Pot/Weed: Drug Or Medicine?
Debate Rounds (5)
The resolution isn't completely clear, nor is there any stipulation that I must argue, as Con, that Pot/Weed is either a drug or a medicine. Rather, Pro contends that it must be one or the other, or in his case, it is not a drug but a medicine. Therefore, the resolution from his first argument is this:
Pot is not a drug, but a medicine.
In order to win this debate, I must negate the resolution in some way. I can do that by pointing out that drug and medicine are not mutually exclusive. In fact, prescription drugs that you may take, perhaps as painkillers, are also a medicine, yet we call them "drugs."
Let us also turn to a definition of "drug" from the well-trusted Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com...):
1. a substance that is used as a medicine
It appears that my opponent has evaded my arguments. I AGREE that pot is a medicine, but that doesn't mean that it isn't also a drug.
There really isn't much to say. This debate has devolved into de facto anarchy. I made my case already, which hasn't been refuted, so I'll leave it at that and continue to extend.
If that's the case, your resolution should have been "pot should be legal for medicinal purposes," not that it isn't a drug.
May the records show that by admitting that pot is also a drug, Pro has conceded this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by cbcullen84 2 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:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro never argued his originally stated side of the debate, nor did he provide anything that resembled an intelligible argument. Pro didn't refute any of Con's arguments while Con effectively acknowledged Pro's point and then refuted it effectively...Conduct to Con. Spelling and Grammar to Con (If not obvious) because Pro's use of Valley Girl grammar and spelling is offensive to those of us who speak English. Convincing Arguments to Con simply because he didn't reinforce his points with 10 exclamation points per sentence. Reliable sources to Con for referencing Merriam Webster's Dictionary. Pro has effectively made a solid case for outlawing Pot/Marijuana...his irrational arguments cast a dim idiot light on the masses of people who use the substance.
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.