanent brain lesions, learning difficulties, depression, and other long term psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia. Here we can see a long list of violent, destructive long term effects of marijuana. By legalizing this drug, it means that more people are subject to the affects of the drug, causing more illness, injury and in some circumstances death.

If Marijuana is legal, Marijuana users wouldn't have to do as much "stupid stuff" to get those drugs if it wasn't legal. All the Government is doing is spending billions of dollars to try to "stop" what will never stop. People will never stop smoking weed just because it's prohibited. What is the Government's business (if it really needs to be there at all) would be to protect citizen's from serious crime like murder and rape. Also basic welfare/ poverty etc. It should be concerned with protecting citizens from circumstances that involve general harm to other citizens, oppression, and anything that does not invade the private liberty of the citizen. When I say "general harm" to other citizens, I have to mention that the use of weed does not necessarily count as "harm" to other citizens in the same way that smoking a "hookah" does not count as "harm" to other citizens. Once the Government gets involved it always becomes invasive. The Government violates the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens from unreasonable searches and seizures. That is an injustice! Why would the Government go so far as to violate the Fourth Amendment, just to jail weed smokers? If the Government sincerely wanted to stop people from smoking Marijuana, there should be increased spending (which wouldn't cost nearly as much as the money they spent for Prohibition) on education to educate people about the effects of Marijuana abuse. That would serve much more effective as then people would learn more why they should stop smoking weed, instead of just being forced to not smoke weed I already mentioned the education alternative earlier, which Con ignored. Legalizing Marijuana would definitely improve a lot of situations. *It would respect the boundaries on individual liberties more *The Government would save billions of dollars they could use for education on drug abuse *If the education is paid for to educated about drug abuse, kids could stop smoking weed simply by learning about how it affects their body etc. Plenty of teenagers already go to school high, not caring about school work and getting good grades. What would help is education on the matter instead of restrictions that invade civil liberties! People are responsible for their own bodies and own choices and the Government doesn't have the right to be invasive about other people's own choices and bodies! Education is the best weapon. Psychologically, children learn best from their parents, from imitation and education. Contrary to popular belief, children don't learn anything from physical discipline or punishment. That's why people should have the choice to choose what they want to do with their bodies but also have an idea of the consequences (health consequences, that is.) Since Marijuana is not nearly as dangerous as cocaine, it shouldn't count as being a form of potential harm towards other citizens other than the user. Even though sometimes cocaine is put into Marijuana, that doesn't mean that Marijuana is faulty. It's just dangerous distribution in general. Dealers do those kinds of things with any drug. Neither alcohol nor cigarettes should be treated more seriously either. This is a matter of individual liberties! As I've said before, the Government has not right to invade civil liberties for reasons that only involve the individual person's choices The Government has no right to regulate a personal choice The Government has no right to violate the Fourth Amendment for something as petty as individual choice The Government shouldn't waste money that could be used for something more useful And lastly once again, The Government should leave the people alone to make their own choices

O.K. so I will give this one last shot, I have had some very interesting discussions on this website but the debates are rubbish.. especially the gay marriage debate (and pretty much anything about religion) but the marijuana debate is by far the most ridiculous debate that exists. I guess when I challenge someone to debate this topic I'm hoping someone has actually done the research to discover why cannabis is illegal. It has nothing to do with the dangers, it is political b.s. and is a prime example of oppression and hypocrisy! Sorry to blow up at you I was coming off the tail end of a debate that made me realize that I was debating against control freaks that wanted to dictate the lives of anyone different than them.. anyways I'm pretty busy this weekend but I will be challenging you sometime soon to a proper debate.. Do you research into the politics and maybe we can get some where! Anyways my apologies again for dumping my baggage on you.. I will come better prepared next time!

Ok. I know that it seems safer than alcohol and tobacco, but would it still be a good idea to legalize it? I think ( and this is my own opinion) that all substances ( alcohol, tobacco, and other harmful drugs not intended for treatment) should have RESTRICTED uses (not banned) . I know how alcohol and tobacco are easy to get and very well legal, but what if marijuana was of this to? I know it isn't as deadly, but the other two substances are widely accepted. Take for example in the early 19th century, when selling alcohol became illegal in the USA. People where smuggling it left and right and the government eventually just gave up on the law and peace was restored. So that rules out alcoholic substances from being eliminated, but I think more strict laws should be made on the sale of alcohol. And I understand why illegal marijuana is more deadly, but it's not the death that is the only problem (although it certainly is a big one) it is also the fact that people would have another way to lower self esteem. Imagine if it was legalized today? It may stop riots from druggies, but could start ones involving people like me ( who want to stop substance abuse). It could also stop drug dealing, since it would be legal to sell, but it also would allow younger people to hurt there self esteems by being reduced to the level of drug abusers. I'm not saying everyone in the nation would start smoking it, but some people would definitely do so. Why say "we should add it because it isn't so bad", and instead think that "why add another drug people can abuse?" I will wrap this up saying that if you think that it wouldn't be fair not to legalize it, try to see the other side in that it could hurt the picture of our nation (just like alcohol and tobacco do!) Try using the cup analogy for this conflict. Is it half empty, or half full? Is it not fair for it to be legal, or will it just hurt us even further. In reality, it depends on how you look at it in a way. P.S. This debate only concerns the use of marijuana for the public legally, not for medical uses in hospitals.

"Only one in 10 have a serious problem"If marijuana was legalized and declared not that dangerous, I think over a million people in the U.S would smoke it. That means 100,000 would have a serious marijuana problem. That is a ton of people who would have to fix it, but can't because marijuana is still somewhat addictive, but you're right, not as addictive as heroin. " Marijuana isn't as harmful as tobacco or alcohol yet it is still illegal."I beg to differ here. My dad drinks alcohol maybe once a month and gets drunk at a ballgame maybe once a year, but doesn't have a problem like all of those cartoon people (Peter Griffin...) Here's a list of what marijuana can do [1]:• Increase risk of cancer.• Weaken your immune system.• Difficulty remembering things• Changes how human brain works• Linked to increase in panic attacksTobacco is addictive and cancerous, that is entirely true, but not as bad as the above. Alcohol is the same."Has a few health risks"...A few? That's an understatement. Please check out this website: [2]. It's from well-known school called HARVARD.We can't stop a ton of people from smoking marijuana. But legalizing it is going to make even more people smoke it. It will become in such high demand that prices will skyrocket. Many people may lose their homes, jobs and other things due to bankruptcy and need for marijuana. There are already many people like that, so just imagine what would happen if we gave ourselves an even larger sample size. Farmers will grow marijuana for money instead of other fruits and vegetables, which would lead to health problems even to people who don't smoke it.People who don't want to smoke marijuana would also be forced to smoke it. If people can openly smoke it in cities, like tobacco, then people passing by have the opportunity to get high. While it would be HEAVEN for people who want to smoke it, the consequences would be too dire. Years of rehabilitation would become undone and addicts would be released from jail. Marijuana can also lead to insanity, and who knows what can happen when you are both high and insane.For my last argument, I turn to age [3] problems. 45% of people under 21 would smoke marijuana, leading to a decrease in schoolwork and more minimum-wage jobs and more homeless people. Surely you can see the hidden dangers of marijuana if it is legalized. On to you![1] http://ades.bc.ca...[2] http://cyber.law.harvard.edu...[3] http://www.narconon.org...

Inspired by http://www.debate.org... Each person must argue the resolution to the best of their ability. But the catch is, each person must use as many logical fallacies as possible. The arguments vote should be given to the person with the best balance between persuasiveness and fallaciousness. To my opponent, please do not argue semantics or attempt to weasel out of the spirit of the debate. Since sources are irrelevant, the sources vote should be defaulted to the winner of the arguments/fallacies. Now to get on with the arguments. ======== It is vital that we legalize marijuana for the welfare of society. According to this poll (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...), 52% of Americans want to legalize it, while only 37% are opposed. The choice is clear. If we do not begin marijuana on a regular basis, the only alternative is to inflict great suffering on every man, woman and child across the nation. According to my uncle, who is a widely known medical doctor, marijuana has great health benefits. My great uncle, a world-renowned university professor, concurs. He believes that everyone should smoke marijuana in order to enrich their lives. Marijuana is made from the cannabis plant. Plants have evolved side by side with humans; human bodies are designed to be able to use them. So you see, smoking marijuana is a very natural process. Let me give an example. I had a friend named Jill. She was unhappy with her job and had become very depressed. So her doctor prescribed a daily smoking of marijuana. In no time, she felt much better. Marijuana is great. Everyone knows it. The health benefits have been proven in laboratories time and time again. It would be absurd to even try to argue that marijuana is harmful. My opponent must be crazy to accept this debate. Someone who does not smoke marijuana every day is comparable to someone who does not eat every day. It's just not healthy. What kind of person could advocate that sort of lifestyle? Marijuana is great, everyone knows it. That much is undeniable. My opponent is going to have a hard time breaking down my impenetrable arguments based on flawless reasoning.

Fun I get to defend the "Happy plant", Thinking of reasons to hate it I really can't, Marijuana the drug nobody has over-dosed on on, You can be high and not die at the same time! Cigarettes, kills people left and right, Weed doesn't even hurt you, So legalize it tonight, Marijuana is the number 1 cash crop in america, People who think people died from it have a severe case of hysteria,

Jeffrey Miron is senior lecturer and director of undergraduate studies in the economics department at Harvard University. He is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of "Libertarianism, from A to Z." The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author. (CNN) -- Following the liberal footsteps of Colorado and Washington, Alaska, Oregon and the District of Columbia passed ballot initiatives to legalize marijuana this month. Florida's medical marijuana law failed, but only because as a constitutional amendment it needed 60% support; 58% voted in favor of it. In 2016, another five to 10 states will likely consider legalization -- possibly Arizona, California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont. It's not surprising. Opinion polls show that marijuana legalization now commands majority support across the country. Do these developments mean that full legalization is inevitable? Jeffrey Miron Jeffrey Miron Not necessarily, but one would hope so. Marijuana legalization is a policy no-brainer. Any society that professes to value liberty should leave adults free to consume marijuana. Moreover, the evidence from states and countries that have decriminalized or medicalized marijuana suggests that policy plays a modest role in limiting use. And while marijuana can harm the user or others when consumed inappropriately, the same applies to many legal goods such as alcohol, tobacco, excessive eating or driving a car. Recent evidence from Colorado confirms that marijuana's legal status has minimal impact on marijuana use or the harms allegedly caused by use. Since commercialization of medical marijuana in 2009, and since legalization in 2012, marijuana use, crime, traffic accidents, education and health outcomes have all followed their pre-existing trends rather than increasing or decreasing after policy liberalized. Ricki Lake: Pot can treat cancer in kids Investors betting on marijuana in U.S. This is your body on weed The strong claims made by legalization critics are not borne out in the data. Likewise, some strong claims by legalization advocates -- e.g., that marijuana tourism would be a major boom to the economy -- have also not materialized. The main impact of Colorado's legalization has been that marijuana users can now purchase and use with less worry about harsh legal ramifications. Yet despite the compelling case for legalization, and progress toward legalization at the state level, ultimate success is not assured. Federal law still prohibits marijuana, and existing jurisprudence (Gonzales v. Raich 2005) holds that federal law trumps state law when it comes to marijuana prohibition. So far, the federal government has mostly taken a hands-off approach to state medicalizations and legalizations, but in January 2017, the country will have a new president. That person could order the attorney general to enforce federal prohibition regardless of state law. Whether that will happen is hard to forecast. If more states legalize marijuana and public opinion continues its support, Washington may hesitate to push back. But federal prohibition creates problems even if enforcement is nominal: Marijuana business cannot easily use standard financial institutions and transactions technologies such as credit cards; physicians may still hesitate to prescribe marijuana; and medical researchers will still face difficulty in studying marijuana. To realize the full potential of legalization, therefore, federal law must change. The best approach is to remove marijuana from the list of drugs regulated by the Controlled Substances Act (CSA), the federal law that governs prohibition. Standard regulatory and tax policies would still apply to legalized marijuana, and states would probably adopt marijuana-specific regulations similar to those for alcohol (e.g., minimum purchase ages). State and federal governments might also impose "sin taxes," as for alcohol. But otherwise marijuana would be just another commodity, as it was before the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937. A more cautious approach would have Congress reschedule marijuana under the CSA. Currently, marijuana is in Schedule I, which is reserved for drugs such as heroin and LSD that, according to the CSA, have "a high potential for abuse ... no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States ... [and] a lack of accepted safety for use." Hardly anyone believes these conditions apply to marijuana. If marijuana were in Schedule II, which states it as "a high potential for abuse ... [but a] currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States," doctors could legally prescribe it under federal law, as with other Schedule II drugs such as cocaine, methadone and morphine. Given the broad range of conditions for which marijuana may be useful, including muscle spasms caused by multiple sclerosis, nausea from cancer chemotherapy, poor appetite and weight loss caused by chronic illness such as HIV, chronic pain, stress, seizure disorders and Crohn's disease, doctors would have wide reign to prescribe, making marijuana all but legal as occurs under the broadest state medical marijuana laws, such as California and Colorado. Medical science would also face fewer regulatory hurdles to marijuana research. This "medicalization" approach, while perhaps politically more feasible than full legalization, has serious drawbacks. Federal authorities such as the Drug Enforcement Administration could interfere with marijuana prescribing -- as sometimes occurs with opiate prescribing. Taxing medical marijuana may be harder than taxing recreational marijuana. And the medical approach risks a charge of hypocrisy, since it is backdoor legalization. But medicalization is still better than full prohibition, since it eliminates the black market. For 77 years, the United States has outlawed marijuana, with tragic repercussions and unintended consequences. The public and their state governments are on track to rectify this terrible policy. Here's hoping Congress catches up. Shut up Gabe

My opponent states that, "I believe drug abuse should be a public health issue, which means users and abusers do not face criminal penalties," By inference my opponent refers to the use of illegal recreational drugs, as previously noted in Canada and the USA. I object to this on the basis that drug abuse has been made a crime, because drug abuse threatens the health of the user, those around them and the wider society. Cannabis one of the more benign of the illegal recreational drugs has been shown to cause permanent damage to mental health, including paranoia, anxiety attacks and schizophrenia. In addition it can reduce reaction times, driving whilst under the influence of cannabis is therefore a threat to the wider society. . http://news.bbc.co.uk... If the health effects of drug abuse were limited solely to the user/abuser then that would be a point in favour of my opponents proposition. But it is clear that these conditions provide a threat to the liberties and quality of life of others. Thus drug abuse must remain a criminal matter. That is before we address the terrible effects of Cocaine, LSD and Heroin etc. There is also a direct correlation between drug abuse and crime, not merely due to the criminality of the drugs themselves (which obviously would be negated by my opponents proposal), but by addicts who are attempting to fund their habits. Though it can be argued that legalisation would increase the availability and reduce the cost of such drugs, many drug abusers are currently unable or unwilling to hold down a job and so would still resort to crime. If anything the number of these criminal drug users would increase under my opponents suggestion. By treating the catalyst of these crimes, and the crime itself as crimes the police are more able to deal with the overall rate of crime. My opponent further argues that drug uses are not to be prosecuted "but are offered treatment for their addiction in an open ended, government funded center. " My opponent clearly states that the treatment will be ‘offered', this implies that such treatment will be entirely voluntary. I observe that drug abuse is a threat to the health of the user, their friends, families and the wider society. Drug abuse also tends to be addictive. As drug abuse is harmful to society and as drug abuse tends to be addictive then it must be noted that in the former case we would like the users to accept treatment, in the latter case it is questionable how many would. We can not expect a typical Heroin addict to volunteer for drug rehabilitation/treatment, nor having done so to remain in a such a program purely through the strength of their own willpower. It is clear that such treatment deserves a certain amount of coercion and would only be effective through the use of coercion. The current system, where drug addicts are punished, removed from the society they threaten and often required to face rehabilitation or treatment as part of their sentence is clearly superior, thus my opponents resolution is negated. It is also amoral to expect society and specifically the tax payer to tolerate the social cost of drugs without protest, yet then be forced to pay for the drug abusers treatment. This is especially relevant in the USA, why should the tax payer pay for the self-inflicted problem of drug abuse when the rest of society is expected to fend for themselves? My opponents argues that one of the benefits of his proposal will be that, "This would remove much of the racial stereotype seen with arrests for possession of illegal drugs. " I believe that this is the least of our worries, no one really cares what the race is of the person caught dealing drugs to their children, or to which race a drug fuelled mugger belongs to. I would also point out that drug abuse is a noted facet of numerous cultures. "This would save billions of dollars in police processing fees, court fees, incarceration fees, and potential recidivism costs. Money would also be saved with the end of prohibition world wide, including all border regions, bribe costs to maintain prohibition, less violence and therefore less collateral damage to pay for, ect. " Though it can't be denied that there would not be certain ‘savings' in some areas, the issue is that the net cost to society will increase. My opponents proposal is to argue that Heroin use be considered a similar ‘condition' to alcoholism. "These savings would go towards prevention methods, which would be intelligent and factual pieces of information spanning across all forms of media and entertainment in order to educate ages child to adult. " More effective prevention methods would however be more police and tougher sentences for drug abusers. Educating children on the nature of these dangerous drugs removes the stigma that ought to be associated with their use and encourages them to think of drug abuse as a manageable risk, such as going to bar or indulging in red meat. Finally my opponent argues that, "By removing prohibition, the existence of the black market would dwindle considerably as see with the end of alcohol prohibition, and the move into a legal and regulated market. " Though that is true, alcohol which is only dangerous through excessive consumption is not analogous to such drugs as say Heroin. Which can be instantly addictive or even fatal with the first use. A better analogy would be between the ending of alcohol prohibition and the hypothetical legalisation of Russian Roulette. Thus I propose that the current system is superior to my opponents proposal and thus my opponents proposal is negated.


Question: Should Cannabis Be Available as a Medical Treatment?

Medical cannabis should be a lawful choice.

I invite my adversary to discuss the advantages or the absence thereof concerning medical cannabis. I firmly believe that medical cannabis should be legally accessible, as it has been scientifically demonstrated to possess therapeutic properties and alleviate pain. Compared to numerous opiates currently prescribed for pain management, it is less habit-forming and exhibits milder adverse effects. Prohibiting medical cannabis could potentially hinder treatment for individuals afflicted with severe illnesses. I look forward to your reply and further discussion.

I know that this topic is very well discussed throughout the United States, so i thought i would let my opinion be out there. I believe that Marijuana should be legalized because it would help put a fire into our economy. Think about it, really honestly, this economy would have an amazing bounce back if we legalized it, and put a tax on it. Think about how many people smoke Weed. If we taxed weed, and sold it in per-say Weed store, in similarity to a liquor store, more people would go and buy it legally instead of risking going to jail. The construction industry would boom back, because we would need people to make the Weed stores. The housing industry would come back maybe not as strong, but there would be plenty of investors, investing in Marijuana. The crime rate would seemingly go down, because we wouldn't be throwing people who didn't commit a "real" crime into jail, and we could focus more on the people who are actually hurting this world. More jobs would come into effect due to the legalization of marijuana, think of how many brand new stores, and businesses would open if it was legal, jobs would be abundant everywhere in the United States. Another strong point, Marijuana has so many things in it that scientists have yet to study, and it has been proven that there are chemicals in Marijuana that can help prevent certain sickness's. "Data in Dr. Tashkin's study suggest that people who smoke marijuana are less likely to develop lung cancer than people who do not smoke anything at all. Since marijuana smoke contains the same cancer-causing agents as tobacco and the only difference between the nonsmokers and the marijuana smokers was their use of cannabis, then it is not an unreasonable hypothesis that marijuana can prevent the development of cancer."(Swerdlow). If Marijuana was legalized we could study the chemicals in Marijuana in more depth and maybe find cures for such "UN-curable" diseases. Swerdlow, Lanny. "MARIJUANA CAN PREVENT CANCER, NOT CAUSE IT ." (2010): n. pag. Web. 26 Oct 2010. <http://cannazine.co.uk...;.

Thank you for starting this debate. I am sure that it is going to be very enjoyable. Here are some reasons why adults in the United States should not smoke marijuana regularly: 1. I said so. 2. Every person who has smoked marijuana in the United States so far has been a criminal, so smoking marijuana regularly would turn all of America into criminals. 3. Barack Obama said so, and he is always right, because he promises hope and change. 4. If all adults in the United States didn't smoke, then they'd all give that money to charity, because that is what Jesus would do. 5. If all adults in the United States didn't smoke, whatever they bought otherwise would be taxed, which transfers money to government, and we all know that government is the best place for money to be kept, because acer said so here (. http://www.debate.org...), and acer is a straight-A student who built a robot, so all things he says should be accepted without question. 6. If all adults in the United States did smoke, the policemen would be forced to arrest themselves, and criminals would run mad on the streets robbing everything every hard-working American ever owned in our proud history. 7. Marijuana sounds funny. Let's look at my opponent's arguments: All of my opponent's arguments are unreliable, because he is an atheist, and all atheists are immoral. He argues that polls are reliable, but they are not, because the Founding Fathers limited the power of the common man with the Electoral College, so they think that the common man is an idiot. Therefore, the poll is an argument against legalization of marijuana. My opponent's relatives must also be unreliable, because they are related to an atheist. Everyone knows that marijuana's sole purpose of evolution was an attempt to remove all humans from the face of the Earth to save the whale. Don't be so ridiculous. My opponent cites a story about his friend, Jill. However, Jill is a character from a storybook (. http://en.wikipedia.org...(song)), and all storybook characters are silly, so Jill is silly, and her story cannot be trusted. My opponent calls me crazy. However, one has to be crazy to call somebody else crazy. Therefore, my opponent is crazy, and cannot be trusted. My opponent compares eating to smoking marijuana, but there is obviously a tremendous difference, because "eating" starts with "e," and "smoking" starts with "s. " My opponent has exaggerated before, as seen here: . http://www.google.com... Therefore, he must be exaggerating now, and all things he says cannot be trusted. I have shown my opponent to be completely unreliable, so anything he says must the tossed out, no questions asked. I have shown why only an idiot would smoke marijuana, ever, so don't be an idiot.

To address your list of "Short-term Hazards", all of these things are also associated with using other legal drugs or even just being highly fatigued and should be of no concern to the general public or government. The only one that could involve others is "Poor Driving Skills". I would say decreased reaction time, and I agree this is bad, but your argument implies that more people would drive under the influence of marijuana if it became legal. In places around the world where legalization and decriminalization strategies have been implemented in the past, consumption rates have actually decreased. To address the "Long-Term Hazards": "Respiratory problems", "Heightened risk of infections, especially the lungs", and "An increased risk of developing lung, head and neck cancers" - That's not what the research says. The only long-term, respiratory consequence of smoking marijuana is an increased lung capacity. Medical professionals are learning more every day that THC (the active ingredient in marijuana) can be used to treat various medical conditions. Some studies show that certain cannabinoids retard the growth of cancer. "Poor short-term recall" and "Inability to shift attention normally" - I'm not sure what you mean by this. There is absolutely no long term, irreversible cognitive damage done by smoking marijuana. "Inability to understand complex information" and "Lack of motivation" - I am offended. I am a senior Industrial Engineer major / Mathematics minor at Texas A&M University with a 3.3 GPR. I was salutatorian of my high school. I am not graduating until May but I signed a job offer at the beginning of this school year at the multi-national corporation I interned at last summer (I'm not saying the name of the company as I don't want to offend anyone associated). I promise you that smoking marijuana since high school has not negatively impacted my ability to "understand complex information" or given me a "Lack of motivation" "Decreased sperm count in men" and "Irregular menstruation in women" - The only research on this I've seen is in a documentary called "Super High Me" and the man's sperm count actually increased during a period of heavy usage following a period of abstinence. "many school children would have access to it." - I challenge you to actually research or think logically about this point because I think it is important to realize why you are wrong. Ask any middle or high school student whether it is easier for them to get marijuana or alcohol. Invariably, the answer will be marijuana. The reason? Drug dealers don't ID. Just as alcohol was easier for minors to get under the prohibition of alcohol, marijuana is easier for children to get under this prohibition of marijuana. "Furthermore, my opponent speaks about job creation if marijuana is legalized. This is simply tedious to mention" - I think you are vastly underestimating the profit margins these corporations will be making and the number of people they will have to employ to become successful. Look at the thousands of jobs that have already been created and the millions of dollars of tax revenue generated in the states who have legalized just medical marijuana. If marijuana were to be legalized nationwide for everyone, these benefits could grow exponentially. "After all, "prevention" is better then "cure"." - Even if this true, I think we can agree, we will never prevent an entire country from using drugs. The failed war on drugs has been pretty strong proof of this. The best way to handle this issue is to get the drug that generates the most profit in the world out of the hands of criminals and into safe, FDA regulated shops. As you can see, I have done a staggering amount of research on this topic and I believe all signs point to legalization. It has been a great success in the places it has been implemented and it is about time America realizes this. Just as prohibition of alcohol failed by every measure, so is the prohibition of marijuana.

Marijuana should be de-criminalized for a few reasons, There is not one case in history that recorded a death due to only cannabis use, not one! Compared to the hundreds of thousands that die due to tobacco and alcohol!

Another reason that marijuana should not be legalized because it could cause young children to think that it's ok to do drugs. Legalizing drugs is like telling a teen it's ok to engage in risky behavior, when drugs are involved, there is an increase of possible death or permeant injury. I'll agree that prescribed drugs are just as easily abused, but this drug should be used due to its "safe" use, when actually it could cause serious problems later on in life or cause a serious reaction due to a existing medical condition. Again this can happen with prescribed drugs, but the drug in question is just as dangerous as herion and cocaine.

IntroductionI would like to begin by thanking my opponent for responding. However, I believe he misunderstood my argument. I feel he rushed his argument, did not thoroughly read my statements, and simply did not put enough effort into understanding my stance. I am entitled to a few final rebuttals - my opponent is as well - and then I will write my conclusion and review of the debate. Final RebuttalsI would like to refute my opponent's most crucial rebuttals. He writes, "I am aware of this, however it is still not the point I am getting at. I am not talking about the dangers of recreational marijuana, I am speaking of the undeniable side effects of medical marijuana, even when bred a certain way. " I do not deny the side effects of recreational marijuana but, again, marijuana can be bred to have certain traits. Genetic modifications will reduce or possibly even eliminate the side effects. This marijuana - which will be used for medical purposes - will be beneficial. My opponent writes, "[m]inor? Since when are respiratory issues, hunger, and giddiness minor problems? " Perhaps I utilized the wrong terminology. The point I was trying to make was that the side effects are nothing in comparison to the benefits. My opponent claims, "[h]ow is my statement not sufficient? I am clearly stating the undeniable dangers of medical marijuana use. " I acknowledge the potential, yet very unlikely, dangers of medical marijuana. However, it is currently the safest drug to treat epilepsy and other such conditions and diseases. "Um. .. Why would I not 'ignore this statemtent' when it was not yet time for rebuttals? I was simply following my opponent's rules. I have already refuted this anyway, so there is no reason to do it again. " No, my opponent has not refuted this. Marijuana can be bred, not only to have low THC and high CBD, but also to have reduced or eliminated side effects. It is a matter of genetics. Genetics experts can make the necessary modifications for marijuana to be 100% safe. Marijuana right now, actually, is close to 100% safe when used safely and carefully. "I did not ignore it, I simply did not wish to break the rules. Secondly, the only reason we do not use the traditional medicine is because we have not discovered it. Instead, we are using a dangerous alternative. We should focus out research on finding safer alternatives. " While we research and try to find cures and deny individuals to use medical marijuana, people are dying. I do not deny that safer alternatives can and will be found in the future, but for now, marijuana is the safest treatment for certain conditions and illnesses. While we wait for that perfect treatment to be discovered, and people are not utilizing the positive effects of medical marijuana, death is occuring because of this. My opponent, as well as the judges, should consider that. I have now completed my final rebuttals and I will now conclude the debate with the following conclusion paragraph:ConclusionThis debate was rather enjoyable. However, I believe my opponent misunderstood and misinterpreted my arguments. I feel he has not put enough effort into this debate. But ultimately, the outcome of the debate is not the decision of my opponent or I. The judges will decide.

I don't know really what you mean when you say that our economy would be better if it was legal, because that could turn into even more problems for our people. Marijuana is a gateway to even stronger drugs and if people use it, they might start buying other drugs that aren't good for their bodies. You also said that marijuana should be provided for scientists to study it, but if doctors gave away the prescriptions, the people taking the medicine could overdose and not know. I heard a story about a girl that took drugs for a medication, only needed to use them certain times, but used them just because they made her feel calm, and abused it. She ended up waking up in the hospital. This is just one of the many stories of people who can abuse drugs, such as marijuana. If it were legal, people could make these decisions everyday not even knowing the effects it has on their bodies. Marijuana is dangerous and harmful. If our government made it legal it would just cause more problems for our country, because of all the health care and taxes we would have to pay for the marijuana abusers and users in the hospital. This is not fair, and it's not as big of a deal as it would be if we made it legal. I thank you for listening to my side of the story, and giving me the chance to have a good debate! Thanks!

Weed can help A LOT with getting off debt from other countries; Weed is very useful with helping people who may always be in pain and relaxe those from doing thins stupid; and can just have a good laugh with your peers. For gods sake weed is just a PLANT ! And there is nothing wrong with doing it with your family or friends as long as u can really trust them; enough to not lace it with something more dangerous. LEGALIZE MARY-J !!!!!!!!!! :D

Inspired by http://www.debate.org... Each person must argue the resolution to the best of their ability. But the catch is, each person must use as many logical fallacies as possible. The arguments vote should be given to the person with the best balance between persuasiveness and fallaciousness. To my opponent, please do not argue semantics or attempt to weasel out of the spirit of the debate. Since sources are irrelevant, the sources vote should be defaulted to the winner of the arguments/fallacies. Now to get on with the arguments. ======== It is vital that we legalize marijuana for the welfare of society. According to this poll (http://www.huffingtonpost.com...), 52% of Americans want to legalize it, while only 37% are opposed. The choice is clear. If we do not begin marijuana on a regular basis, the only alternative is to inflict great suffering on every man, woman and child across the nation. According to my uncle, who is a widely known medical doctor, marijuana has great health benefits. My great uncle, a world-renowned university professor, concurs. He believes that everyone should smoke marijuana in order to enrich their lives. Marijuana is made from the cannabis plant. Plants have evolved side by side with humans; human bodies are designed to be able to use them. So you see, smoking marijuana is a very natural process. Let me give an example. I had a friend named Jill. She was unhappy with her job and had become very depressed. So her doctor prescribed a daily smoking of marijuana. In no time, she felt much better. Marijuana is great. Everyone knows it. The health benefits have been proven in laboratories time and time again. It would be absurd to even try to argue that marijuana is harmful. My opponent must be crazy to accept this debate. Someone who does not smoke marijuana every day is comparable to someone who does not eat every day. It's just not healthy. What kind of person could advocate that sort of lifestyle? Marijuana is great, everyone knows it. That much is undeniable. My opponent is going to have a hard time breaking down my impenetrable arguments based on flawless reasoning.

The drug should not be legalized because if it is, then other drugs like herion and cocaine might be made legal as well. While it is used to treat diseases like cancer and other medical problems, which I have no problems with, if it was legalized, then dealers would be free to sell it on the streets to anyone they wanted. Crime would go up because as more of it sells, gangs would want to enlarge their territories, thus putting people who live in the areas in the middle of a possible gang war, and cause innocent people to be seriously hurt or killed. Drugs like marijuana are harmful to young children as it messes with their brain, which is still in important developing processes, if legalized then it increases the danger marijuana poses to them. Any drug has a risk of overdose no matter what it is, cocaine and herion are placed in the same category as marijuana, and you can over dose on the two, every drug has the possibility of over dosing.


Question: Should Cannabis Be Available as a Medicinal Alternative?

THW mandate the availability of marijuana in all state-funded healthcare programs. It is unjust for governments to withhold treatment based on unfounded and unreasonable claims, demonstrating a heartless and blindly ideological stance.

An understandable fear but many people thought the same of the alcohol prohibition but as is the case with most things in life their fears were worse than reality. If prohibition yielded more promising results I might see justification in continuing with it. Even if the prohibition is lifted people will not be allowed to just run rampant through public places getting high and causing chaos. There will be designated places such as their is with alcohol. People are allowed to smoke cigarettes, east fast food, and drink like a fish and all three of those things are proven to be extremely bad for your health. Their legal because 1. mega companies make a fortune off of them and 2. It is up to the individual on what they put in their body. This really comes down to ones freedom to choose for themselves. People don't like having the government tell them what they can do with their body.

Thank you for your opening argument! Firstly, I would like to talk about the negative health effects of marijuana. Marijuana has several short term negative effects which include- panic attacks, anxiety, depression, sleepiness, restlessness, lowered reaction time and increased heartbeat by almost 50%- sharply increasing the risk of a heart attack However what makes the effects of smoking marijuana even more severe is the length of time that the drug stays in the body. In one smoking of marijuana- the drug stays in the body for around to 14 days and in smokers who smoke marijuana more often and more intensely, the drug can stay in the body for up to 3 months. This means that one smoking of marijuana stays in the body 56 times longer than 3 pints of beer, which is usually removed from the body within a maximum of 6 hours. There are also several long term effects of marijuana which include-Respiratory issues such as- Reduced resistance to bronchitis, rapid destruction to lung tissues and fibres, potentially causing lung cancer. Marijuana also affects the immune system, causing abnormally low or high activity and in some cases the body begins to fight off its own "good" cells. It also causes abnormal growth in teen users, brain disorders and abnormal cellular structures, sometimes even the complete destruction of cellular matter. Marijuana negatively affects the urological system, it reduces male sex hormones, and can cause erectile dysfunction. Marijuana is also shown to cause testicular cancer in some cases. The most overwhelming negative effects of marijuana lie in the brain, it can cause permanent brain lesions, learning difficulties, depression, and other long term psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia. Here we can see a long list of violent, destructive long term effects of marijuana. By legalizing this drug, it means that more people are subject to the affects of the drug, causing more illness, injury and in some circumstances death.

I don't really believe that marijuana is illegal for health reasons, or addiction! I don't believe that pot is any more dangerous than most products that are readily available! Without going into my argument against the Pharmaceutical companies or the alcohol and tobacco industries, I have to point out the amount of harmful substances that are mainstream and extremely addicting that cause serious health conditions! Sugar is the wolf in sheep's clothing while cannabis is the sheep in wolves clothing! Preservatives are in almost everything and even meat has been known to increase tumor growth! The cotton industry along with the tobacco industry forced out marijuana (competition) with propaganda and dogma surrounding the plant to stir up a malicious campaign against Hemp and Marijuana! If you watch refer madness now its good for a laugh, but back then it manipulated people with racist and ignorant messages! Apparently they were stupid enough to believe it and now we have the biggest contradiction in the history of America, and a prohibition that simply cost the tax payers money with very negative results!

Thank you for accepting this debate :D I will define alternative medicine as: "Any of a range of medical therapies that are not regarded as orthodox by the medical profession, such as herbalism, homeopathy, and acupuncture," and will allow my opponent to state their point first

Marijuana has altering affects on a humans mind that cause cancer and many other diseases. Marijuana has some benefits to it, but not enough to balance it's cons, let alone succeed them.

Again, marijuana is a drug. Yes, it can be used for medicinal purposes and has proven to be a rather affective form of physical stilumation. But the harsh reality remains. People use drugs to acquire money. AND when this drug of choice is used for monetary gain, familes have to suffer the consequences of people who make bad decisions. Marijuana is also a lifestyle. And this lifestyle consists of cultural debauchery, drunkeness, rogue capitalism, and illegal trade. This is a business that will never die. So the truth remains, drugs affect our lives and our state of mind. Marijuana. although not as mild as others, yet highly addictive, is no different.

The first and most basic reason that marijuana should be legal is that there is no good reason for it not to be legal. Some people ask 'why should marijuana be legalized?" but we should ask "Why should marijuana be illegal?" From a philosophical point of view, individuals deserve the right to make choices for themselves. The government only has a right to limit those choices if the individuals actions endanger someone else. This does not apply to marijuana, since the individual who chooses to use marijuana does so according to his or her own free will. The government also may have a right to limit individual actions if the actions pose a significant threat to the individual. But this argument does not logically apply to marijuana because marijuana is far less dangerous than some drugs which are legal, such as alcohol and tobacco The second important reason that marijuana should be legal is that it would save our government lots of money. In the United States, all levels of government (federal, state, and local authorities) participate in the "War on Drugs." We currently spend billions of dollars every year to chase peaceful people who happen to like to get high. These people get locked up in prison and the taxpayers have to foot the bill. We have to pay for food, housing, health care, attorney fees, court costs, and other expenses to lock these people up. This is extremely expensive! We could save billions of dollars every year as a nation if we stop wasting money locking people up for having marijuana. In addition, if marijuana were legal, the government would be able to collect taxes on it, and would have a lot more money to pay for effective drug education programs and other important causes. The third major reason that marijuana should be legal is because prohibition does not help the country in any way, and causes a lot of problems. There is no good evidence that prohibition decreases drug use, and there are several theories that suggest prohibition might actually increase drug use (i.e. the "forbidden fruit" effect, and easier accessibility for youth). One unintended effect of marijuana prohibition is that marijuana is very popular in American high schools. Why? Because it is available. You don't have to be 21 to buy marijuana -- marijuana dealers usually don't care how old you are as long as you have money. It is actually easier for many high school students to obtain marijuana than it is for them to obtain alcohol, because alcohol is legal and therefore regulated to keep it away from kids. If our goal is to reduce drug consumption, then we should focus on open and honest programs to educate youth, regulation to keep drugs away from kids, and treatment programs for people with drug problems. But the current prohibition scheme does not allow such reasonable approaches to marijuana; instead we are stuck with 'DARE' police officers spreading lies about drugs in schools, and policies that result in jail time rather than treatment for people with drug problems. We tried prohibition with alcohol, and that failed miserably. We should be able to learn our lesson and stop repeating the same mistake There are plenty of other reasons why marijuana should be legal. Just to name a few: Medicinal use: Marijuana can be used as medicine because it helps to stimulate appetite and relieve nausea in cancer and AIDS patients. Hemp: The hemp plant is a valuable natural resource. Legalizing marijuana would eliminate the confusion surrounding hemp and allow us to take advantage of hemp's agricultural and industrial uses. Religious Use:Some religions instruct their followers to use marijuana. Just like Christianity and Judaism instruct their followers to drink wine on certain occaisions, some Hindus, Buddhists, Rastafarians, and members of other religions use marijuana as part of their spiritual and religious ceremonies. These people deserve the freedom to practice their religion as they see fit. The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that the government cannot 'prohibit the free exercise' of religion, and so marijuana should be legal.

Since the early 1900s, weed has been demonized and considered harmful and destructive. Today, several studies have arose to disprove these theories. One study suggests that the only effect of cannabis on humans is the temporary loss of short-term memory. Nobody has ever died, or contracted any health issues caused by using weed. The government and smaller organizations including D.A.R.E. have gone out of their way to demonize this plant in an effort to hide it's many uses from the public. Some examples of common propaganda include the theory of weed acting as a "gateway" drug, the theory of weed causing lung cancer/tumors, and countless others. These are all untrue.

My Argument On Healthcare is Void?If drugs are legalised for recreational use they would also be available for medical experiments (in the same way alcohol is) therefore my argument stands.Drugs and ViolenceWhen Alcohol was legalised in the US violence went down [1]. In fact a large bump in the murder rate can be linked to the prohibition of alcohol in the US. During this time gangs took over the alcohol trade and this increased violence. When alcohol became illegal violence went up and when alcohol became legal violence dropped.This same parallel works for drugs. When drugs are illegal crime goes up because the drug market is taken over by violent criminal gangs.EconomyWhat if we compare the unemployment rate of the US as a whole with the Netherlands? Remembering that the Netherlands has far more Libertarian drug laws than united states. The Netherlands has an unemployment rate of 6.6%, its neighboring country Belgium which has much more authoritarian drug laws has an unemployment rate of 8.5% [2].Human NatureI showed that there were working anarchist communities in the north of Spain before and during the Spanish civil war [3].AddictionIt is considered impossible to overdose on marijuana [4] I can find no record of anyone who has died of marijuana.(Marijuana is illegal in Scotland) I took a survey of 20 people under the age of 16 living in Scotland and this is the result.65% Had been offered alcohol over the last six months.80% Had been offered class B drugs over the last six months.65% Had been offered class A drugs over the last six months.Furthermore remember that the total cost of alcohol in medical bills every year is £6 billion [4], vastly more than marijuana.[1] http://madeinamericathebook.files.wordpress.com...[2] https://www.google.co.uk...[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...[4] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...

To start off with, I have never smoked weed. However I know people that do. My source states " Scientists have confirmed that the cannabis plant contains active ingredients with therapeutic potential for relieving pain, controlling nausea, stimulating appetite, and decreasing ocular pressure. Cannabinoid-based medications include synthetic compounds, such as dronabinol (Marinolï¿½) and nabilone (Cesametï¿½), which are FDA approved, and a new, chemically pure mixture of plant-derived THC and cannabidiol called Sativexï¿½, formulated as a mouth spray and approved in Canada and parts of Europe for the relief of cancer-associated pain and spasticity and neuropathic pain in multiple sclerosis." http://www.drugabuse.gov... On the other hand my source says this about alcohol."Alcohol affects every organ in the drinker's body and can damage a developing fetus. Intoxication can impair brain function and motor skills; heavy use can increase risk of certain cancers, stroke, and liver disease. Alcoholism or alcohol dependence is a diagnosable disease characterized by a strong craving for alcohol, and/or continued use despite harm or personal injury. Alcohol abuse, which can lead to alcoholism, is a pattern of drinking that results in harm to one's health, interpersonal relationships, or ability to work." "In 2009, 51.9% of Americans age 12 and older had used alcohol at least once in the 30 days prior to being surveyed; 23.7% had binged (5+ drinks within 2 hours); and 6.8% drank heavily (5+ drinks on 5+ occasions). In the 12-17 age range, 14.7% had consumed at least one drink in the 30 days prior to being surveyed; 8.8% had binged; and 2.1% drank heavily." "The NIDA-funded 2010 Monitoring the Future Study showed that 13.8% of 8th graders, 28.9% of 10th graders, and 41.2% of 12th graders had consumed at least one drink in the 30 days prior to being surveyed, and 5.0% of 8th graders, 14.7% of 10th graders, and 26.8% of 12th graders had been drunk." This is a few stats and facts.


Question: Should Cannabis Be Available as a Medical Treatment?

In places where the medicinal benefits of cannabis are recognized, the substance is usually accessible, which might unintentionally endorse its recreational use. When authorities and healthcare experts are attempting to curb the consumption of legal substances like alcohol and tobacco, endorsing cannabis use through government approval could lead health policies in a direction that the majority would rather avoid. Essentially, such a policy shift would imply, 'We'd prefer you didn't consume alcohol or smoke, but it's fine to get high'. In countries where this debate is ongoing, personal use of mild narcotics is often overlooked by law enforcement. Nonetheless, legitimizing drug use in any form sends a message to the public that 'it's not a concern, do as you please'. The production of drugs can devastate lives and communities. Legalizing marijuana for medical purposes would likely only be effective in Western liberal democracies, but it could encourage increased production in regions where it's still illegal. This could incentivize the growth of the drug market in illegal states. Legalizing cannabis for medicinal use might inadvertently boost its use as a recreational drug. Restrictions on cannabis production could push the market into the hands of criminal organizations. As a result, cannabis cultivation might continue to be characterized by organized violence, corruption, smuggling, and drug adulteration. Legalizing cannabis use through state legislation might overlook and mask the human suffering caused by drug production in both developed and developing countries. Additionally, many criminal networks favor cultivating and selling cannabis over other, more strictly controlled substances. It's highly probable that the legal cannabis market proposed by the state would attract organizations trying to launder illicit funds or pass off contaminated marijuana as medical-grade products.

Alright this is my first debate. I know you may not think I am a good debater since no one has seen mine. Marijuana shouldn't be legalized due to the reasons that the high is too powerful for most people to control. I understand it is used for medical purposes as a painkiller, but there are other ways to relieve someone's pain.

I'm fairly new to this site and to debating but this is a controversial issue that I have opinions on. I accept this debate but I would like to state that I'm not against medical marijuana if it is approved by a doctor.

Hello, Its nice to debate you again. Marijuana is listed as an addictive and harmful substance by the DEA. I am not going to disagree that marijuana can not be addictive I'm just saying that its addictive potential is being overstated. The article that i have listed in the bottom shows that on 10 - 30 percent of users are addicted and only one in 10 have a serious problem. Of course, addiction is a major problem but, you may be overstating the case. You also compare the use of pot to tobacco, this brings up another argument. Marijuana isn't as harmful as tobacco or alcohol yet it is still illegal. Tobacco is one of the leading causes of cancer and kills thousands every year. Alcohol also causes many healthy issues in people and is a leading cause of violence. Should we ban alcohol and tobacco too? We tried to ban alcohol in the 20's and that was a miserable failure just like the ban i pot is today. i disagree with comparing marijuana to heroine, heroine is obviously far more addictive. I disagree that this should even be a point. So what? Someones life style is no concern of mine. Yes, a majority of stoners are losers, but that is just a stereo type. A list of "losers and hippies" include Barrack Obama, George W. Bush, Al Gore, Rand Paul, Brad Pitt, John Lennon, Steve Jobs, Oprah and many more. I'm just saying that just because something is associated with something negative doesn't mean that it should be illegal. Marijuana does have health effects but so do many other things. You can get cancer from the sun and air. Just because something that has a few health risks doesn't mean we should continue a policy that has resulted in the creation of an underground black-market, Millions of non violent people being incarcerated and tens of billions of dollars spent to all stop the use of a plant. people have been using marijuana for thousands of years and will continue to. Their is no way to stop that. So my opinion is that prohibition doesn't work and can be inadvertently more harmful then the thing it is banning. So prohibition of a substance should only be used when that substance is something really harmful, and i don't think marijuana is as harmful as we have been led to believe. http://norml.org... Great website to check out http://www.psychologytoday.com...

Con has forfeited, but I'll put my points up anyway. Marijuana should be legalized for three reasons. 1. Marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol and therefore applying the law to one and not the other presents a double standard that just isn't reasonable. 2. The criminalization of pot has contributed greatly to the upsurge in the already bloated American justice/prison system. 3. Keeping draconian laws on a nearly harmless substance that just recently passed a majority (over 50%) support for legalization isn't even democratic. As a nation, if we decide in majority that we want something legalized the argument is over. People might support it and they might not, but in a democratic society majority always wins, period. It's a matter of time. Give it a generation and it'll be made legal - I guarantee it.

Marijuana should be legalized for many reasons. The number one reason is that the legalization of marijuana will reduce drug related deaths.

It is very tame drug, and has little effects. While it's not without it's problems, it's less harmful than cigarettes and even over-the-counter pills. There has been no recorded deaths in history by over-consumption of marijuana. It is not only less harmful than cigarettes and many other drugs, it's much less addictive. Unlike tabacco, it can be eaten and doesn't have to be smoked, thus reducing it's harm even more. Meanwhile, a number of studies in recent years have demonstrated the medical potential of pot. Purified forms of cannabis can be effective at attacking some forms of agressive cancer [1]. Marijuana use has also been tied to better blood sugar control[2], and may help slow the spread of HIV[3]. Legalization of the plant for medical purposes may even lead to lower suicide rates [4].Decriminalizing it would also drasticly reduce the prison population, about 800,000 people are in jail for marijuana, and 70% of that is just for posession of it. [5][1]http://www.huffingtonpost.com...[2]http://www.reuters.com...[3]http://www.huffingtonpost.com...[4]http://www.huffingtonpost.com...[5]http://hashexpress.wordpress.com...;

Why should marijuana be illegal? It isn't a nasty concoction of a drug; like meth. It is a plant that grows in the ground and does no harm to anybody. So many people do it anyway, so why not just legalize it and stop people from being taken away from their families and friends. Opinions please!

This should be brief so I'll jump right in. My first argument can be summarized with this quote from the American Lung Association's website, "We caution the public against smoking marijuana because of the risks it poses to lung health. "[1] Marijuana contains 33 chemicals and cigarettes contain more than 7000. [2] While cigarettes are obviously worse, inhaling any chemicals will still harms your lungs. When the same amount of marijuana and tobacco are smoked, marijuana inhalation brings four times as much tar as tobacco into the lungs. [3] Also, people who smoke only marijuana, have more healthcare visits for respiratory conditions compared to nonsmokers. [4] I may put more arguments in later rounds, but I'll leave it at that for now. 1) . http://www.lung.org... 2) . http://www.lung.org... 3) . http://www.snopes.com... via the ALA 4) Polen MR, Sidney S, Tekawa IS, Sadler M, Friedman GD. Health Care Use by Frequent Marijuana Smokers Who Do Not Smoke Tobacco. West J Med. 1993;158(6):596-601.

Marijuana has altering affects on a humans mind that cause cancer and many other diseases. Marijuana has some benefits to it, but not enough to balance it's cons, let alone succeed them.

I as well believe that marijuana is pointless, and it does do some pretty dumb things to you, but i still believe if it was legal it would help our economy and everything would be better, we could focus on bigger problems, and alot of forward movement would go on from there. Another thing is, just like beer, and smoking tobacco its the persons choice, alot of people do it because they enjoy the high, i personally don't, but everyone has their opinion, also, there is more pollution in the air caused by smog and cars, and all sorts of other things that make smoke from marijuana and tobacco seem nearly there. So overall marijuana may be dangerous, just like alcohol and tobacco is. but it should still be legal for people to make their own decisions and for us to reap the benefits of a fruitful booming economy. Thank you for listening, you made some very good points!