Debate Rounds (4)
Definiton of medical marijuana: Marijuana used as a herbal therapy or some other type of medicine prescibed by a physician.
First round is acceptance.
Support 1: Restricting the use of medical marijuana violates the needs of individuals. People who need this as medicine are barred from their treatment.
Support 2: Medical marijuana has extensively proven in a myriad of cases to be a treatment including for cancer and neuro-disorders. (See www.medicalmarijuana.net/uses-and-treatments/cancer-and-chemotherapy/). Giving legal access would be the same as allowing a cancer patient to be given treatment. Why would one deny treatment to another?
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.
Rebuttal 1: The potentiality of marijuana as a harmful drug is valid but under discretion of the user. Those who decide to use it unwisely choose to do so. It can be compared to other [bad] decisions such as smelling whiteout. Des this mean that whiteout should be made illegal? By no means!
Con's argument is focused on the harmful affects of marijuana, but disregards the fact that it is up to the user to decide the usage.
Support: The point that other rights (such as having paint) might be violated further supports my 1st reason that rights are at stake when making medical marijuana illegal.
1: Con has failed to address any of my supports up to the conclusion thus conceding to each and every single point of mine.
2: Con has repeatedly ignored the point made that it is up to users to decide on what to do with marijuana. He has only reiterated his point on how harmful marijuana CAN be, never addressing the user's decision nor defending any rebuttals by Pro (me).
3. Recall the phrase issued by Con "damages brain, repertory..." This is completely absurd. Repertory refers to a theatrical presentation which is completely deviating from this debate.
Based on everything, vote PRO
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||5||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had sources, and proved that medical marijuana is useful and not allowing it is violates individuals needs. Con dropped several argument and failed to refute them.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.