I think this type of lying is used only to preserve the jobs of those that make their living fighting drugs. Science has shown the anti-inflammatory, pain relief, and other benefits of THC. Marijuana presents no threat, other than to those that wish to control the lives of others.
If the active ingredient in Marijuana is already legal and is in a drug, then why would there be any need to actually do the drug. simply people like it, they are addicted, and they are using semi-logical arguments to prevent their addiction from being suddenly taken away from them.
In ancient times, if someone was chronically ill or in pain, it was common to give them alcohol to stem their pain. The bible even says this lol, i will find the verse if anyone wants me too, but the point is, is it socially acceptable for people who are chronically ill now to get drunk to solve their problems? No, we have medicines and drugs to treat that based on 100's of years of medical advancement. We are obviously not as primitive as ancient people that we have use a drug that can cause such devastation within any society.
Loss of productivity on an economic scale, loss of virtue on a moral scale, and loss of social stability with those around any addict are problems that we face as a society by the increased use of Marijuana if it is legalized.
Though it is is socially acceptable, what has Alcohol really done to advance the human race? equivocally what would marijuana do as well.
Its useless, Go Obama
From the N.Y. TimesMarijuana is one of the safest therapeutically active substances known. No one has ever died from an overdose, and it has a wide variety of therapeutic applications:
* Relief from nausea and increase of appetite;
* Reduction of intarlobular ("within the eye") pressure;
* Reduction of muscle spasms;
* Relief from chronic pain.
Marijuana is frequently beneficial in the treatment of the following conditions:
* AIDS. Marijuana can reduce the nausea, vomiting, and loss of appetite caused by the ailment itself and by various AIDS medications.
* Glaucoma. Marijuana can reduce interlobular pressure, thereby alleviating the pain and slowing -- and sometimes stopping -- the progress of the condition. (Glaucoma is the leading cause of blindness in the United States. It damages vision by increasing eye pressure over time.)
* Cancer. Marijuana can stimulate the appetite and alleviate nausea and vomiting, which are common side effects of chemotherapy treatment.
* Multiple Sclerosis. Marijuana can limit the muscle pain and spasticity caused by the disease, as well as relieving tremor and unsteadiness of gait. (Multiple sclerosis is the leading cause of neurological disability among young and middle-aged adults in the United States.)
* Epilepsy. Marijuana can prevent epileptic seizures in some patients.
* Chronic Pain. Marijuana can alleviate the chronic, often debilitating pain caused by myriad disorders and injuries.
Each of these applications has been deemed legitimate by at least one court, legislature, and/or government agency in the United States.
Many patients also report that marijuana is useful for treating arthritis, migraine, menstrual cramps, alcohol and opiate addiction, and depression and other debilitating mood disorders.
Those are just the first two examples I pulled up referencing the medical benefits of marijuana.GOVERNMENT STUDY OF MARIJUANA SEES MEDICAL BENEFITS
The active ingredients in marijuana appear to be useful for treating pain, nausea and the severe weight loss associated with AIDS, according to a new study commissioned by the Government that is inflaming the contentious debate over whether doctors should be permitted to prescribe the drug.
The report, the most comprehensive analysis to date of the medical literature about marijuana, said there was no evidence that giving the drug to sick people would increase illicit use in the general population. Nor is marijuana a ''gateway drug'' that prompts patients to use harder drugs like cocaine and heroin, the study said.
The authors of the study, a panel of 11 independent experts at the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences, cautioned that the benefits of smoking marijuana were limited because the smoke itself was so toxic. Yet at the same time, they recommended that the drug be given, on a short-term basis under close supervision, to patients who did not respond to other therapies.
The release of the delicately worded report, at a morning news conference here, prompted a flurry of political maneuvering. Proponents of state initiatives to legalize marijuana for medical purposes seized upon the findings as long-awaited evidence that it had therapeutic value. They called on the Clinton Administration, and in particular Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, which requested the study, to ease its steadfast opposition to the initiatives.
Your opinion is not supported by any fact. The facts are that personal responsibility is what is at issue here. People abuse prescription drugs just as much as they do marijuana. Easily.Originally Posted by Mr. Roth
You can take your moral argument and wrap it around the board that...well I'll reserve that comment. Your "moral" argument is irrelevant on all levels and has no place in this discussion. You have absolutely no credible argument regarding marijuana's effect on "virtue." Where do you come up with this argument anyway?
What difference does that make? What have lima beans "really done to advance society?" How about soft drinks? Or cupcakes? Or Big Macs? What I see in your post is your desire to have the morality police tell us how to live. That is your basic argument. That is not neither reasonable nor intelligent.Originally Posted by Mr. Roth
Now why don't you actually make a reasonable and intelligent argument against marijuana?
The medical benefits of marijuana alone are enough justification to take it off Schedule 1.
Clearly, we must make everything with no medicinal benefit illegal.
Yeah, that sounds like a winning plan.
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911
I said "not neither."
It's his job to demonize drugs. It's a stupid job that requires stupid statements.
Originally Posted by Korimyr the Rat