View Single Post
November 20th, 2012 (9:12 AM).
A lot of the arguments for marijuana legalisation I'm seeing here involve a "but". Stuff like agreeing that marijuana effects cognitive skill
only for a short time, that marijuana can alter brain structure
only if used excessively, an addition can form
it is only mental rather than physical. That's all well and good but it begs the question in my mind, why let any of these things happen? The fact that there are any "but"s present here show that there is indeed substance to these reasons against the use of marijuana. And if there are legitimate reasons not to use it while the only legitimate reason is medical, since I don't really consider "it gets you high" to be a legitimate reason when there are drawbacks involved, then I don't see any reason why it should be legal for recreational use.
I just see it as having the option to let people use something which has negative effects and having the option to let people not use something which has negative effects. I don't understand why you'd pick the first option there.
Joined Apr 2011
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Nihilego
Find all posts by Nihilego
Find threads started by Nihilego
Ignore Posts by Nihilego