Question: Should marijuana be a medical option?

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Should medical marijuana be legal or no?

Title: Should pot be legalized Content: My opponent concedes that marijuana can have medical benefits. The fact that people use marijuana to get high in no way shows that it should not be legalized. Other drugs can be used to "get high", however their beneficial effects allow them to stay legal. English Syllogism 1. Drugs that have more medical benefits than medical costs should be legal.2. Marijuana is one such drugC. Therefore, Marijuana should be legal. Classical Syllogistic Translation 1. All B is L 2. m is B. C. Therefore, m is L.

Title: Should Medical Marijuana Be Legal Content: I believe that medical marijuana should be legal. Marijuana is customarily known as a street drug, but in recent years it has gained its credibility as a medication to treat chronic pain and sooth side effects of chemotherapy for cancer. Already 72% of doctors support medical marijuana. Cancer patients had positive feedback when they tried medical marijuana. They said things like "It made me feel like I had an appetite for the first time in probably six months". For the people who benefit from medical marijuana should not be criminalized. Current remedies for pain like Vicodin and Percocet are far more addictive and dangerous. In states where medical marijuana is legalized, doctors have seen a decline in opioid abuse. Making sure people actually need marijuana for medical use and are using it solely for that is where there is a valuable argument. Regulations and government involvement would need to be necessary as with any drug. This also opens up a new industry that could be profitable. There are many ways to consume marijuana than to just smoke it, which is safer to for your lungs. It is unfair to compare the legalization of the medical and recreational use of marijuana, it is a different debate as a whole. The legalization of medical marijuana could steer away from the abuse of opioids and give patients a new way of treatment that has been proven to be effective. It could also change the perception of the drug from a street drug to a medication.

Title: Medical Marijuana should be a legal option Content: I challenge my opponent to debate the merits or lack thereof of medical marijuana. I believe that Medical Marijuana should be legal because it has been proven to have medical benefits and relieve pain. It is less addictive and has less severe side effects than many of the opiates currently prescribed for pain. Making medical marijuana illegal could therefore be detrimental to therapy fro people suffering from sever diseases. I await your response and f

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Let's get started off with the contentions. 1) Beneficial in health. As noted by my own opponent, medical marijuana can help alleviate symptoms of pain, discomfort, and lack of appetite caused by many common disease, including AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, etc. This can go uncontested, as my opponent has already agreed that medical marijuana has these properties. Of course, there are even more benefits of marijuana, such as a prevention of the symptoms of Alzheimer's disease and its progression. (1)(2) A legalization of medical marijuana would aid those who are in pain from said diseases and symptoms. 2) Reduce number of those in prison. The current amount of arrests of marijuana-related crimes totals over 700,000 thousand a year, and that was back in 2005! (3) Of these, a whopping 88% were just for simple possession, while the rest were only for sale or manufacture. (3) These inmates who have done nothing morally wrong or reprehensible are now spending years and years in prison, just for possessing or growing marijuana. 3) Help cut our spending. We currently spend more than 15.5 billion dollars a year on marijuana arrests. (4) If legalized and taxed, not only would we eliminate that spending, but we would also have a major source of revenue that would help pull us out of this recession, as marijuana is our best cash crop, pulling in $35 billion dollars per year. (5)(6) 4) Little to no side effects. Marijuana causes a very small amount of, if at all, side effects, which are negligible at best. (7)(8) 5) It doesn't make any sense to render it illegal. And that's the crux of the matter, isn't it? It is not overly harmful, if at all, and it doesn't have any second-hand smoke effects. There is simply no logical/moral reason to keep it illegal. No one should have a right to tell you what you can and cannot ingest. You don't violate the rights of others in any way, shape or form, so why should it be illegal? There is not convincing argument as to why. 6) User's choice. The consumer is not forced to buy, smoke, or use marijuana in any way. It has no negative repercussions to anyone aside to the consumer. Marijuana does not make you do anything. If you choose to purchase and smoke marijuana, it is your choice, and the government should not prevent you from ingesting what you will, be it alcohol, tobacco, or marijuana. I thank my opponent for this debate, and look forward to his next round. SOURCES . http://www.scientificfactsofpot.com... (1)(8) . http://tinyurl.com... (2) . http://www.nowpublic.com... (3) . http://www.changetheclimate.org... (4) . http://abcnews.go.com... (5) . http://www.drugpolicy.org... (6)(7)

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: ======== Introduction ======== I will be arguing that Medical Marijuana should be illegal while my opponent will argue that medical marijuana should be and/or remain legal. For the purposes of this debate, medical marijuana will stand as Marijuana used to help manage, suppress, or reverse symptoms from medical disorders, such as but not necessarily limited to AIDS, cancer, chronic pain, glaucoma, etc. If my opponent feels that there is something I haven't made clear then tell me during the first round of this debate and I will be more than happy to clarify as best as I can. I want to thank my opponent in advance for accepting this debate. I will let my opponent start his argument first. ====== Definition ====== Marijuana: The female leaves of the Cannabis plant as used to create a number of euphoriant and hallucinogenic drugs. Medical: Relating to the study or practice of medicine.

Title: Marijuana should be legal for medical purposes. Content: I challenge jamccartney to a debate about medical marijuana. I will be arguing that marijuana should be legal for medical purposes. My opponent will be argue that marijuana should not be legal for medical purposes. My opponent and I already agree on the issue of recreational marijuana. Before we begin, I would like to state the debate structure:Round One: Acceptance and stating your stanceRound Two: Main ArgumentsRound Three: Rebuttals and ConclusionBoth jamccartney and I share nearly identical views and I will therefore not list the debate rules. They are obvious to both of us.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Medical benefits of marijuana outweigh potential risks

Title: Marjiuana should be legal Content: My opponent did not say "Medical Marijuana should be legalized. " He simply said that Marijuana should be legal. While I do not find this completely fair, he has not broken any written rules. I am Con Marijuana, Pro medical Marijuana. Therefore I will be playing somewhat of the devils advocate. Just because something feels good to people who are sick, is not a reason to legalize it. Marijuana is proven to be a dangerous drug. Some of the short term effects are: 1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch). 2. Problems with memory and learning. 3. Loss of coordination. 4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving. 5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure. There are many reasons why these things can be bad, I will go through them one by one as quickly as I can. 1. Distorted perception (sights, sounds, time, touch). This is very dangerous, the reason is because people will take the drug and drive at the same time. Car accidents will go through the roof. This is an example of death with Marijuana. What people like to do is say that no one has died because of Marijuana. Well, no one has died of a cell phone, yet many people die from talking while driving. 2. Problems with memory and learning. Children these days already are failing in school. Why would we want to add to that? They need all the memory and learning they can get. 3. Loss of coordination. This corresponds with number one. More accidents, more deaths. 4. Trouble with thinking and problem-solving. This also corresponds with number two. But not only for kids, people need all the brain power they can get. 5. Increased heart rate, reduced blood pressure. Some people do not even know that they have a bad heart. Marijuana could hurt these people. It would be no use to use on most sick patients. Lots of them have a bad heart. Many people who take the drug for medical purposes get addicted to it. Many people do not get addicted to it, but there are some that do. There are also many other dangerous effects. Like sleepiness, an altered sense of time and space, hallucinations, delusions, disorientation. Marijuana contains more than 400 different chemicals; this is bad for obvious reasons. Marijuana also can lead to lung and/or throat cancer. (Again, they don't die of Marijuana, just cancer. ) Your father's theory sounds good, but there can not be a law based off of it. Just because 8 out of 10 people say that there is a KFC on the moon does not make it true. Something else to consider, there would be a major increase in health problems. Therefore, there would be a major increase in the cost of health care. No one in any country wants this. I will stop here for now and look forward to your response. May the force, again. AND I AM YOUR FATHER! !! ! SOURCES: (1). . http://faculty.washington.edu...

Title: Marijuana is a good alternative medicine to suit individual needs Content: The fact that there are alternatives to medical marijuana for many treatments is not necessarily an argument against medical marijuana. It is always important to have many alternatives, largely due to differing personal preferences, beliefs, and physical reactions to different drugs.[15]

Title: Marijuana should be legalized Content: Marijuana should be legalized for medical purposes. 15 of 50 US States and DC have legalized the medical use of marijuana. It can be a safe and effective treatment for the symptoms of cancer, AIDS, multiple sclerosis, pain, glaucoma, epilepsy, and other conditions. Scientific studies show that for many years marijuana has pointed to medicinal help. Six of these studies sponsored by U.S. states in the 1970s and 1980s, demonstrate that smoking marijuana reduces nausea and reduces pain for many patients, especially those facing cancer chemotherapy and glaucoma. Plus thousands of patients and their families and doctors have experienced and witnessed the medical benefits of marijuana. They have testified at public hearings and appeared in the media with these findings. Too many people are suffering from these diseases and if marijuana can help them, we should legalize it so they can get better.

Title: Medical cannabis Content: Look at this from a different point of view. In your argument you stated "Medical cannabis has been used in easing symptoms of cancer and many other illnesses" There are many other medications that are being developed and have been developed for quite some time that have effects similar to the effects of cannabis without the risk of being used for the wrong purposes. In many cases the use of medical marijuana is abused by the patient who requested it, they over exaggerate the pain that they are in, it results in a more medication then they would need. "Medical cannabis can avoid misuse with appropriate tests and papers" This is not always true as the illness is not always well known and there is little research out for it, sometimes patients request more than is necessary. Medical marijuana is also very expensive and is not always covered by insurance companies. In short marijuana is pointless and not necessary for pain relief. In the least the only thing it would be good for is a substitute for other drugs out there that are better known and are more efficient pain relievers.

Title: Medical Marijuana Should Not Be Legalized. Content: NOTICE: This debate is apart of the Revive DDO Debate Competition. RESOLUTION: Marijuana Should Not Be Legalized For Use As Medicine or for Medical Purposes.

Title: Medical marijuana should be legal Content: This is for a devil's advocate tournament. I hope for a really fun debate - I'll try and offer something different from the usual boring old arguments that always seem to get presented for medical marijuana.This first round is for acceptance. I'll start my case in round two.

Title: Should marijuana be legalized for medical purposes Content: About this debate:Welcome to my debate. As you can see you and I will be debating whether the legalization of marijuana should be used for medical purposes (only). Not only should marijuana be used to cure cancer, but also various other diseases.Rules: 1. No profanities2. No plagiarism3. Forfeiture causes disqualifications.Rounds: Round #1: Acceptance from opponentRound #2: ArgumentsRound #3: Rebuttals Round #4: Conclusion/Summary

Title: Resolved: The United States Federal Government Should Legalize Medical Marijuana. Content: If you wish to accept, please apply in the comments section. 4 rounds, 10k characters and open voting with a minimum ELO of 1,500. Resolved: The United States Federal Government Should Legalize Medical Marijuana. Definitions: [1] Medical Marijuana- Marijuana used to relieve pain and treat disease. [2] Legal/ Legalize- actions or conditions that are permitted or authorized by law. Structure: Round 1: Con's rules and TOU while Pro accepts. Round 2: Opening Arguments, NO Rebuttals. Round 3: Rebuttals. Round 4: Rebuttals and conclusion. No Semantics No trolling No profanity Sources 1. (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...) 2. (http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...)

Title: Resolved: Medical Marijuana should be legal Content: My first debate!Round 1: AcceptanceI think Medical Marijuana should be legal and ther are many benefits.Definitions:Marijuana - Marijuana (marihuana) Cannabis sativa L., also known as Indian hemp, is a member of the Cannabaceae or hemp family, thought to have originated in the mountainous districts of India, north of the Himalayan mountains.http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...LETS DO THIS!

Title: Medicle Marijuana Content: It has been proven that marijuana can be used for medicle purposes. Well if it can be used to benifit a persons health then they should be able to use. Now it's not like somebody says hey lets go to the doctor and get some drugs. No marijuana can just be given away. The doctor has to have a valid reason as to why they need to use marijuana. And, the doctor has to notify his advisors of his actions. Therefore marijuana should be used for medical uses.

Title: Should Marijuana be legalized Content: I think that Marijuana Should be legalized because it can be used for much more that just medical use. I believe it can be used for things like clothes, string, sowing material and of course medical use. Now I now there are some people out there who would disagree with me and that is fine but i have knee issues and every now and again my knee dislocates do to sporting activities and when I am given morphine and multiple doses to be exact it still isn't enough to ease the pain, I also have other medical issues as well and there some points that I wish had something to ease the pain.

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Marijuana should be legal for medical purposes, because it has been shown to be an effective pain reliever, and is less harmful to the liver than most other prescription painkillers. Especially in the case of those who are terminally ill, the negative effects of the drug are insignificant when compared to the improved quality of life it provides to suffering patients. It can likewise reduce the anxiety of the patient during severe medical procedures, and again this is further the case in terminal patients. Severe anxiety has been shown to have immediate detrimental affects on the body, and can complicate some medical procedures. Having yet another option that a doctor may, but need not necessarily prescribe or utilize, only adds more options for the medical system to serve patients. This is not to say that it necessarily should be available for the general public, but certainly for medical usage, as prescribed by licensed doctors, it has a utility that outweighs any possible negatives in many situations.

Title: Marijuana ought to be legalized Content: I thank Con for their response. I will attempt to negate my opponents points. Your negation of my contention of Medical marijuana was that of "I acknowledge that Marijuana has specific medical benefits. However, this does not require that Marijuana be legalized for public use. Heroin and opium also have specific medical benefits, and are used today. I wouldn't't want marijuana intended for a specific medical effect to leave the hospital any more than I would want morphine to roam the streets." The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, otherwise known as the FDA, could easily control the usage of marijuana if it was legalized. Your first objection to my second contention were that of the military has access to certain things that the general public does not. Well, you could extend this access to certain justice and crime associations, such as the CIA or the FBI, which could be used to allow the pain reliving effects of those groups. Your second objection to my second contention was that of there are better alternatives for pain killer which have less side effects. Marijuana has a greater effectiveness as a pain killer than most other pain killers. Wars may produce a near death injury, while allowing the use of marijuana as a pain killer, can allow the pain to be eliminated near instantly. Your third contention stated attempted to show that certain drugs are less harmful than marijuana. According to NORML, " In fact, the most recent studies have tended to confirm marijuana's safety, refuting claims that it causes birth defects, brain damage, reduced testosterone, or increased drug abuse problems." In refute of the THC spray, I doubt the majority of users of marijuana have discovered said THC spray. Users may also prefer actual marijuana experience over the THC spray. (1)http://norml.org... (2)http://www.annieappleseedproject.org... (3)http://www.library.vanderbilt.edu...

Title: Marijuana should be legalized Content: Now then let the games begin. A. You say that medicinal marijuana can CAN be a safe and effective treatment. For some very serious medical conditions that are a huge concern for our society. Of the conditions you did state, i will say you are valid on 1 of them. That being pain, as to my knowledge Marijuana does act as sort of a pain killer, except without the high of some of the other pain killers out there like vicodin. But that goes to say how much pain would be required to needed for one to get said medicinal marijuana. To go on, one could simply fake pain to abuse the system, trust if it is legalized that would happen in great numbers. Furthermore, I would like to know how that is if you can show it to me if not it is of no matter, how it can help treat such illnesses such as AIDS, Cancer, epilepsy, etc. B. Now also how would you ensure that it is actually getting to those who need it and it is not just going to any random person who can present a card or something saying they have legal access to the marijuana? I say without at least a proper way of ensuring it gets to the right people Marijuana should remain illegal. Since there has also been no proven way to ensure all laws are enforced, since there is always a loophole or an exception of some kind. No one can justify making marijuana legal since it could and would be abused by a variety of people. No matter what the medicinal trials show about the drug, and how it MAY benefit people. Legalizing Marijuana would only fuel the rampant illegal use of it in our nation. It would give people a reason to then abuse the system and obtain marijuana for their own personal and selfish needs. It could also cause a lot of corruption in the form of a pharmacist selling said Marijuana on the streets or, in the back for a huge profit of their own personal gain.

Title: Medicle Marijuana Content: As my opponent has forfeited their last round, they dropped every single argument I made in Round 2. I have shown that there is no need to use medical marijuana. We have multiple drugs with the same purpose for every condition that marijuana is thought to treat, including the individual chemicals from marijuana that help to treat these conditions.

Title: Marijuana should be legal for medical purposes. Content: I will be taking the stance of 'Marijuana should not be legal for medical purposes' while he shall be taking the stance of 'Marijuana should be legal for medial purposes. As he has already stated the rules and procedures, I see no reason to say any more in round 1. I patiently await his first argument in round 2.

Title: Marijuana should be legalized Content: Full resolution: "Marijuana should be legalized for recreational and medical purposes in the United States. I thank SocialPinko for hosting this tournament. I will be arguing that marijuana should be legalized. Definitions: Should- indicating a desirable or expected state [1] Recreational- any substance with pharmacologic effects that is taken voluntarily for personal pleasure or satisfaction rather than for medicinal purposes. [2] Medical- curative; medicinal; therapeutic [3] This will be 4 rounds, the first being acceptance and clarifications if my opponent wishes to state any. The last round will NOT include new sources. Use of unorthodox semantics (discretion of voters) should be seen as a loss. Good luck! 1. http://oxforddictionaries.com... 2. http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... 3. http://dictionary.reference.com...

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Medical Marijuana is Marijuana and would therefore be considered as a potential drug which can not only cause addiction but also create unwanted side effects. As my opponent previously stated, Medical Marijuana can be used as a treatment for cancer and neurological disorders. However, the way in which Marijuana actually treats these symptoms should be considered. Marijuana, according to most websites, stimulate and then muffle the nervous system in such a way that the human body is no longer concerned with the disorder but rather feel the need for more Marijuana. This its self is addiction. Therefore, we can conclude that although Marijuana can treat symptoms, it does so in a dangerous way which creates more side-effects than results.

Title: Marijuana Medicine Content: I accept the challenge! If you allow sick people marijuana as medicine, they may become addicts once they are better, and begin to use it illegally. Marijuana is not medicine, it is a recreational drug, and should remain illegal.

Title: Medicle Marijuana Content: "It has been proven that marijuana can be used for medicle purposes. Well if it can be used to benifit a persons health then they should be able to use." I will admit that marijuana has medicinal properties. That being said, every problem that marijuana helps to treat already has multiple LEGAL treatments that are more effective. Take glaucoma for example. Medical marijuana, when it was legal, was primarily used to treat this. However, glaucoma is now treated by latanoprost, bimatoprost, timolol, and epinephrine, just to name a few. Furthermore, scientists have suceeded in synthetically producing the ingredients in the marijuana plant that give it its medicinal properties. I would think that using this would be highly preferable to unnecessarily altering your brain chemistry. Unless, of course, the patient is using marijuana primarily to get high.

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Full resolution: Medical Marijuana should be legalized in the United States of America. I will be affirming that medical marijuana should be legalized in the United States of America. This debate only pertains to medical marijuana, not marijuana in general.STRUCTURE:Round 1-AcceptanceRound 2-Cases/CON rebuttalRound 3-RebuttalRound 4-Conclusion/Summary Definitions:medical-curative; medicinal; therapeutic [1]marijuana-the most commonly used illicit drug; considered a soft drug, it consists of the dried leaves of the hemp plant; smoked or chewed for euphoric effect [2]I would like to thank 16kadams for agreeing to debate this topic. This should be a very fun and informative debate!Sources:1. http://dictionary.reference.com......2. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...

Title: Medical Cannabis Content: I completely disagree with making the decision to make marijuana a legal medication. Yes, it does have many benefits as a medical drug. However this can also be labeled as a mind controlling substance. There are different types of cannabis and not all strains are actually used for medical purposes. I believe marijuana should remain under strict watch among doctors, distributors and health professionals. I must also add the criminal and violence aspect of this as well. U.S citizens aren't out causing voilence over tylenol or aspirins. But there are infact doing so over this cannabis, as it is my literal definition of a "drug". I would not stand firm and call this a "medicine" or "medication".

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Marijuana is a safer alternative to many medications

Title: Pick your own debate! Content: My opponent is using a huge logical fallacy; he is claiming that because medical marijuana doesn't have medical purposes for all medical conditions that the medical conditions it does have medical purposes for do not count. The fact remains that medical marijuana has several medical purposes such as alleviating neurpathic pain. A ban on medical marijuana would result in the ban of a medicine that works better than any other medicines, resulting in worse health out comes and a worse off health care system. My opponents post is also lying the source i posted studied the addictive potential of some medical marijuana the studies found that certain medical marijuana extracts do not result in addictive properties or addictive behavior. medical marijuana is different then regular marijuana because in medical marijuana they take out the harmful and addictive chemicals and only use the chemicals that have medical purposes. this means that every time my opponent links to marijuana having unhealthy effects he is comparing apples and oranges, and therefore his comparisons are invalid. For example a scientific study found that medial marijuana improved the mental abilities of people with Alzheimers. So basically a ban on medical marijuana would be an example of the government telling doctors how to treat patients. it would also be an example of the government telling millions of sick people that they cannot legally consume medicines that improve their medical condition.

Title: Marijuana Legalization Content: 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.

Title: medical marijuana Content: i will break my rebuttals down into bullet points that are more easy to understand for people who may currently be taking their prescription ;) 1. once again, the debate is over the use of marijuana (the plant) for medical use. 2. yes i said THC has benefits, so if you would like to put THC in pill form and prescribe that, it would be fine and i believe it is already in existence but no other medicinal drug is smoked. 3. nicotine and caffeine have medical benefits but we dont refer to cigarettes and cola as alternative medicines. 4. tobacco and alcohol can be ingested in many ways as well. you can make a drink out of them, cook with them, and you can even mix alcohol with dry ice and inhale the steam to get drunk which may be fun and all but we still dont call them alternative medicines, they are recreational drugs just like marijuana. 5.smoking a medicine is never a "best way to take it" you could maybe put THC in an inhaler if you want to inhale it though and it would work just like smoke without the side effects. 6.im comparing marijuana smoke to all smoke, not just cigarettes. all smoke is bad just as you said. i could also compare marijuana to tobacco that doesn't have added chemicals. 7.ive heard all kinds of claims, statistics and studies on marijuana that oppose everything youre saying such as marijuana having 3 times the tar that cigarettes have, THC weakening your immune system etc. but unlike you, i choose not to believe everything i hear and read which is why i am not posting all kinds of random stats as you are. i dont want people to have to trust mine or someone elses word, i want them to use their own reasoning and see if they can follow my logic. so my argument allows people to rely purely on their own reasoning while yours forces them to trust someone elses findings. most people including yourself understand that smoke is bad for you and that is all that you need to know in order to conclude that marijuana shouldnt be touted as a medicine, it should be treated like a recreational drug and people should be aware of its dangers. anything else is false advertisement. 8.it doesnt matter how many health benefits pot has, it should be put in pill form like every other medicinal drug. theres no reason to smoke it, we dont live in the stone age anymore. 9.once again, i dont buy into all these stats and studies but i cant believe that youre acting like its not a bad thing that lung function declines after 10 yrs of smoking. 10.i didnt say pot has no pros but just think of how much more unhealthy oxicodone would be if it were taken in smoke form. in pill form you can have the benefits without the harmful side effects. 11.theres medicine that you can and cant overdose on but none of them are in smoke form. 12.my friend that has a card to buy medical marijuana smokes with other people in the room. i could see many idiots smoking in the house with kids or their kids coming in the room before the smoke has cleared up.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Alternatives to marijuana should be used to ease the terminally ill

Title: Should Marijuana Be Legalized For Medicinal Use Content: Marijuana should not be legalized for medicinal use, just because it relieves pain. The drug in mention might relieve pain, but also would harm the body, and cause more threatening side effects to the patient. Since marijuana does do harm to the body while relieving pain, patients should instead try pain killers that do less damage to the body. On another note By legalizing marijuana for medicinal use, the percentage of illegal marijuana trade would go up drastically. Drug dealers could possibly fake illnesses to get said drug, or people with illnesses that requires said drug would get the drug and sell excess drugs to another party. examples of drug dealing through legalization of medicinally used marijuana Party A fakes a disease to get the drug Party A then sells drug to party B another example Party A has ms and gets subscribed a marijuana based drug Party A sells marijuana to party B who overdoses, and dies. Party A goes to a different hospital/pharmacy and gets a different prescription for a pain killer 1 month later party A refills his prescription for the marijuana based drug and sells to party C who has negative side effects cycle repeats through the whole **** alphabet

Title: Should Marijuana Be legal Nationwide Content: Contention 1: Ease of AccessIt is truely easy to acquire Medical Marijuana in America. For the number one example I'll give you our Bluest State in California as an example. Journalist Adam Brown reviewed California's law and revealed that in California and several other states, including DC, that you could be prescribed medical marijuana if, "you have a debilitating condition like "general pain" or "mild depression" or "unspecified symptom syndrome." [1] We can see that this isn't a black market issue and it's a sugar coated way of legalization of marijuana for the general public without officially doing it. I mean let's alll be honnest here. We've all suffered from some sort of "general pain" in our life time, does that mean that we should all get Medical Marijuana? It's simply wrong and we can see that this is a close connection to Brave New World's Soma. The fact is that many Medical Marijuana advocates would argue that it's mainly used for cancern, but if we observe Colorado we can see that over the majority of the people perscribed Medical Marijuana isn't cancer related and is something perposterous that wouldn't even get a person any type of perscription medicine. [2]We can plainly see that we cannot continue with further legalization of Medical marijuana until we see major reform here, so that the above attrocities are corrected.Contention 2: Safety ConcernsThere are several safety concerns surrounding Medical Marijuana. Like first one can see that Medical Marijuana involves the chemical THC which has been found due to a recent study to increase the rate of brain tumors. [3] They have found that the THC in Canibas slows the bodies anti-tumor responses to a near stop allowing tumors to increase and become more previlent. Many studies show that THC can slow down tumors, but when it is mixed with cannibas and not soley THC injected into the body we can see that it has the oppoisite effect. UK cancer institute director Lesly Walker has found that contrary to popular belief that "It absolutely isn't the case that men might be able to fight prostate cancer by smoking cannabis," [4]Another study showed that smoking 1 joint increases the percentage that one could get Lung Cancer by 8% and that smoking 3 joints is the equivlence of smoking 20 cigarettes. [5] Other studies have shown to cause many other mental disorders like Skizofrania [6], panic attacks/aniexty [7], and after smoking the joint it increases the rate of a heart attack by 5 times! [8]We can simply see that these risks are way to much and especially for that of Medical Marijuana being used the way that we've seen it be used and the ease of access being way to much we can simply see that these side effects are not worth a tiny bit of being high because of your "pain."Sources1. (http://www.cracked.com...) 2. (http://www.mapinc.org...) 3. (http://www.jimmunol.org...) 4. (http://www.reuters.com...) 5. (http://news.bbc.co.uk...) 6. (http://www.schizophrenia.com...) 7. (http://www.panicattacks.com.au...) 8. (http://www.drugabuse.gov...)

Title: Resolved: The United States Federal Government Should Legalize Medical Marijuana. Content: Contention 1: Ease of AccessIt is truely easy to acquire Medical Marijuana in America. For the number one example I'll give you our Bluest State in California as an example. Journalist Adam Brown reviewed California's law and revealed that in California and several other states, including DC, that you could be prescribed medical marijuana if, "you have a debilitating condition like "general pain" or "mild depression" or "unspecified symptom syndrome. " [1] We can see that this isn't a black market issue and it's a sugar coated way of legalization of marijuana for the general public without officially doing it. I mean let's alll be honnest here. We've all suffered from some sort of "general pain" in our life time, does that mean that we should all get Medical Marijuana? It's simply wrong and we can see that this is a close connection to Brave New World's Soma. The fact is that many Medical Marijuana advocates would argue that it's mainly used for cancern, but if we observe Colorado we can see that over the majority of the people perscribed Medical Marijuana isn't cancer related and is something perposterous that wouldn't even get a person any type of perscription medicine. [2]We can plainly see that we cannot continue with further legalization of Medical marijuana until we see major reform here, so that the above attrocities are corrected. Contention 2: Safety ConcernsThere are several safety concerns surrounding Medical Marijuana. Like first one can see that Medical Marijuana involves the chemical THC which has been found due to a recent study to increase the rate of brain tumors. [3] They have found that the THC in Canibas slows the bodies anti-tumor responses to a near stop allowing tumors to increase and become more previlent. Many studies show that THC can slow down tumors, but when it is mixed with cannibas and not soley THC injected into the body we can see that it has the oppoisite effect. UK cancer institute director Lesly Walker has found that contrary to popular belief that "It absolutely isn't the case that men might be able to fight prostate cancer by smoking cannabis," [4]Another study showed that smoking 1 joint increases the percentage that one could get Lung Cancer by 8% and that smoking 3 joints is the equivlence of smoking 20 cigarettes. [5] Other studies have shown to cause many other mental disorders like Skizofrania [6], panic attacks/aniexty [7], and after smoking the joint it increases the rate of a heart attack by 5 times! [8]We can simply see that these risks are way to much and especially for that of Medical Marijuana being used the way that we've seen it be used and the ease of access being way to much we can simply see that these side effects are not worth a tiny bit of being high because of your "pain. "Sources1. (. http://www.cracked.com...) 2. (. http://www.mapinc.org...) 3. (. http://www.jimmunol.org...) 4. (. http://www.reuters.com...)5. (. http://news.bbc.co.uk...) 6. (. http://www.schizophrenia.com...) 7. (. http://www.panicattacks.com.au...) 8. (. http://www.drugabuse.gov...)

Title: Marijuana should be legal for medical purposes. Content: Introduction I would like to start by thanking my opponent for responding. As he has stated that he is back home and can write more sophisticated arguments. I will now begin with mine: Rebuttals Pro has stated that he cannot deny the fact I have kindly placed before him. However, he has also stated that it is a matter of how one interprets the facts. I mostly beg to differ. It is true that you can interpret facts your own way, but only to a certain extent. There happens to be more cons than pros to medicinal marijuana, which stands to prove that I am correct. Pro stated that "[marijuana], when taken in moderation and with caution, can be beneficial for those who desperately need it." It is true, but doctors cannot always know if a patient will have a positive or negative reaction to it. Pro has assumed that I am not aware of the fact that medical marijuana does not have to be smoked. I am indeed aware of this. Moving on, I will talk about how Pro has continued to refer to the fact that these facts all have to do with how you interpret them. Again, this is true, but facts are facts. My opponent has admitted that the facts I gave are undeniable, however has continued to refer to interpretation. Lastly, I will refer to Pro's reference to what I stated about there being different cures to illnesses. He has said that "[f]or many illnesses, there are NO alternative cures." That happens to be false. We just have to find those cures. Conclusion As the viewers can see, I have given plenty of facts towards why it should not be legal to use marijuana for medicinal purposes. My opponent has accepted those facts, however slightly denies them. I will say one thing: Facts are facts and they cannot be denied. This debate is now in the hands of the voters. I have enjoyed this debate and hope to win.

Title: Should marijuana be legalized for medical purposes Content: Argument: Many doctors agree that marijuana is very beneficial for medical purposes. Diseases like cancer, glaucoma, epilepsy, and many other mental disorders are all well treated with marijuana. Marijuana is capable of killing pain and helps rise your metabolism. It has been proved that marijuana is better than pain killers. Marijuana has been legalized in 18 states, and in most of them marijuana is less costly than many medical prescriptions that treat pain. Marijuana has been legal during the 1930s-1940s, and later on this medical treatment has been becoming more limited (1).Here is what doctors say about medicinal marijuana:1. 69% of doctors say it can help with specific illnesses.2. 67% it should be an opportunity for many patients.3. 56% agree making it legal throughout the world.4. 50% of doctors agree it should be legal in their state.5. 52% call for making new laws on medical marijuana in their state (2).[1]: http://www.teenink.com...[2]: http://www.medscape.com...

Title: weed Content: I think that marijuana is an option that should be available to those that choose to use it. Just as one could go to a coffee shop for an energy boost, You should be able to go buy some weed to calm yourself down, Or just for fun if you want. Also, Comparing marijuana to grass isn't really fair. You wouldn't add grass to a pasta dish, But you probably would add basil. All plants aren't the same, Is my point.

Title: Marijuana Legislation should not pass. Content: Medical marijuana as well as recreational use of marijuana should not be legalized in the United States. I do not live elsewhere so i wont include any other countries. Medical marijuana may have certain benefits, but they are not benefits that out do any other type of medication allotted. Marijuana is a drug. It fogs up your brain and changes your perceptional views of reality; as well as your five sense. Cocaine is also a drug. Cocaine has some benefits. It wakes you up. So should cocaine be legalized in a sense that all professionals are using it to stay awake for work; like energy drinks? I personally don't think so. Medically speaking individuals will begin to find any reason and sore to take the drug. To even have fun and enjoy. That's a little strange if you have a traditional mindset. The world should not go down the wrong path. Marijuana will usually make a user eventually lazy, paranoid, and slow. It is proven that it slows your ability to learn. Recreational use, is a big no no. Recreational use makes it look acceptable to children and young adults. Would you like to walk around and just smell marijuana all the time, lets be honest some people may not think its that pleasant. Would you like to go into work where your coworkers are high? Or out to eat and the couple is high behind you? If many people were stoners it would be a major downfall to society. But in the end it would just weed out the people whom don't fall into social pressure and choices. Children don't need to be exposed to such drugs and them to be embellished and shown as something beneficial. People used to say it was a gate way drug. Looks like society itself will enter the gate lol. Many people whom smoke marijuana are usually the people who want it legalized. Those who haven't experienced the drug may have different opinions. Someone who has smoked in the past. (No longer a user) Am happy to have stopped. In doing so life changes, and it becomes more brighter, and honestly more yourself (and cleaner). There are different choices people can take to ease their pain than taking illegal drugs. HOWEVER (a whole other piece of mind) There is a chance medical marijuana could benefit certain people. But these specific people who get seizures, and have life threatening issues, that only cannabis should treat should have special access to the governmental system in which they specifically receive medical marijuana. Only to those who have had excessive testing. People are trying to get certified because they have a scratch or slight back pain, that is not what the drug is for. Other opinions are welcomed!

Title: Medical marijuana should be legal Content: Medical marijuana hasn't been proven to help any otherwise treatable disease, and is pointless really. Marijuana also disconnects you from the outside world and is a depressant (Like alcohol) which makes you relaxed and not wanting to do anything, not wanting to get the treatment either. The proper treatment.

Title: Medical Marijuana should be a legal option Content: 1. Proven Medical Benefits There are many who say that there are many proven medical benefits to smoking or otherwise ingesting marijuana. First off, I would like to ask my opponent to cite a source saying, and proving, the medical benefits of medical marijuana. I have a source that says the following, "There is plenty of evidence to show that marijuana can help people cope with a variety of diseases," Of course it can help people cope with diseases. If I took cocaine, the same effect would happen, in fact I might forget that I even had a disease. Being able to help people cope is no reason to legalize marijuana for medical use. The same source goes on to say, "That said, medical marijuana is not right for every patient. Nor is it even the first drug of choice,". Not even the first choice. Medical marijuana would not replace current medical practices, it would only supplement them. The legalization of medical marijuana is bad for many reasons, which brings me to my next point. . http://www.post-gazette.com... 2. Ill Effects of Ingesting Marijuana The Office of Drug Control Policy says the following, "Marijuana use is associated with dependence, respiratory and mental illness, poor motor performance, and impaired cognitive and immune system functioning, among other negative effects. Marijuana intoxication can cause distorted perceptions, difficulty in thinking and problem solving, and problems with learning and memory. Studies have shown an association between chronic marijuana use and increased rates of anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts, and schizophrenia. Other research has shown marijuana smoke to contain carcinogens and to be an irritant to the lungs. Marijuana smoke, in fact, contains 50‐70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than does tobacco smoke," This goes to show why any use of marijuana, even for medical uses, is a bad thing for the health of any users. If marijuana for medical purposes was legalized, it would harm many more people than it would help. Is forgetting about your pain through smoking a joint worth it if you can get schizophrenia from smoking it? Or any other medical complication? No, its not worth it, and that is why medical marijuana should not be a legal option. . http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov... In conclusion, I have yet to see a source that legitimately proves the benefits of medical marijuana. Not only is there a lack of health benefits from ingesting it, but there are serious medical issues that could result from ingesting the drug.

Title: Marijuana should be Legalized! Content: Okay, first of all I would like to say that I do not EVER want to do drugs and put myself in that kind of danger. If Marijuana is legalized, think about all the danger that that would put people in. Even though, the taxes might give our government the money, it's not worth the risk of people dying in order to do so. Also, if marijuana was made legal, think about all of the health problems that would occur. I don't think we need to be paying anymore money for health care. I also understand that you made a point how scientists have yet more to study about marijuana. The government is in fact keeping us safe because WE DON'T really know what's in Marijuana. If they said that we could have it anytime we wanted, think about what that would do to people everywhere. Smoking is already harming people enough. The second-hand smoke? We would all have to deal with that too. So back to my point, we could at least WAIT to find out what is in marijuana and see if it IS safe, and wait for them to keep the law or not. I agree though with your point about your topic on "If Marijuana was legalized we could study the chemicals in Marijuana in more depth and maybe find cures for such "UN-curable" diseases". I think that scientists and doctors with degrees should be able to study marijuana, but I don't think it should be open to everyone. I thank you for listening to my debate.

Title: Marijuana Legalization Content: My position: 1- Marijuana should not be legal in ANY quantity for ANYONE to do ANYTHING with. 2- Marijuana should not be considered for medicinal purposes...medical professionals are not witch doctors. 3- Since marijuana shouldn't be legal, there's no reason to discuss taxing it. 4- The growth of marijuana for personal use should be considered a crime. 5- Since marijuana shouldn't be legal, there's no reason to discuss the acquisition of it.

Title: Resolved: The United States Federal Government Should Legalize Medical Marijuana. Content: This round dosen't call for rebuttals, so I will now state my case. Resolved: The United States Federal Government should legalize Medical Marijuana. As Pro, I will be giving the voters substantial arguments and proof that Medical Marijuana does more good than bad. In my argument, we will not only look at the medical aspect, but how Medical Marijuana helps the economy. C.1 Health Benefits of Medical Marijuana There are many ill and terminally ill people in this world. Allot of them suffer due to the lack of money to buy proper medication in which they need, because prescriptions can be pretty costly. As stated in my definition of Medical Marijuana (Marijuana used to relieve pain and treat disease.) It has been proven that Medical Marijuana can relieve pain. Chronic Nerve Pain According to WebMD (A medical website)A Canadian team has found that [1] " Three puffs a day of cannabis, better known as marijuana, helps people with chronic nerve pain due to injury or surgery feel less pain and sleep better" You are probably thinking this may be some made up scenario, but it's not. According to Mare Ware a M.D, he states [1] "About 10% to 15% of patients attending a chronic pain clinic use cannabis as part of their pain [control] strategy" Not only did he give us this information, but he also conducted a test on 21 men & women (average age 45) who suffer from chronic pain. He found that: [1] After each of the five-day trials, participants rated their pain on a scale of zero to 10, with 10 being the worst. The highest dose, 9.4%, provided relief, Ware says. "They reduced their pain down to 5.4," Ware says. "Those on placebo were at 6.1." Although that difference may seem modest, 'any reduction in pain is important," Ware says. The concentration of 9.4%, Ware says, is lower than that found in marijuana on the street. "On the street, it's 10% to 15% THC, more or less," he says. "We've shown again that cannabis is analgesic," Ware says. "Clearly, it has medical value." Side effects were reported, including headache, dry eyes, numbness, cough, and a burning sensation in the area with pain. The cannabis relieves pain, Ware says, by 'changing the way the nerves function." As you can read by the definition, Medical Marijuana can be used to relieve pain. Here is proof that is does actually lessen the pain with those who suffer chronic nerve pain. Cancer Medical Marijuana has also been proven to either 1. Cure some types of cancer 2.Slow down the caner or 3.Relive pain and nausea caused by chemotherapy. Don't just take my word for it though. According to Canger.org, Medical Marijuana is actually beneficial and helpful to cancer patients. [2] There are 2 chemically pure drugs based on marijuana compounds that have been approved in the US for medical use. Dronabinol (Marinol®)" is a gelatin capsule containing delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) that’s approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat nausea and vomiting caused by cancer chemotherapy as well as weight loss and poor appetite in patients with AIDS......Based on a number of studies, dronabinol can be helpful for reducing nausea and vomiting linked to chemotherapy." "Dronabinol has also been found to help improve food intake and prevent weight loss in patients with HIV. In studies of cancer patients, though, it wasn’t better than placebo or another drug (megestrol acetate)." "Nabiximols has shown promise for helping people with cancer pain that’s unrelieved by strong pain medicines, but it hasn’t been found to be helpful in every study done. Research is still being done on this drug." As you can see, Medical Marijuana helps reduce symptoms of cancer. We all know that chemotherapy is a dreadful process and tends to make the patient even sicker. Medical Marijuana can only help these people who suffer with these symptoms, so what's the harm in that? [2] So, how can How can marijuana affect symptoms of cancer? "A number of small studies of smoked marijuana found that it can be helpful in treating nausea and vomiting from cancer chemotherapy." "A few studies have found that inhaled (smoked or vaporized) marijuana can be helpful treatment of neuropathic pain (pain caused by damaged nerves)." "Smoked marijuana has also helped improve food intake in HIV patients in studies." "There are no studies in people of the effects of marijuana oil or hemp oil." "Studies have long shown that people who took marijuana extracts in clinical trials tended to need less pain medicine." "More recently, scientists reported that THC and other cannabinoids such as CBD slow growth and/or cause death in certain types of cancer cells growing in laboratory dishes. Some animal studies also suggest certain cannabinoids may slow growth and reduce spread of some forms of cancer. " So why shouldn't we legalize it when it's been shown to comfort people with deadly diseases? I mean even the Cancer foundation even recognizes it as a humongous help because it can kill cancer, slow it down, and most importantly, comfort and relive pain of the patient. Now that we have focused some on the medical aspects, let's take a look at how Medical Marijuana can boost the economy. How Medical Marijuana is beneficial to the economy. So, it may be hard to believe, but Medical Marijuana can help and boost the economy. [3]https://halcyonorganics.com... -Increase Revenues Without Tax Increases- "Cannabis is a $25+ billion dollar industry. Currently, all of those revenues go directly to cartels and criminal gangs. Through regulation and taxation, we can transform these black market billions into taxable revenues. This new income can bolster our state economy without raising taxes on main street." Decrease Government Spending "Cannabis prohibition is expensive. Harvard economist, Jeffrey Miron, estimates that state and federal governments spend an excess of $20 billion per year fighting this little green plant. Much of this cost comes from burdening our justice system, wasting law enforcement’s time, and using $125/day of taxpayer money incarcerating cannabis offenders. To add insult to injury, these efforts continue to fail as cannabis is more available than ever before." Fortify Infrastructure and Social Programs "Applying the increased revenues with the decreased expenses caused by medical cannabis legalization yields a net gain in the billions. This ‘new’ money can be used to fortify our many distressed and underfunded public works programs like the lagging education system, build new roads that reduce traffic and increase Social Security and Medicare benefits for our seniors." Weaken Criminal Organizations "How do gangs and cartels have the same weapons that our military uses? Why do drug dealers drive $100,000 cars? Because selling illicit drugs is a wildly lucrative and untaxed business. Legalizing and regulating medical cannabis will take this profit center away from murderous criminals and transfer it to licensed and regulated businesses. By taking these revenues from organized crime, we can significantly weaken them financially. Additionally, we will be able to control how and to whom medical cannabis is dispensed by setting responsible standards to which businesses must adhere. Liquor stores ID customers, drug dealers do not." As you can see, legalizing Medical Marijuana will not only help those who suffer from illness, but it also helps boost the economy. It's quiet clear that the positive, outweighs the harm. Sources [1] http://www.webmd.com... [2] http://www.cancer.org... [3] https://halcyonorganics.com...

Title: Marijuana ought to be legalized Content: Greetings! My position in this debate is that Marijuana ought not be legalized. As a utilitarian, my reason for this is that the benefits of such an action would not outweigh the negative effects. I shall respond to Pro’s points in the relevant sections, and present one counterpoint of my own afterward. Counterpoints: First contention – Marijuana for Medicinal purposes: (The resolution states “Marijuana ought to be legalized,” as opposed to “Marijuana ought to be legalized for medicinal purposes.” Furthermore, the argument from medicinal purposes is made as its own point in Pro’s argument. Both of these lead me to believe that Pro wished Marijuana to be legalized for all purposes as opposed to those simply medical in nature. Keep this in mind as I state my position on this point.) Objection 1: You have not cited any sources for this point. Keep in mind that you share the burden of proof for this debate. Objection 2: I acknowledge that Marijuana has specific medical benefits. However, this does not require that Marijuana be legalized for public use. Heroin and opium also have specific medical benefits, and are used today. I wouldn’t want marijuana intended for a specific medical effect to leave the hospital any more than I would want morphine to roam the streets. Second contention – Wartime use of marijuana: Objection 1: In a similar case as with my second objection to the first of Pro’s points, the military has access to many things that the public simply does not. It is perfectly legitimate to acknowledge that marijuana has a place among military personnel without opening it up to the public. Objection 2: There are more effective pain killers available which have less severe side effects. If I were to choose a drug for pain relief for the people going to war for me, I would be choosing one which has less of an effect on a person’s mental state, such as acetaminophen of ibuprofen. In severe cases, such as those in which the pain is incapacitating anyway, drowsiness should be accepted, and so stronger painkillers could be used. The issue comes with administering a hallucinogenic drug to a person in full control of an assault rifle. Not only would this be dangerous in and of itself, it would be amplified by the fact that it would be self-administered as opposed to something one needs to report to sick-bay for. Third contention – The catch-all category: “…less harmful than…” Tobacco: The only thing I can say to this is that it is patently false. Tobacco may be more addictive because of the nicotine. However, marijuana smoked vs tobacco smoked has about 50% more benzopyrene, which is the leading chemical under suspect for causing lung cancer in tobacco smokers. [1][2] Additionally, tobacco smoke has limited short term effects on cognition, being no more altering than caffeine. Marijuana is a hallucinogen, increases heart rate, is a depressant, and has impairing effects on coordination and decision making skills. Long term effects of tobacco are limited to a lengthy list of cancers and respiratory problems. Research on marijuana is limited, so an acknowledged gap in information exists relating it to cancers. However, other respiratory problems generally attributed to tobacco are, in fact, present in people who smoke marijuana alone. [3] Alcohol: Again, this is demonstrably false. Alcohol has detrimental effects all over the brain. It impairs the ability to solve simple problems through reason, resulting in impaired judgment; it impairs fine motor skills and muscle coordination; and it impairs hearing, vision, processing associated with those senses, and ability to speak. Marijuana has all of these effects [4] and more, including, again, hallucinogenic and heart-rate and blood pressure increasing effects. In a study from the New England Journal of Medicine, almost 40% of drivers stopped for reckless driving who were not under the influence of alcohol were under the effects of marijuana. [5] “Limiting the use of marijuana restricts personal freedom”: Prohibiting people from possessing child pornography also restricts personal freedom. There are cases in which restriction of freedom is a good and necessary thing. I don’t think I need to elaborate much more on this point. “Legalization would mean a lower price: thus, crimes linked to marijuana would be reduced” and “Street justice related to drug disputes would be reduced”: There is a strong correlation between marijuana use and other crimes. [6] Contrary to what many think, possession and distribution are not the only crimes associated with marijuana. Marijuana impairs cognitive reasoning abilities, and can make a person more likely to behave with disregard to other laws. “It would be a source of additional taxing revenues”: About $83 billion per year is spent on cigarettes [7], and about half of this is taxes. About 20 metric tons of tobacco is sold annually. [8] An estimated 15 metric tons of marijuana is smoked annually. [9] This gives us a total of approximately $30 billion dollar revenue from our hypothetical marijuana tax. Given our nearly $750 billion military budget [10] this amount really does pale in comparison to the amount this nation spends. This minor benefit is not enough to nullify the downsides. “Police and court resources would be freed up for more serious crimes”: In relation to the total number of arrests made, those made because of possession of marijuana is actually rather low, at barely more than 5% of the total. [11] Given that people all over the nation are still ticketed for going 5 over the speed limit, having a turn signal out, or having an expired license, I’d say that police time and resources aren’t all that precious. As with the above, this is not enough of a benefit to tolerate the other consequences. “Drug busts often trap adolescences in a flawed system transforming them into lifelong criminals”: Objection 1: I don’t understand what you mean by this. Are you suggesting that children whose parents are charged are put into foster care? Are you suggesting the children are placed into detention centers? In either case, see objection 2. Objection 2: You provide absolutely no evidence for this claim whatsoever. Again, as you do have a burden of proof to carry, I do expect some evidence which I can dispute. Until then, this claim shall be disregarded as unsupported. Even without my objections to Pro’s points, there is the valuable fact that we can have the effects of marijuana without the harmful effects of smoking them. Canadian scientists have developed a THC spray which, when absorbed though the red lining in one’s mouth, imparts the same psychological effects of marijuana without the harm to the lungs. [12][13] Summary of my points: A – None of Pro’s contentions are persuasive enough to allow the legalization of marijuana in the face of B – The harmful effects of legalizing marijuana. C – One can impart the effects of smoking marijuana without actually smoking it. Therefore, Marijuana ought not be legalized. [1] http://www.drugabuse.gov... [2] http://www.pbs.org... [3] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... [4] http://www.pnas.org... [5] http://www.nejm.org... [6] http://tinyurl.com... [7] http://www.cdc.gov... [8] http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org... [9] http://www.drugscience.org... [10] http://www.gao.gov... [11] http://www.fbi.gov... [12] http://thcsprays.com... [13] http://www.news-medical.net...

Title: Marijuana ought to be legalized Content: I believe marijuana should be legal ONLY on certain terms. The certain terms being to help with a disease, such as cancer, epilepsy, AIDS, etc. Now, this marijuana isn't smoked, it's taken orally. It's for cancer patients whom suffer nausea and vomiting; It helps reduce both problems. Some cancerous treatments cause those effects. For epilepsy, it helps reduce stress. For AIDS patients, it helps gain appetite, which allows them to gain weight. Marijuana should only be used medically, whether than to just be using it. People react differently when induced on marijuana -- Some contain themselves, acting mellow...Some act wild and out of control. My real argument is: Marijuana should be used medically, and medically ONLY, because if it were just legal and any one could use it, it would be JUST like if it were illegal. People would still lace it with other drugs and hallucinogens, people would still kill over it, and etc. [What I said in the comments, basically.] I'm in between about it. Allowing it be legal, could be a pro and a con; Along with being illegal, pro and con.

Title: Medical Marijuana should be legal. Content: I was looking at your profile, and i saw that you think that medical marijuana should not be legal. I disagree but i want to know why you believe that medical marijuana is unsuitable to be legal in the us. And a debate will follow. It is currently used to make peoples with diseases better, so i dont see why not.

Title: Marijuana should be legal for medical purposes. Content: It will not be an issue. Secondly, I would like to begin with stating my arguments and reasons. Because this is not the round for rebuttals, I will not talk about Pro's main argument until round 3. Arguments Facts about medical marijuana: Medical marijuana can be used to reduce nausea and vomiting, treating HIV/AIDS, and reducing muscle pain (Wikipedia). It can also prevent epilepsy. However, it works "by binding to specific sites in the brain and on the nerves (WEBMD). " All chemicals that bind to the brain are dangerous. Here are it's uses: Improving appetite for people with AIDS Glaucoma Multiple Sclerosis Why it should not be used: According to webmd. com, "cannabinoids in marijuana can weaken the immune system", "long-term use of marijuana can make lung problems worse", "marijuana might make seizure disorders worse in some people [(in other people it might help to control seizures)]", and "it might slow the central nervous system too much when combined with anesthesia and other medications during and after surgery (WEBMD). " Here are some other common side effects of using marijuana for medicinal purposes: Drowsiness, dry mouth, giddiness, hunger, insomnia, red eyes, respiratory issues, short-term memory loss, and uneasiness or anxiety (Southwest Medical Evaluation Center). As you can see, it can be used to help people, but the effects are not always the same. For some people, medical marijuana can cure seizures, while it may make the disorder worse for other people. Currently, marijuana has not been fully tested, which means it should not be used. Unstable drugs should not be used in people. One could argue that it is human experimentation, which is not legal. Other treatments: Anyone who knows as much as I do about biology knows that there are plenty of other ways to cure illnesses. I am sure Pro is aware of this as well. For certain diseases, such as diabetes, people need insulin. Getting insulin used to be difficult. Now, however, we genetically altered a certain bacteria to generate it. Using that knowledge, one can assume that there are other cures to epilepsy, glaucoma, and sclerosis. Conclusion In this round, I have stated the pros and cons to medical marijuana. As Pro, as well as the viewers can see, there are more downsides to it that upsides. The list of cons is longer and the alternative cures are obvious. Here is my conclusion: Using marijuana for medicinal use is unnecessary and should not be done. I patiently await Pro's rebuttals. Thank you. MLA Citations "Medical Cannabis. " Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, 03 Dec. 2014. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. <. http://en.wikipedia.org...;. "MARIJUANA: Uses, Side Effects, Interactions and Warnings - WebMD. " WebMD. WebMD. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. <. http://www.webmd.com...;. "Medical Marijuana Side Effects - Effects of Medical Marijuana. " Medical Marijuana Side Effects - Effects of Medical Marijuana. Web. 14 Mar. 2014. <. http://www.evaluationtoday.com...;.

Title: Individuals have right to pursue what they believe are best treatments. Content: Individuals have a right to pursue treatments that they believe are in their best interest, and which do not come into conflict with the rights of other patients. Medical marijuana qualifies as a such a treatment, which many believe is best for their ailments, and so should be allowed to pursue.

Title: Cannabis should be legalized Content: "Cannabis, commonly known as marijuana, and by numerous other names is a preparation of the cannabis plant intended for use as a psychoactive drug and as medicine." This is my definition of Cannabis, or what we will be calling it; Marijuana. I will be arguing Marijuana should not only be legalized medically but for recreation purposes as well. We are not talking about legalization in a specific country, just legalization period. The rules are as follows: 1st round: Acceptance 2nd round: 1st argument (1 point only!) 3rd round: 2nd argument (2 points only!) 4th round: Rebuttal We will be only doing rebuttals in the fourth round. Good luck my friend DarthKirones

Title: Should Marijuana be legalized Content: I appreciate that my opponent has made his case in round one, giving me to open with a rebuttal, as I do best (especially given the constraints of the debate).When my opponent says that he thinks marijuana (cannabis) should be legalized, he has not specified where. He also has not stated what about it should be legalized: its possession, its traffic, its cultivation, or anything else. He has just jumped in and stated that it should be legalized, and stated some of its uses. The traffic and possession of marijuana has indeed been decriminalized in a number of countries, so my opponent is being rather ambiguous in his opening argument.Your use of yourself as an example is interesting. I'll do the same: in a sports injury, I once suffered stress fractures of the lumbar (large vertebrae). I did not receive an accurate diagnosis, or treatment, for months, yet took no pain killers. You do not need to be stoned to endure a knee injury.I shall make my own case in one of the next rounds.

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Although marijuana has been proven as a alternative to treating cancer, it is still a dangerous drug. There are other medical options that have the same effect on cancer patients without being as dangerous. Different medicines can diminish pain and cause relief without having as dangerous side effects.

Title: Medicle Marijuana Content: I would think that using this would be highly preferable to unnecessarily altering your brain chemistry. Unless, of course, the patient is using marijuana primarily to get high. Like I said marijuana that is used for medical purposes is not just being prescribed to anyone you have to go through certain steps and on to the part about it having other solutions.. Lets look at a common cold, you can use Vick's or dayquil and many others but sometimes peoples chemistry doesn't work well with that drug and they could be allergic to it. Wouldn't you rather have another alternate out there for example marijuana, that you can take and it could help you out.

Title: Marijuana Legalization Content: This is a four round debate. The first round is for presenting our positions, but the debate officially starts in Round 2. I would prefer to debate this with someone who feels strongly about the position, and not just playing devil's advocate or semantics. This is my basic position, and will get into further detail pending my opponent's response. Do not accept if you are only going to debate the specifics of my position rather than the overall legalization position. If your concern is regarding the personal preferences I set forth in my own hypothetical situation legalizing marijuana, then you are not truly against the legalization of marijuana. This is not a debate about degree of legalization, nor is it abut decriminalization vs. legalization. This debate is about the status quo vs. ANY form of legalization, liberalization, or reform of marijuana laws in favor of non-violent users. Thank you. 1- Marijuana should be legal in small quantities (3 oz. or less) for personal use to responsible adults over the age of 21. 2- Marijuana should be considered for medicinal purposes for a variety of illnesses including, but not limited to depression, fibromyalgia, scoliosis, crohn's disease, HIV, AIDS, patients on chemotherapy, migraines, insomnia, and others. 3- Marijuana should be taxed and regulated by the individual states, and proceeds from taxation should be used to fund treatment for drug abuse, studies for alternative medicines like marijuana, youth education programs, etc. 4- The growth of marijuana for personal use should not be considered a crime. 5- Means of legal acquirement of marijuana should be established with federal protection so that those which follow their state laws need not be worried about federal prosecution. I await my opponent's introduction, and hope this turns out to be an informative debate for all.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Marijuana is a good alternative medicine to suit individual needs

Title: Marijauna legalized in the united states Content: I believe that in the united states we should incorporate medical marijuana federal level, for various reasons. I am willing to discuss these reasons ethically who will step up. BTW this is my first debate

Title: Medical weed Content: Weed should be alowed in medical cases because weeed is not that harmful to the patient and if you are gonna put patients to sleep you might as well give them confort and put them at ease.

Title: Legalize Marijuana for ALL uses. Content: Marijuana should be completely legalized for medical and recreational use. Marijuana is completely safe. Marijuana is very healthy. The illegality of Marijuana and criminalization of Marijuana users is an unnecessary and harmful restriction on American culture and its citizens. I await someone to challenge these three points.

Title: Legalization Of Marijuana Content: Hey, I have decided to accept this. I would love to begin. Well first of all Marijuana is terrible for you. Some people may not even use it as medication. Yes I understand it can be used for helping the Ill but there may be other drugs to help with that, that we have not discovered yet.

Title: Cannabis Legalization in the United States (Medical and Recreational Uses) Content: I was wondering when I would get a response. I find this topic very important and enjoy debating it. As per your request, I will focus on medical as well as recreational purposes this round. To begin with, marijuana used medically has proven very useful for a medication. Your fact that marijuana has some negative side effects is true; smoking anything in general can harmful for your lungs. However, the panic attacks, paranoia, etc., are effected by the environment and you mood when smoking. To go along with that, what strain of marijuana smoked does matter. Certain strains will make you more tired and sluggish or active and energetic. A main use for medical marijuana is that it reduces pain. Medical marijuana advocates in other states have said that when diagnosed, they have tried pills or other "big pharma" recommendations. When these do not work, many turned to alcohol. Once medical marijuana was allowed, they reported that they had finally found a medication that worked and had less side effects along with the fact that they worked better for them. As for the recreational reasons, the U.S. has an incredibly high incarceration rate; the highest in the world. Between 2001 and 2010, there were 8.2 million marijuana related arrests, 88% of those were for simply possessing marijuana. If marijuana was decriminalized and legalized recreationally, the arrest rate would in turn drop. Another use of recreational marijuana would be that it would reduce the number of deaths from other, much more harmful drugs. In states with recreational use, especially with Colorado, deaths related to Opium, which can be made into pills or drugs such has heroine, have decreased dramatically. If we were to instate proper laws, like those in states with medical and recreation use, (age requirements, laws against smoking in public, issuing proper medical use licenses) along with creating proper laws making driving while under the influence illegal, medical and recreational uses will prove useful and helpful, as well as fun. If it is alright with you, may we discuss the economic effects of legalization next?

Title: Marijuana Legalization Content: I do agree with marijuana being used for medical purposes, but making it 100% legal is just an awful idea. Can you imagine college kids being able to obtain marijuana as easily as alcohol? Marijuana should not be legal, for very obvious reasons. It should ONLY be used for medical purposes, and quite honestly, there are few medical purposes for it anyway.

Title: Medical marijuana should be legal Content: I apologise to my opponent for the delay in getting this up, and for the abbreviated nature of this argument. Recently, my country legalised medicinal cannabis use (http://en.wikipedia.org...). Since then, we haven't had any significant cases of abuse. Our insurance costs have not skyrocketed, and niether have our taxes. We are not a destination for drug tourism, and we have not undermined our anti-cannabis stance in wider society. When people take medicinal cannabis, their doctors first assess their condition. The doctor's "do no harm" mantra prohibits them from proscribing anything that is significantly harmful for the patient. Obviously, most if not all medicines have side effects, but we allow doctors to assess what will work best for the patient because they - not the government - are the ones who know the medicine best. Ultimately we leave the decision down to the patient when a range of options are available for the same reason. To presume that some government buraeucrats have a better understanding of each patient's individual condition (if you will excuse my RoyLatham-esque expression), and thus what treatments should be available, is to undermine the entire healthcare system. Healthcare is a personal thing. Our right to life confers a responsibility for it, and our responsibility for our life empowers us to choose what medicine we take. We make exceptions in various circumstances - for young children, for instance, and for mentally impaired people who cannot understand what is involved with these decisions - but in general the rule is that illness does not rob us of our general autonomy, but rather extends it. It allows us access to public facilities, such as hospitals, just as it opens up access to prescription drugs, for the simple reason that we cannot make a choice when certain choices are prohibited. As a principle, we feel it is entirely consistant with the role of the healthcare system to legalise cannabis. You can't make a full medical choice when certain medical options, endorsed by many scientists globally, are not available to you. For instance, cannabis causes pain relief. It would be a mistake to assume that cannabis is not the right pain reliever for anybody. That's why the choice must be available, in these kinds of difficult medical situations, not narrowed down to a few government-approved alternatives. I personally do not believe there is any evidence cannabis cures anything, or has any helpful effect beyond suppression of symptoms (such as pain). However, since doctors will not have the prescribed the medicine in any situation where it would be harmful, the cannabis would never be used when it is harmful to the patient's health. Since a person who's in hospital all the time undergoing chemo is not exactly going to be drug driving or doing property crime, there's no harm to the public either. Furthermore, research on cannabis is still ongoing. Perhaps it has some helpful effect that science has not yet isolated. It must be the patient, informed by the advice of their medical professional, who makes that decision, not me, because I have no responsibility for their health. My contention is that it should be on the basis of harms to the patient, not the benefits to the patient, that medicine is administered. We already accept the principal that the relative value of benefits must be decided by the patient because we allow patients to refuse treatment. Since cannabis has no real harms when administered in the right way under proper, doctor-specified and recommended conditions, as and when appropriate, there is nothing wrong with medicinal cannabis legalisation. We do not ban the use of placebos if patients want to take them voluntarily. Patients can, if they so wish, hug a teddy bear instead of undergoing chemotherapy and pray to God to remove the desease. These are examples of placebos, and they confer no benefits, nor do they have any particular harms. Cannabis can, under most circumstances, fall in the same category. In the remainder of circumstances, doctors will intervene. As can be shown with countries where it has been legalised, such as New Zealand, this does not translate into a broader problem for society. If you don't accept medicinal marijuana, then as a principle, you deny patient autonomy. You limit the scope of healthcare. But what is of greater value than human life? Even if cannabis has few, if any, beneficial effects, that is no grounds for banning it as a choice. That is why we need to legalise cannabis for medicinal use.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: General statements in favor of medical marijuana

Title: Marijuana Legalization Content: This is a difficult topic for me to pick a side on. I'm not just talking about marijuana being legal for medical reasons, im focusing on the legalization for recreational use. a lot of people use this drug everyday, and view it as a form of stress relief. but instead of relieving their stress they might just be covering up their problems and concerns briefly.

Title: Legalization of Marijuana Content: I just realized that my topic was a bit vague. What I should have said was "Legalization of Marijuana for Recreational Use". While I still disagree with medical uses, I am most passionate about it being legalized for recreational use. I strongly believe it should not be. You were right regarding the THC chemical. I have no problem doing some more research as you requested, but I hope you can respect that I feel there are better ways to handle medical problems than using marijuana. So, with this topic established, how do you feel about legalizing marijuana for recreational use? The way I see it, doing so would greatly endanger communities.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Unhealthy effects of Marijuana outweigh medical benefits

Title: marijuana should be legal man.... Content: Hello BongMan, Thank you for starting this debate. I would like to use my round to ask you a few questions. 1. Do you think marijuana should be legal for medical purposes or for pleasure? 2. What are your thoughts on marijuana's harmful effects? 3. Should there be an age limit on who can take the drug? 4. Should there be a limit on how much of the drug one can buy? 5. Please, please do not be offended, but I realized that you are apart of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, in order for me to have a full debate with you, I would like to ask you if that is what you fully believe, and if you really do live in Jamaica. Thank you, I look forward to your response.

Title: Marijuana Medicine Content: this was fun- my first debate ever. well here it goes- Maybe marijuana isn't as harmful as it is rumored to be, however, does not take away the fact it is still harmful. it causes hallucination, lung infections, and obstructed air ways.heart race and anxiety, just to name a few. Overall, you have made a very strong argument on legalization on marijuana as a recreational drug. However, you have completely missed the focal point of the debate- marijuana as medicine. You have provided no evidence of how marijuana could be used as medicine. My closing statement is that as you have no evidence supporting your claim, we may not assume that marijuana is a medicine without solid evidence.

Title: Pick your own debate! Content: 1)Around half a million Americans use medical marijuana, also this only includes 12 states given that not many states allow medical marijuana. http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org... 2)According to everyone who uses medical marijuana it benefits them. Also I've already posted a source that links to a couple dozen studies that show that medical marijuana has real health benefits. Again my opponent is making a huge logical fallacy. He is saying that because medical marijuana doesn't provide medical benefits for every disease that the diseases it does provide benefits shouldn't count. I said this in my earlier post but clearly my opponent decided to ignore it or didn't even bother to read my post. There is nothing wrong with regulating the medical industry; what is wrong is the government banning medical marijuana. This is wrong because it is the government telling doctors how to treat patients and it is an example of the government telling sick people that they cannot have effective medicine. My opponent is using another logically fallacy. Every medicine has its complications, and side effects, this does not make those medicines worthless saying so is ridiculous. My opponent is using another logically fallacy. He is saying that because most societies haven't legalized Medical marijuana that the health benefits of MM are invalid. It would be like saying that in the 1400 since almost no nation had democracy that democracy would be a bad thing. Even my opponent admits there are scientific double blind studies that show MM having medical benefits, therefore even my opponent agrees with my side.

Title: Marijuana should be legal Content: I propose that Marijuana should be legalized. I believe that it's a spectacular opportunity for those who are dealing with the hardships of life to escalate in terms of mood or disease. Studies have shown that Marijuana has the capability of stopping Cancer, curing Glaucoma, reversing effects of Tobacco and ameliorating lung health, decreasing anxiety, ridding of Dravet's Syndrome, etc. C1) A substance that is able to prevent the effects of negative thoughts and emotions, diseases, and seizures should be legal. C2) Without Marijuana, you are going to have people who are outright stressed out, get seizures, and are withering from diseases. P1) Marijuana should be legalized (everywhere) There is a good reason for why police officers think Marijuana should be legal. 3.6 Billion dollars were spent against the usage of pot in 2010. I believe that is an insanely large sum of money to be spent on something as simple as Marijuana usage, which is good for you, and we should be spending this large weight of money on crimes that are actually dangerous, like assaulting others drunkenly. If Tobacco is legal, then why on earth should Marijuana should be illegal? Since Marijuana can reverse the effects of Tobacco and keep your lungs in a healthy state, that makes it even better than Tobacco itself. Sources: 1] http://www.businessinsider.com... 2] http://www.rollingstone.com...

Title: Marijuana should be legal Content: My bad I read the post wrong. I believe medical marijuana is a legitamate way of treating a sickness (within reason of corse. ) But marijuana that anyone can receive would catastrophic in that anyone could receive marijuana even younger children. Meaning that if my theoretical son Timmy wanted some pot to smoke with the cool kids and I happened to be in possession of it he could easily get it. Of course fast too he might be able to receive some from other children. And the transfer of marijuana would be legal too, as the government would have no way of determining who can receive marijuana whether the person is responsible or not. Also I never said alcohol nor cigerets should be aloud. In all reality they should be illegal as well but that's a debate for later

Title: Marijuana Should NOT Be Legalized Content: First I will address your questions that I was unable to squeeze into my previous argument. 1. Do you admit that marijuana has medicinal benefit beyond its application as a pain killer (stimulating appetite being one such benefit)? The other benefit being the alleviation of nausea and vomiting. Yes, I acknowledge the proposed benefits of the substance, but disagree with its effectiveness and overall safety. Moreover, I think the negative health effects of smoked marijuana outweigh the potential benefits, and in some cases can worsen a patients condition by weakening their immune system. 2. Should there only be one pain killer on the market, and should all others be banned? No. There is no reason to add another pain killer to the market when there are already numerous legal, effective alternatives. Sure, all drugs have side effects that are of health concern, but marijuana has a more consistently negative effect on patients. Countless studies have shown marijuana to be far more harmful, and less effective in several areas, than the legal alternatives. 3. Do you concede that marijuana, if abused, is less harmful than cocaine? Absolutely. My intention for mentioning cocaine legalization was not to contrast the severity of the negative health effects, but to point out the nonsensical reasoning of legalizing a harmful drug. In other words, marijuana is not a safe drug, neither is cocaine. Both are effective as a drug, particularly for pain relief, but both have negative health effects that outweigh their respective benefits. 4. Do you admit that prohibition of drugs is unconstitutional, and if not, why was a constitutional amendment needed to prohibit alcohol? Drug abuse fuels degeneracy. If the government must play the role of mother to protect the health and well being of its citizens, so be it. 5. Do you think that the Drug War has been worth the fiscal and social costs, especially given the fact that people still want and use drugs? Absolutely. The legalization of marijuana would be to let the lion out of its cage. People need to realize the importance of the illegality of this deleterious drug and the importance of government quarantine. It is imperative that we keep the beast caged at all costs. We must learn from the history as well as the present severity of the health epidemic created by the abuse and addiction of alcohol and tobacco. We don't need another such epidemic to legally creep into public domain and have use become influenced by social pressures of conformity and normality upon society in the manner as has occurred with alcohol and tobacco. NEW QUESTION #6: Should alcohol and cigarettes be banned, and if not, why not? Tobbacco cigarettes, yes. There is no reason for it, and it has become a social health epidemic. It is an addictive, harmful drug that is claiming lives by the truck load. It may not impair your judgment and perception in the same way marijuana and alcohol do, but the long term effects are well documented. As for alcohol, there have been various studies that have shown that an occasional drink may actually be beneficial for your health. I do not think alcohol should be banned, but that those that drink irresponsibly should suffer a more severe penalty. However, I don't think either of these are on a par with the severity of marijuana abuse. Most major medical and health organizations, as well as the vast majority of nationally recognized expert medical doctors, scientists and researchers, have concluded that smoking marijuana is not safe and effective medicine. Some of these organizations include: --The American Medical Association --The American Cancer Society --National Multiple Sclerosis Association --The American Glaucoma Association --American Academy of Ophthalmology --National Institute for Neurological Disorders and Stroke --National Institue of Dental Research --The Natioanal Institute on Allergy and Infectious Diseases. Several government agencies of both party affiliations have also opposed the legalization of medical marijuana. These organizations include the Drug Enforcement Administration and the US Public Health Service. Their latest finding, as recently as 1994, was affirmed in a decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. Frequently, pro-legalization advocates put forth unscientific, non-scrutinized or analyzed anecdotal statements from people with a variety of illnesses. We aren't told whether these individuals were using marijuana prior to the illness or if perhaps they are using marijuana in combination with other medication. Had the individual had a recent thorough medical exam? Or is he or she justifying their use of marijuana, experiencing a placebo effect, or experiencing the intoxicating effect of smoking marijuana? Such anecdotal evidence would not pass in a peer reviewed journal. According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse, "In the last half of 2003, marijuana was the third most commonly abused drug mentioned in drug-related hospital emergency department (ED) visits in the continental United States." The National Eye Institute (NEI) reports, "there is no scientifically verifiable evidence that marijuana or its derivatives are safe and effective in the treatment of glaucoma." None of NEI's marijuana-based research studies demonstrate that THC can safely and effectively lower intraocular pressure enough to prevent optic nerve damage from glaucoma. Dr. George L. Spaeth, the first President of the American Glaucoma Society and Director of the Glaucoma Service at the internationally known Wills Eye Hospital in Philadelphia has "not found any documentary evidence which indicates that a single patient has had his or her natural history of the disease altered by smoking marijuana." Dr. Keith Green, Director of Ophthalmology Research at the Medical College of Georgia, states, "It is clear that there is no evidence that marijuana use prevents the progression of visual loss in glaucoma." In 1996, Harmon J. Eyre, Executive Vice President for Research and Cancer Control for the American Cancer Society stated, there is "no reason to support the legalization of marijuana for medical use." Joanne Schellenbach, spokeswoman for the American Cancer Society, said her group feels there is "no need to treat the side effects of chemotherapy" with marijuana. There are ample legal pharmaceuticals available to do this which don't present the [medical] problems [caused by] inhaling," she said. Dr. David S. Ettinger, associate director of the Johns Hopkins Oncology Center, and a nationally respected cancer expert, has written that "There is no indication that marijuana is effective in treating nausea and vomiting resulting from radiation treatment.... No legitimate studies have been conducted which make such conclusions." Quotes from "Medical Marijuana Should Not Be Permitted" by Robert L. Maginnis Ed. William Dudley. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999. There are other legal, safer, more effective drugs on the market, and no need for marijuana. Legalization of marijuana, either medicinal or recreational, will encourage use, not dissuade it. The negative effects of marijuana are well documented, while the positive effects of medicinal use have failed to stand up to the rigorous tests of science. clsmooth, it has truly been a pleasure debating with you. I chose you specifically because I had seen a few of your debates before, and felt you were the best challenge available. You certainly delivered. I look forward to future debates with you. Thank you for the lively, persuasive, insightful debate! P.S. I got a good laugh out of the mirapex reference with the urge to gamble!

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Medical marijuana has serious side effects, although many argue it can stifle pain, I argue pain is healthy although it may not feel like it because pain relieves body stress. Marijuana is infamous for being detrimental to a person. Now I know you are arguing medical marijuana my argument is that legalizing the medical use of marijuana allows this deadly substance to be obtained by normal people, exposing them to the harmful effects of this deadly poison, plus this drug doesn't realy do anything, all it does is relieve pain temoporaily and then send you into a state of depression.

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: ====== Rebuttal ====== [QUOTE] 1) Beneficial in health. As noted by my own opponent, medical marijuana can help alleviate symptoms of pain, discomfort, and lack of appetite caused by many common disease, including AIDS, cancer, glaucoma, etc. This can go uncontested, as my opponent has already agreed that medical marijuana has these properties. Of course, there are even more benefits of marijuana, such as a prevention of the symptoms of Alzheimer's disease and its progression. (1)(2) A legalization of medical marijuana would aid those who are in pain from said diseases and symptoms. [/QUOTE] The main chemical used in "medical marijuana" that helps to manage disease is Delta-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol, more commonly known as THC. While THC can be helpful in the treatment of certain diseases, the parts of the cannabis plant used to make "medical marijuana" contain only 3% THC. In order to intake this measly amount of THC, the patient must also assume the numerous harms of taking marijuana itself, including the intake over 400 hazardous chemicals and numerous psychological and physiological hazards. Not only that but the few good things that marijuana brings to the medical industry have already been isolated and incorporated into a FDA-approved pharmaceutical drug called Marinol. Marinol preserves the benefits of THC while lessening or eliminating the harms brought about by Marijuana consumption. Medical professionals have noticed the notable effects of certain narcotics in the suppression of pain. Does that mean that they legalize opium or heroin? Obviously no because pharmacists can isolate the positive effects of pain suppression and reduce the rather negative effects of extreme addiction and potential for homicidal rage. Why, then, legalize medical marijuana, when the aforementioned pharmaceutical drugs are superior in every regard to marijuana? [QUOTE] 2) Reduce number of those in prison. The current amount of arrests of marijuana-related crimes totals over 700,000 thousand a year, and that was back in 2005! (3) Of these, a whopping 88% were just for simple possession, while the rest were only for sale or manufacture. (3) These inmates who have done nothing morally wrong or reprehensible are now spending years and years in prison, just for possessing or growing marijuana. 3) Help cut our spending. We currently spend more than 15.5 billion dollars a year on marijuana arrests. (4) If legalized and taxed, not only would we eliminate that spending, but we would also have a major source of revenue that would help pull us out of this recession, as marijuana is our best cash crop, pulling in $35 billion dollars per year. (5)(6) [/QUOTE] Instead of sending those people to prison, we could just make them pay a citation and the citation would depend on how much marijuana the person possesses. This would also help the recession while keeping marijuana illegal. [QUOTE] 4) Little to no side effects. Marijuana causes a very small amount of, if at all, side effects, which are negligible at best. (7)(8) 5) It doesn't make any sense to render it illegal. And that's the crux of the matter, isn't it? It is not overly harmful, if at all, and it doesn't have any second-hand smoke effects. There is simply no logical/moral reason to keep it illegal. No one should have a right to tell you what you can and cannot ingest. You don't violate the rights of others in any way, shape or form, so why should it be illegal? There is not convincing argument as to why. [/QUOTE] This is obviously false. Depending on the user Marijuana usually causes the user to become hungry, lazy, paranoid, etc... Marijuana could cause obesity from hunger and that's if the user can get food. If the user can't get food in time, they will die of starvation. Marijuana could cause people to be lazy and therefore if marijuana was legal, The recession would actually be worse. Marijuana could cause people to be paranoid and lose trust in others causing them to go insane and crime rate may possibly go up and thus, this would do harm to others. ======= Arguments ======= 1)People say that marijuana can make the user "happy." Unnecessary and harmful freedoms are not handed out to the terminally ill simply to ensure that they have a pleasant trip out of life. Doing such sets an unneeded and negative precedent to the rest of society. Honestly, "happiness" isn't an idea that falls under the umbrella of medicine, and the Affirmative plan draws no line if happiness was an acceptable use for medical marijuana. If I had a bad day at work, would I be justified in using harmful drugs as an escapism? The use of medical marijuana as a means to achieve happiness by escaping from life's problems is neither a just reason for assuming that societal harms achieved by legalizing marijuana, nor does it even fall under the concept of medical marijuana in the first place. 2)What we must see is that current treatment options are far superior to the suggested use of medical marijuana, and any minuscule benefits are far outweighed by the harms of making marijuana easily available. 3)It's obvious that the legalization of medical marijuana has been abused on a widespread basis. Taking the action suggested by Pro provides little to no benefit to those actually sick, while simultaneously harming society as a whole. 4) Marinol is a better alternative to medical marijuana. ===== Sources ===== http://www.homedrugtestingkit.com... http://www.drugs.com... http://www.justice.gov...

Title: Regulation of Marijuana like alcohol Content: I agree that marijuana has medical benefits, as i simply is true. however, I would say our agreement may end there. 1) Marijuana use has negative side effects. Your argument made it seem as though marijuana was safe and harmless. Whether or not this was your intention, i ought to address the medical problems that arise from marijuan use. Marijuana users, in a University of Sydney study, were shown to have higher instances of psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and psychosis. It is also as addictive as tobacco, also being as likely to induce cancer. With potential drivers, marijuana can be just as life threatening as alcohol. Marijuana causes imapired reaction time and abilities, a vital driving tool. another, possibly more sinister side of marijuana is its gateway potential. Have you ever seen the show "Intervention"? Many times, the first drug that these addicts try is marijuana, eventually leading to more serious and dnagerous substances. While the "Gateway Hypothesis" is not an innate quality of cannibis, it is still a prevelant factor amongst users. 2) An age limit would have no effect on marijuana's availablility to minors. Making marijuana legal would simply make it easier for the suppliers to these kids to have easier access to the drug. There is no evidence to support that an age limit of any kind would decrease weed usage amongst minors. It would more likely increase it, as stated in my reason above. Simply because it is easily available to minors now is not justification that it should be legalized. This would only aggravte the problem. 3) Marijuana being used for tax leverage is a dangerous road. Simply stating that marijuana should be legal for tax reasons is absurd. Marijuana, as I have established, has many downsides to it. Legalizing it in an excuse to gain revenue sets a dangerous precedent. What may be marijuana today could become methamphetamine tomorrow. Selling out the american people like this would be furhter proof that the government doesnt care about its people. Would you be ok with the government allowing the sale of heroin so it could be taxed? Hopefully not. Doing so shows that money is more important than the welfare of the people. The same principle applies to marijuana. 4) The answer to cartels is not through legalization Cartels do not care about the law. Legalizing it would not stop their activity, in fact it would just make it easier for them to do it. The real problem with cartels is that they can hop the border at any moment whenever they want. A better idea would be a stronger border patrol, rather than laxing drug laws. 5) Marijuana is under the same scrutiny as any drug Marijuana is (as stated) a potentially harmful drug. Like Cocaine. Or Heroin. Or LSD, shrooms, pcp, etc. If we legalize marijuana, a potentially dangerous substance, then we must legalize other drugs as well, since the same arguments for weed could be made for any of these drugs. Here's an example. Opium, when used in small and controlled doese, is simply a pain reliever. It is used by people anyway, and thus it ought to be legalized so that we could gain tax revenue for it. Legalizing opium would thus put the chinese mob out of business, by allowing the government to sell it and compete. Police need to not arrest people just looking for pain relief. Now obviously opium is a dangerous drug, but it too easy to apply the same argument. Legalizing marijuana sets a bad precedent. I also had issues with you saying marijuana is more dangerous than a doctor's pills. I'd like some verification of this, before I am accept it. Also saying they are making "criminals out of inncocent people" is fallacious, considering that they have broken a law and thus are no longer inncocent. k, your turn. you did actually a pretty good job in that round.

Title: Non Medical Use of Marijuana SHOULD Be Legal in the United States Content: Non medical use of marijuana should be legal in the United States because of it's history, it's positive impact on people, and because it will make the state a better place. Marijuana has many uses, not just to be smoked, but to make cloth and paper. Think about how using marijuana for these purposes would benefit this state as a whole. Marijuana could be a BILLION dollar industry, if just that. We could get out of debt as a state because of the uses that marijuana has. Marijuana also has SUCH a positive impact on people; medically and non medically. Non medically, marijuana stimulates the brain and relaxes the body. It allows people to think about things more heavily and opens the mindset of many people. Medically, marijuana stops seizures, kills cancer cells, treats glaucoma, helps control and regulate blood sugar, has the ability to prevent suicide, has the ability to lower violence, and helps police to focus on the ACTUAL criminals. So why isn't marijuana legal if it does all of these good things? The answer, the government. Now, trust me, I'm not one of those people who believe that the government wants to destroy humanity or are "coming after us", just bear with me. Think about it; if marijuana has the ability to cure cancer, treat glaucoma, regulate blood sugar, prevent suicide, stop seizures, and lower depression... what would that mean for the billion dollar medical industry? That's right, they would lose money. If marijuana has the ability to lower depression (which causes people to act out in violent nature), steer people away from other and more dangerous drugs, lower violence in communities and states... what would that mean for the billion dollar prison industry? They would also loose money. As well as the tobacco industry. And this is why the government doesn't want marijuana to be legal. If people aren't suffering, and dying, and needing to go to the hospital, and if people aren't committing crimes, and SELLING MARIJUANA, then those industries would lose LOTS of money. And of course, our selfish, money-hungry government does not want that.

Title: Cannabis Legalization in the United States (Medical and Recreational Uses) Content: In my opinion, cannabis or marijuana should be legalized in the United States. I believe that it would have many useful medical, as well as recreational purposes. If the proper laws are instituted, cannabis legalization would prove very useful in the United States.

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: I hope to help 16kadams in his/her attempt to start a career in politics. I have seen him/her participate in several debates. I saw one debate on this topic in which the person who posted it only allowed a 10 minute period to post arguments so that rounds were automatically forfeited. I hope he/she accepts this invitation and I look forward to the debate. Round 1 is acceptance. I will be arguing that medical marijuana should be allowed, so the burden of proof will be on me to show why it should be allowed. My opponent will be asked either to point out why I have failed to prove my point or to prove me wrong.

Title: Autistic children should not be allowed to smoke marijuana. Content: Con begins by questioning the legitimacy of medical marijuana and how one would go about getting it. Currently, at least 14 states allow for medicinal marijuana; you have to register for a card and then talk to your doctor about a prescription. The information which Con requested can be found here [1]. However, Con is right in stating that it is still illegal at the federal level. While I completely disagree with this legislation, this debate is not about whether or not pot should be legal, or even if it should only be legal for autistic kids. If that were the case, it would have been clarified in R1. However, you'll notice that R1 only talked about the lack of autistic kids in gangs and how/why they should be allowed to cut and sell drugs for profit. So, that is exactly what Con has to defend in this debate. Rebuttal: 1. Con's point makes absolutely no sense. I said, "For legal purposes, I am in favor of marijuana legalization (buying) for those over the age of 18. Autistic "children" do not fit within these parameters." That argument makes perfect sense -- my personal feelings on legislation do not apply to autistic CHILDREN (the subject of this debate). Con says that this isn't relevant, but clearly it is. 2. Con concedes the first part of the argument, but then claims that he's not telling the children to disobey their parents ~ he thinks they should be allowed to smoke if their parents agree. Well, as I already pointed out (so yes, I did refute it), it would be irresponsible for parents to be encouraging their under-age autistic children to smoke pot. That is a decision for someone of legal age to make. Further, people with autism are considered to be mentally handicapped [2] and in many cases, they're literally retarded [3]. So, given the CHILD'S age (under 18) and the probability that they're not capable of making those kinds of decisions, Con is advocating that a parent use their kids to study something that is not proven to be effective and in fact can severely harm them. This seems like it is violating the child's rights. While pot can be an incredible tool of medicinal value, it can have devastating effects on one's mental health - particularly those who are already susceptible to mental deficiencies. For instance, in addition to weakening the immune system, marijuana has been linked to the acceleration of mental disorders such as paranoia, depression, uncontrollable aggression, bipolar psychosis, schizophrenia, etc. [4]. So, for a child with autism, this can potentially be incredibly dangerous. 3. I pointed out that there were beneficial and less harmful treatments for autism than marijuana. Con countered this by saying (a) I haven't pointed out any, and (b) that I was wrong because there are no known cures. He's right about the second part - there is NO known cure for autism, including marijuana... so this is a moot point. As far as the alternatives, how about: sensory integration therapy, dietary modifications, occupational and physical therapy, play therapy, social stories, picture exchange communication systems, vitamins, etc. [5]. So, now that we've cleared that up, Con's next part of the argument claims that we should allow for this kind of testing specifically to see if/how marijuana can help with autism. A few things - Based on the evidence and knowledge that we DO have, we can infer or at least draw some kind of conclusion about the prospective benefits and whether or not this would be a good endeavor to look into. Also, why does this testing have to be done on CHILDREN specifically? Most importantly, I already detailed how one could go about getting a marijuana registration card, talking to their doctor about medical marijuana, and doing this in a safe and legal way. However, I do think people should consider the risks (especially as it pertains to other mental health disorders and associations regarding pot). 4. Regarding the legality of this issue, it was never clarified in R1 that we were discussing changing the current laws. Moreover, it was not implied or specified in the resolution. So, when I accepted this debate, the only thing up for discussion was the resolution and what Con posted in the first round: "Since we can't easily force gangs to accept autistic children among their ranks, we need to do the next best thing and provide autistic children with an alternate source of marijuana which they can consume, sell, and cut for profit." While I think pot should be legal (that's obvious), I don't think it should be legal for children as I have mentioned. Further, if it becomes legal, it should be legal for STUDIES and an advancement of science as my opponent said -- not for autistic people to consume (without knowing the dangers), sell and cut for profit. The basic point, though, is that even if it WERE legal - that doesn't necessarily mean that people *should* smoke pot, let alone people with autism, let alone children with autism. If I can prove -- and I believe I have -- that KIDS with autism probably shouldn't be smoking pot, then I have won this debate. 5. Con concedes that having an autistic gang is unethical and unfeasible. [[ Update ]] So it seems to me the only arguments in question are: 1. If those under 18 should consume pot (Con says yes) 2. If parents should be able to give their under-age and mentally ill children pot (Con says yes) 3. If pot with all of its negative connotations to mental health should be administered to mentally ill children when there are other, healthier alternatives (Con says yes) In the first round, basically Con said that autistic children need a voice (they're not represented in gangs) and should have pot accessible to them. However, as I've pointed out, children should not have this option, and parents should seek healthier alternatives which have proven to be effective. Experimentation is fine, but it should be administered first to adults and those who would probably benefit the most (which science can help us infer). Plus, if this argument applies, then it should apply to ALL people that pot can benefit - which would be most people - not just those with autism. And again, this debate is about autistic children. Even if it were legal for these individuals, their parents should have the first and foremost say about what they ingest for medicinal reasons. Most parents would probably agree that this is a bad idea. [1] http://www.mahalo.com... [2] http://www.autismspot.com... [3] http://www.autism-resources.com... [4] http://cyber.law.harvard.edu... [5] http://www.neurologychannel.com...

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: My opponent provides no source for the bold claim that up to forty percent of persons with BP disorder cannot tolerate standard treatment medications, or any suggestion of logic or evidence that cannaboids would be an exception. Even if my opponent's doubtful claims are true, the minimal impact of medical marijuana is easily negated by the 400+ toxins found in the substance. Additionally, THC has never been used as a controlled substance in the study of BP disorder, directly contradicting my opponents assumption that cannaboids could be used to combat the disease. Furthermore, marijuana has been proven to heighten the risk and intensity of the depressive states of bipolar disorder. My opponent's second main point is completely irrelevant. Unnecessary and harmful freedoms are not handed out to the terminally ill simply to ensure that they have a pleasant trip out of life. Doing such sets an unneeded and negative precedent to the rest of society. Honestly, "happiness" isn't an idea that falls under the umbrella of medicine, and the Affirmative plan draws no line if happiness was an acceptable use for medical marijuana. If I had a bad day at work, would I be justified in using harmful drugs as an escapism? The use of medical marijuana as a means to achieve happiness by escaping from life's problems is neither a just reason for assuming that societal harms achieved by legalizing marijuana, nor does it even fall under the concept of medical marijuana in the first place. In my opponent's final main point, he affirms that marijuana could be used as a method of pain relief. While this may be true, my opponent makes no claim or provides any evidence to suggest that medical marijuana would be a preferable option to pain relief medications already available, including Marinol. He asserts that experts could control the use of the drug, completely ignoring the already controlled substances already on the market. My opponent's claim that the legalization of medical marijuana would encourage research of the substance is irrelevant as the research of cannaboids is not prohibited by the negation of the resolution. What we must see is that current treatment options are far superior to the suggested use of medical marijuana, and any minuscule benefits are far outweighed by the harms of making marijuana easily available. Per the New York Times: "In this environment, it was worrisome to read a first-person report in The Times on June 12, that the writer, a 31-year-old marathon runner, found it "shockingly easy" to obtain marijuana in San Francisco. Although she was in peak health, she sought medical marijuana on the grounds that she suffered a migraine headache every month or so. After her own health plan turned her down, she got a recommendation from a clinic doctor who never asked to see her medical records. His say-so was enough to get her an identification card from the city's health department, along with cards for two friends she had designated as "primary caregivers" so that they could pick up her marijuana if she felt too ill to fetch it herself. That laissez-faire transaction sounds like an easy target for anyone seeking to denigrate the whole program." It's obvious that the legalization of medical marijuana has been abused on a widespread basis. Taking the action suggested by Pro provides little to no benefit to those actually sick, while simultaneously harming society as a whole. Note that my opponent has failed to refute any portion of my case, and as of now it remains untouched. REQUEST: My opponent needs to provide evidence that says that a large portion of BP patients cannot tolerate Marinol but CAN tolerate natural cannaboids. He also must prove that marijuana would be a preferable option of pain relief when compared to current approved medications. Sources (not including those previously used): http://www.pendulum.org... http://www.nytimes.com...

Title: Marijuana should be legalized for recreational use Content: Thanks, you bring up some very good points - however, I would like to remind you that this debate discusses the recreational use of marijuana, not medical. In your first rebuttal, you describe the medicinal benefits that marijuana can possess. As of the present date, twenty-three states (Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington) and the District of Columbia have passed legislation that allows for the legal use of medical cannabis in conservative amounts. In response to your description of benefits, a carefully measured, legally dispensed amount of medical marijuana can be effective in treating or bringing relief from said medical issues. However, I would like to again highlight that this debate is centered on legalization of recreational use of the drug. As with the majority of prescription drugs, these medicines are more difficult to access than over-the-counter drugs because potential misuse could have disastrous effects. This is why a doctor's prescription is required to obtain these prescription drugs. Should marijuana be legalized for recreational use, thus giving it the same accessibility as over-the-counter drugs, it is far more likely to be misused for purposes beyond medical reasons. By keeping it as a carefully monitored, limited, and measured and prescription drug, we as people are allowed to take advantage of such benefits you have described while avoiding the disastrous effects of potential abuse. In response to your second rebuttal, it is true that a tax on marijuana could contribute to government profit. However, as I mentioned in my introductory argument, its legalization could lead to even greater hikes in national spending by needing to provide for greater health care and educational needs that would need to be met as a long-term result of the drug's harmful effects. The government also realizes and embraces the fact that there are many other forms of taxation that they currently impose to gain revenue (whether we agree on them or not), and that the consequences of recreational marijuana legalization could far outweigh the benefits. It is true, in the meantime, that America is a country founded on principles of human rights and freedom. However, our forefathers established a government for many reasons - among these is to "promote the general Welfare" of our people, as quoted from the Constitution. This concept of general welfare can be defined as "the concern of the government for the health, peace, morality, and safety of its citizens" (http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...). In carrying out this mission identified in the Preamble, the government works to protect its citizens by keeping from them the dangers and threats that this drug poses to the health and welfare of society. It is much the same reason as to why the government prohibits the public from accessing nuclear weapons - but it's a free country, right? Well, yes, but the government has good reason to be keeping such potentially lethal things from public use, even if the majority of users are responsible individuals who "promise it doesn't affect them." Despite the fact that marijuana addiction itself is rare, the influence the drug (in non-medical use) can and does have upon users and those around them as described in my introductory argument is too significant to put aside. The government, though recognizing our freedoms, is remaining faithful to the law of the land by watching out for its citizens - providing safer ways of having a good time and relieving one from the pains of life. This, in my opinion, is something to be thankful for. :) Citations: http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org... http://www.nlm.nih.gov... http://www.archives.gov... http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

Title: medical marijuana Content: Hey there. I'm having a little trouble understanding...are you just against smoked medical marijuana? or medical marijuana as a whole? I'll argue for both. Medical Marijuana. Period. You said yourself, THC has health benefits. It causes hunger in cancer and eating disorder patients, dulls pain in patients experiencing it, and actually GROWS brain cells! (crazy, right?). Marijuana can be ingested for these effects in many ways, INCLUDING pills and edibles, and a doctor would prescribe a patient the best way for THEM to take it. Obviously, no lung cancer patient will be smoking weed to get better. I feel I don't need to argue this too much, because you brought up good points already yourself, so let's get to the main event. Smoked Marijuana Alright I'm gonna break down your argument here. You're right, all smoke is harmful. HOWEVER, Marijuana smoke is far less harmful than cigarette smoke, due to its lack of chemicals and the fact that marijuana is smoked far less than cigarettes because less is needed for its effects. Further more, the helpful effects of smoking marijuana FAR outweigh the hurtful effects, so you're wrong about people being "tricked" into thinking it will help them when it will only hurt them. I read about a study done where a hand full of people volunteered to smoke marijuana everyday to see how long it took for the weed to effect their lungs. The result? it was 10 YEARS before any lung function began to decline. Here's the article: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com... just because something has cons doesn't mean there's no pros. I mean, Oxicodone isn't very good for you either, but it is a commonly prescribed pain medication. People can overdose on all kinds of legal prescription meds, but you CAN'T overdose on marijuana. As far as your second hand smoke argument, It's not like a cancer patient is gonna be smoking weed watching TV with their kids, they'd be smoking it in a private environment, probably a hospital, where no others would be harmed. In conclusion, your argument has tons of flaws, but I happily await your rebuttal.

Title: Legalizing marijuana Content: While my opponent has provided reasonable ideas that could work for the sale and production of marijuana, there is one slight issue. My opponent speaks as if this is will be actually done within the real world and that he knows how they will do it. This is not a debate about what we would personally do, but what would actually be done and how it would affect society. Health is huge today in the world. With a world population of over seven billion and continued to grow even more within the next century, we need to take into account that diseases, viruses, and bacteria are all a larger issue with a larger population. Being prescribed by a doctor is one thing, but using it recreationally is another. I will state no further new point as I already have previously. Our society's health and wellbeing is much more important that a boost to our economy - which can be done via anything else other than marijuana. I thank my opponent for a productive debate. Good luck with your votes.

Title: Marijuana Should Be Legal Content: Marijuana should be legal for the following reasons. Also, I rushed this a bit. I apologize for not having a lot of time. 1) Marijuana can cure diseases: Using medical marijuana, there is an abundance of diseases that you can fight and cure with. One example includes glaucoma, which is an eye disease involving increases pressure in your eyes, which causes it to damage vision. Marijuana can decrease the pressure in your eyes and thus improve your vision. It is also able to reverse the effects of smoking tobacco, which is a legitimately lethal substance that can kill you over time. Marijuana can also increase your lung capacity and thus give you better breathing. Smoking tobacco is an issue today because too many people resort to it and we can't just stop that process by banning tobacco, so instead, we can give people marijuana to reverse the effects of tobacco and act as a substitution for tobacco. This only scratches the surface of what marijuana can do for you. It can also control epileptic seizures, can treat Dravet's syndrome, can stop cancer with a substance called Cannabidiol, can decrease anxiety, etc. http://www.businessinsider.com... 2) Marijuana is not lethal My first argument ties in with this argument. Marijuana has an annual death rate of 0, and deadly substances like tobacco has an annual death rate of 406,290. That is a big difference right there. Studies show that marijuana can steer people away from smoking tobacco, which is definitely a good thing. If you look at the amount of deaths tobacco causes every year compared to marijuana, you would see that marijuana is obviously the better choice. I have already demonstrated that it can cure other diseases, and with marijuana, we will have more happy people, less injured and ill people, and less deaths. Also, as an added bonus, marijuana can help people with their driving, and reduces car crashes by 8-11% 3) Marijuana helps with the economy. Taxing for Marijuana can give the U.S a grand total of 6 billion more dollars a year, and a minimum of 14 million dollars in a year. If the U.S can save billions of our profit, they can use the money for bigger issues and strengthen our economy as Marijuana usage continues to grow. Also, WeGrow would be able to set up more jobs for people. 4) Marijuana is beneficial for the environment. If Marijuana is legalized, it will allow high degree planters to grow Marijuana and waste less water and electricity. Otherwise, Marijuana would have to continue in the state of being grown by lower class planters who may be unaware of the consequences. Currently, 5 billion dollars is being thrown out of the window because of the use of electricity. Toxins are also emitted from Marijuana if it's planted and grown incorrectly, but which I'd certainly unhealthy. http://distractify.com...

Title: Medical Marijuana Content: Refine the point you are arguing for. When reading through your Initial text, there were several points as to why you should think marijuana should be legal for. Should it be legal to the same extent that cigarettes and alcohol are legal? Should it be legal to cut down on the imprisonment of less dangerous individuals to society and leave space in prisons for violent criminals? Should it be legal for monetary gain to propose a more efficient way of create a federal monetary gain? Should it be legal because it is a means of a perceived safer way of medicating, than man made prescriptions? Should it be legal because that's just what you want? Refine your argument please.

Title: Medical marijuana dispensaries Content: Marijuana is an effective medicine and treatment for many illnesses

Title: marijuana legalized Content: 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.

Title: Legality of Marijuana Content: That is exactly why medicinal marijuana is available for medical use. But recreationaly, I don't think it will ever be legalized here.

Title: Legalization of Marijuana Content: Hello all, I will be arguing for the legalization of marijuana for medical and recreational use in the United States (to at least a level equivalent to that of alcohol's) . I will begin by presenting a few main statements and their subset points if they apply. I respectfully request for my opponent to refute them, then I will challenge their arguments. This is simply to establish a sense of organization, please and thank you. Also feel free to add any points you may have or to not address any of mine that you choose (if you don't however, I will assume you either acknowledge my point or cannot refute it). I do not wish to focus on other drugs besides cannabis although I intend to mention them for argumentative purposes if necessary. If you do not understand anything I say, simply ask and I will clarify, no need to be rude. My Arguments 1.There will be little to no negative effects to the country/society from marijuana's legalization. a) Marijuana is not addictive. b)Marijuana is physically impossible to overdose on c) Marijuana's supposed "negative" effects, whether long term or short, are negligible, and many of which cannot credibly be declared true. d) The Gateway theory is fundamentally flawed e) Marijuana's intoxicating effects are not harmful to the users or others within itself (i.e. causing aggressiveness or other adverse changes to mood or perception), and therefore responsibility is placed on the user. f) Youth's access to marijuana will not be increased by legalization but will in fact be decreased g) assuming it is true that marijuana's potency has increased since the 1900's, it is an irrelevant fact seeing as how the negative effects remain unchanged. 2. There will be a plethora of positive effects resulting from marijuana's legalization. a) The revenue saved and made from marijuana's legalization will be substantial and much needed to the country b)The medical benefits of marijuana would benefit many of its citizens, saving lives and creating a greater quality of life for many c) Legalization will allow regulation of cannabis and therefore a greater degree of damage control. (i.e. preventing child access, stopping drugged driving) d) Legalization will improve society by ending prosecution and punishment of responsible, contributing citizens simply for committing the victimless crime of consuming marijuana for medical or recreational purposes. e)Cannabis integration would benefit our culture and uphold our rights as a nation under the constitution.f ) Violent crime revolving around marijuana will cease. 3.Marijuana Prohibition altogether is a colossal failure. a)The whole purpose of prohibition is to prevent use nationwide, yet, marijuana use is still very prevalent.b)Because of point a, the adverse societal effects of marijuana (however miniscule) are in effect despite of prohibition, therefore prohibition is purposeless. c)It is exactly the same as the 20's alcohol prohibition save for the failure to end it. 4. It is not the governments place to tell us how to live, but to protect the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness for all.a) Proof of the government's failure to do this is how a constitutional amendment was needed to sign alcohol prohibition into law (and is now beng used to prohibit marijuana). This proves that the views this nation was built on differ from those that allow/support prohibition.

Title: Marijuana should be legalized in Canada Content: This is the first time I debated this topic and I learned many things from my opponent. Before I begin my arguments, I will summarize the contentions used on each side. Pro believes that marijuana should be legalized for two main reasons:Marijuana is not a very harmful substance. Marijuana can be potentially used to treat many different ailmentsMarijuana can replace prescription drugs which are more harmfulThe series of arguments I have used so far are:Long-term marijuana is addictive. Marijuana alters your brain structure. Marijuana Smokers Faces more Rapid Lung Destruction than Cigarette Smokers. Marijuana Smoke Contains Higher Levels of Certain Toxins than Tobacco Smoke. Marijuana can cause impairment of the senses, which can then lead to accidents. Marijuana is not good for long-term economic growth. Most scientific research today agrees that marijuana is more detrimental to our health than it is harmful. Marijuana will lead to higher crime rates (as proven by the Amsterdam experiment)"Legalizing" marijuana will send the wrong message to teens, many of whom are not using marijuana for medical purposes, but for "coping mechanisms" or to appear "cool"Most scientists agree that further studies on marijuana are necessary to resolve the debate. Legalizing marijuana is easy, but banning it is difficult. If marijuana does prove to be detrimental to the health, and it does damage health, it would be costly for the lives of many individuals. Points 8 and 9 are built on the premise that prescription drug abuse is rampant, and that marijuana is currently used illegally. Regarding the second, legalizing marijuana would encourage more widespread use of the drug for "casual uses", as people would perceive the government to be stating that "marijuana is not harmful". Points 7 and 10 can exist together logically (for instance, if 51% of the research points against "medical marijuana). Pro has so far refuted points number 3 (which I will concede), and has tried to refute points 6, 7, and 10. As of the last round, Pro has not refuted my other arguments or countered my defences, so I extend them. I will now begin my arguments. Opponent's First ContentionMarijuana is not a very harmful substance. This is an argument stated repeatedly by my opponent. However, there is much uncertainty regarding this topic. For instance, all of the below sources (there are many more) agree that research on marijuana is inconclusive. . http://www.revisiondrugs.org...http://archive.coloradoan.com...http://philadelphia.cbslocal.com...http://www.medscape.com...Dr. David M. Labiner, a neurologist with the university of Arizona, said that while there have been anecdotal evidence about the medical properties of marijuana,"there is limited high-quality evidence about the efficacy and virtually no data about the safety of using marijuana or cannabinoids". Pro also claims that Huffington Post is a reliable source. While Huffington Post may or may not be a "reliable" source, the data they used is not. With such a wide variety of results of the effects of marijuana, we should consider the entirety of the scientific research regarding marijuana. Today, experts agree that that the debate on marijuana is inconclusive, though most of the research is against the claim of "medical marijuana". Pro has not refuted this contention as my opponent has only looked at a few studies for marijuana, and hasn"t looked at the studies as a whole. Consequently, we should not legalize marijuana, as the risk is too great (If the drug proves to be damaging, banning marijuana later would be very difficult and costly for the lives that had been exposed). Marijuana also has higher levels of hydrogen cyanate and ammonia (and other toxins) than tobacco smoke. This is easily quantifiable and cannot be refuted. Marijuana contains hundreds of chemical compounds. The effects of these compounds cannot be easily determined. Opponent's Second Contention: Marijuana can be potentially used to treat many different ailmentsAgain, my opponent"s position is uncertain as the benefits of marijuana are uncertain (shown above). Cocaine was the "miracle drug" prescribed a couple of decades earlier by doctors. Look how that has turned out today. Opponent's Third Contention: Marijuana can replace prescription drugs which are more harmfulThere are two arguments which speak against this. One of them being that marijuana can already be prescribed in Canada (Though it is not "legal" in the way that Pro described it). If you truly believe in medical marijuana, are willing to take the risk, and your health is in a state which require you to take the drug, you can take the lengthy process to acquire it. The process is listed below:. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca...Which means that Canadians can already use it to replace dangerous drugs such as morphine if they truly deem it necessary. Second, marijuana may be harmful. If this is true, then we want to limit the effects of cannabis on society. Maybe most importantly, cannabis is mostly used recreationally and to improve people's "quality of life", not as medicine. If that is the case, when government decides to legalize marijuana, it will send a message to citizens in Canada that marijuana is safe (when there isn't enough evidence), and drastically increase the rate of use. For my concluding statement, I would like to point out that it was once legal for pharmacies to sell marijuana in Canada. However, the pharmacists themselves removed themselves from this law, stating that they were uncomfortable distributing products without enough research. . http://www.ctvnews.ca...Until more conclusive evidence can be found regarding marijuana, we should maintain the status quo. The status quo does not equate the complete banning of marijuana, and only maintains a strict control over the distribution. This is ideal for the current imbalance of opinions surrounding marijuana. As the burden of proof is on Pro and my opponent has not proved why we should extend the selling of marijuana to pharmacies, I urge a Con vote.

Title: Medical as well as recreational marijuana should be legal in all US states Content: The matter of legalizing medical marijuana is an important issue for several reasons. From the data observed in the link below [1] there are currently 23 states with laws legalizing marijuana, some still more restrictive than others. This of course is a significant step in the right direction. However, I believe that all states should follow the examples of Alaska, Colorado, Washington and Oregon to legalize not only cannabis for medicinal usage but also for recreational consumption. I will list my reasons further below. Before doing so I would like to specifically define the meanings of marijuana itself and respectively medical and recreational cannabis to avoid any confusions or misunderstandings. Marijuana is defined as "a commonly used illegal drug made from dried leaves of the hemp plant" and "a strong-smelling plant from whose dried leaves a number of euphoriant and hallucinogenic drugs are prepared." Marijuana goes by many other names such as cannabis, hemp, weed etc. [2] Medical marijuana is defined as the usage of marijuana for medical or medicinal purposes. [3] [4] Recreational marijuana is defined as any other recreational drug which is described as "a drug (as cocaine, marijuana, or methamphetamine) used without medical justification for its psychoactive effects often in the belief that occasional use of such a substance is not habit-forming or addictive." [6] I acknowledge the many different types of marijuana that exists for different purposes, most, I understand, are hybrids made for different specific medical needs. However I do not know enough on the subject of them, their effects and upsides as well as downsides. I would therefore appreciate if this debate could be exclusively on the matters of the aforementioned descriptions of cannabis, medical and recreational. Now I will present my arguments as to why I believe medical and recreational marijuana should be legalized in all US states.R32;R32;First of all I would like to point out that there is no scientific background with evidence as to exactly why marijuana was classified as a Schedule I drug in the first place. The definition of a Schedule 1 drug from the Drug Enforcement Administration itself clearly states, that "Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use and a high potential for abuse."[6] This definition leaves no room for doubt that no Schedule 1 drug has any medical use. However it has been a known fact for centuries that cannabis has been used for medical purposes with positive effects. This can easily be found true when looking at many different sources. Here I have merely linked one. [7]R32;The National Institute on Drug Abuse also states that there are medical benefits from marijuana. [8] R32;There can be many reasons as to why marijuana was classified the way it was and still has not been re-classified but that is a completely different debate. Here are links with possible explanations that no matter what do not justify why it was classified so harshly. [9] [10] R32;All in all, there can be no doubts that this classification of marijuana is deeply illogical and misleading. Second, I would like to stress that America would merit tremendously from the economic profits caused by legalizing marijuana. It can be no surprise to any logical thinking creature that America spends enormous sums of money on dealing with and prohibiting crime related to illegal marijuana sales and consumptions. All of this money would of course not be spent if marijuana was legalized. In stead I propose that all states start off like Oregon, Alaska, Washington and Colorado by legalizing recreational marijuana as well. These states all have different laws that specifically suits them and I believe this is a good way to start. R32;R32;The legalization of medical as well as recreational marijuana would be the only solution to properly profit economically from the marijuana businesses that are currently not legal. This is because these businesses will probably still exist if only medicinal marijuana was legalized. [11] [12] Third and last I believe, as mentioned, that marijuana should be legalised for recreational use. This is because I believe in every individual"s right to care for him or herself"s own health and decide what is best. Especially when it comes to smoking tobacco or marijuana for pleasure. I am aware of the fact that marijuana has other effects than regular tobacco smoking. However tobacco smoking is the leading cause of preventable death here in America and I do not see how it in any aspect is justifiable, that tobacco smoking has no legal restrictions when a harmless plant such as cannabis is classified as a schedule 1 drug and illegal in most states. [13] I believe that cannabis should be legalized for medical and recreational use. Of course all sale should be done by an approved salesperson to ensure and uphold a certain safety. This will still leave room for illegal sales but not in the same measure as it is now. I am not trying to say that tobacco smoking should be classified as a schedule 1 drug as well. I am saying that the laws making marijuana illegal are so illogical that I am astonished this can happen in a well educated country in the 21st century. http://www.governing.com... https://www.vocabulary.com... http://criminal-law.freeadvice.com... https://www.leafly.com... http://www.merriam-webster.com... http://www.dea.gov... http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com... https://www.drugabuse.gov... http://www.ibtimes.com... http://www.drugwarrant.com... http://www.dailydot.com... http://www.huffingtonpost.com... http://www.cdc.gov...

Title: Marijuana should be legalized Content: Marijuana should be legalized for a variety of reasons.

Title: Marijuana should be legal in the United States Content: I agree we should stick to marijuana but i was just pointing out that marijuana is relatively harmless when compared to cigarettes or alcohol. I can see short term effects from second hand smoke from marijuana but not long term effects. If marijuana is taxed and regulated which is what I believe we should do we could regulate it like we regulate cigarettes. In most states you cant smoke smoke indoors. Medical marijuana in a pill form would be great as well but i also believe that people should be able smoke marijuana for medical reasons as well. Im going to be honest with you. I was very confused with that last paragraph so i wont respond to that.

Title: Legalization of marijuana Content: Addressing P1: Laws exist to limit personal freedoms for good reasons. There are good reasons for not legalizing this substance. These reasons are outlined in my premises in Round 1. Addressing P2: According to your argument, there is no reason to legalize marijuana. Consumers can purchase it either way. Addressing P3: Legal medicine has been found to have profound medical use with all that you mentioned. Addressing P4: There is no direct correlation between your premise and your argument. While this may be a fact, it does not imply that marijuana should be legalized. My arguments from Round 1 still stand.

Title: Marijuana should be outlawed nationwide Content: Several states and cities have legalized marijuana; both medical and recreational. I truly believe marijuana should be used ONLY for EXTREME medical conditions, not for recreation. For one, in the area I live in (Greeley, CO), marijuana is out of control in the schools, and is causing major problems. There is one town in my area, Garden City, Colorado, which gets ALL of its tax revenue from marijuana sales. This is disgraceful. I believe the federal government should outlaw all recreational marijuana sales, and only use medical marijuana for extreme life threatening situations.

Title: Legalization of Recreational Marijuana Content: Great! I will post my opening statement again for you to respond to. The legalization on marijuana for recreational purposes will only amplify rates of drug usage among individuals at all ends of the age spectrum. Psychologically, legalizing marijuana would send the message that using it would be acceptable, which it clearly generates more complications than it solves. From a legal standpoint, laws would need to be altered in order to accommodate for committing or engaging in criminal activity under the influence of marijuana. Needless to say, our tax-payer funded public health care systems would use taxpayer money to fund both medical and rehabilitative treatment for those involved with the substance.