The Instigator
Logicalthinking
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
airjordan13
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should Marijuana be nationally legalized? (US)

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Logicalthinking
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/25/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 587 times Debate No: 62250
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

Logicalthinking

Pro

In this debate, we will be debating whether or not marijuana should be nationally legalized. I will debate for Pro/For legalization of marijuana while my opponent will be con/against legalization of marijuana.

Format of Debate:

Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Cover points, Main Argument
Round 3: Rebuttals
Round 4: Rebuttals, Conclusion
airjordan13

Con

I can see where you are coming from marijuana could help out the economy but there is a worse negative effect if marijuana is legalized. First, legalizing marijuana would be bad for our nation because, while marijuana has some positive effects the drug can kill brain cells and I'm sure it negatively effects the resepatory system. Although, I'm not a doctor it is common sense that this drug like any other can cause medical issues. Second, if we did legalize cannabis then that means that it would be available to minors with the inference there would be no age restrictions. So, with that our children will get addicted to this drug and get addicted and not only will they become mentally dependent they will become physically dependent on the drug. Third, with legalizing marijuana I will refer to the children's book if you give a mouse a cookie has gonna want milk. Same rule applys here if we legalize one drug then users of other drugs are going to want their drug legalized to. Next, marijuana is a gateway drug meaning non-drug users will use this drug first and go up the later of drugs from cannabis to heroin cocaine morphine etc until they become ill or in most cases over dose and die. In conclusion, legalizing , marijuana will give to the us more problems that already has.
Debate Round No. 1
Logicalthinking

Pro

I would just like to point out that my opponent has broken the format of the debate, for which I urge the readers to take off points for. But nevertheless, I will stick to the format.

I will first begin by pointing out the benefits of the medicinal use of marijuana.

Medicinal Marijuana has been PROVEN to prevent glaucoma, which is an eye disease that damages the optic nerve resulting in a loss of vision. According to a 2003 study, Marijuana can help control epileptic seizures. In the 2003 study, Robert J. DeLorenzo gave marijuana to epileptic rats. The effect rid the rats of seizures for 10 hours. If a similar affect can be used on humans it would be revolutionary for epilepsy treatment.

It is also important to mention that it has also been SHOWN that a chemical that is found in marijuana can stop the spread of cancer. This chemical is called cannabidiol. Cannabidiol stops cancer by turning off a gene called Id-1. Cancer cells make more copius of the Id-1 gene than non-cancer cells, and helps them spread throughout the body.

There are much more benefits and use to medicinal marijuana than I have just stated, these are just among two of the many benefits that medicinal marijuana can offer to patients at a hospital.

I also believe that recreational marijuana should be nationally legalized in the United States.

Marijuana is statistically the safest drug one can use. Alcohol is currently legal in the United States for anyone over the age of 21. Alcohol is much more harmful to the body than marijuana is to the body in large amounts. Also, the cost of alcohol abuse is a greater cost to society than marijuana abuse.
airjordan13

Con

Please notice my opponent has brought up medical marijuana although this debate is on the of legalization of recreational cannabis. First my opponent has said that cannabis prevents glaucoma. Yes this a positive effect but does it prevent any other illnesses itself will cause of course not that would be fictional or rather unscientific. Second, my opponent has not showed me any other substantial evidence to show marijuana would be a positive for the us and I could imagine his/her argument would persuade you either. As I still stand strong behind my argument and I can only infer voters are to I still believe legalizing marijuana would effect the us negatively. (Also take into effect that my opponent has cited a study on rats but he doesn't realize rats are not humans nor are they in the same family like we are primates.)
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
Logicalthinking

Pro

Logicalthinking forfeited this round.
airjordan13

Con

airjordan13 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by InnovativeEphemera 2 years ago
InnovativeEphemera
Logicalthinkingairjordan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had more legible sentence structure and better grammar, Con wrote in frustratingly unpunctuated sentences. Pro also provided clear arguments that were not successfully refuted. There were clear rebuttals that Con could have employed, but didn't, including that the studies on Id-1 have only been conducted in laboratory conditions, not in human trials. You should also really aim to provide sources; none of your contentions are actually supported. Your arguments will be far more convincing if you prove your claims. Con's statement about testing on rats is absurd. There are three commonly-cited reasons for the use of rats in modelling human behaviour in psychology and physiology in medicine. You can both work on refining your technique. I offer you a warm welcome to DDO.
Vote Placed by YYW 2 years ago
YYW
Logicalthinkingairjordan13Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Normative debate; equal burdens. PRO argues that weed is safer than some other substances that are legal, so weed should be legal. PRO also cited certain medical benefits, which were insufficiently substantiated. CON erred in assuming that this was only about recreational weed. Weed's legalization includes both medicinal and recreational use. Both sides could use sources, structure and style -but it is clear that relative to CON, the strength of PRO's recreational use point prevails. CON, I believe, thought that PRO had the sole burden. That was not the case.