It's absurd not to protect children from themselves, as if children were adults. Don't even bother answering. Nobody, but nobody, is going to agree with you on a proposition that ridiculous and devoid of common sense.

What is the difference between the general welfare and the general "badfare"?
Our own Constitution specifically enumerates the morals and ethics for true patriots of our form of statism and social contract.

Almost everyone does drugs in a more developed political-economy. We can afford to simply create them with better infrastructure at our disposal. Our federal public sector routinely obtains discounts for drugs, for our elders.

But in the real world, that's what we always do. Every choice we make, without exception, has undesirable consequences. So really the question is whether you want to deal with the question of pot in some sort of laboratory isolation, or in the real world, and when you're talking about keeping it illegal, automatically you're in the real world.

The thread question is not "make an argument as to why marijuana should be made to disappear." It's "make an argument as to why marijuana should be illegal." As such, you have to deal with all of the consequences, good and bad, of keeping it illegal, versus legalizing it.If there wasn’t another side, it wouldn’t be an issue.

Well, no. There are potential marginal effects of pot smoking on non-smokers, ranging from secondhand smoke to possible on-the-job effects. But there are also many, and not at all marginal, effects of pot criminalization on those who never touch the stuff, including increased danger of crime and increased government budgets/higher taxes.

All I'm saying is that you have to consider the pros and cons on both sides. When you do, I believe the argument for keeping it illegal pretty much evaporates.

Alcohol causes more pain, suffering and property damage than ALL ILLEGAL DRUGS COMBINED.

END OF STORY.

Legalize drugs, or continue wasting 50 billion a year while drug profits go to scumbag criminals who place little to no value on human life.

Common sense is so fucking dead in this country.

So children should be your personal slaves?

You mean like how every day children are taken from their parents in this country, for their own good and put into living situations which are WORSE than the one they left? I know this happens way more than it should, all because of a bureaucracy which has become too big and too inept.

I know it is impossible to not care about children who are neglected and abused by their parents/guardians, but to allow even a small percentage to go into situations that are WORSE is unforgivable and is a direct result of what happens when you allow government bureaucracy to get too big.

If we keep allowing such power to the government, where does it end? In schools we had had a drastic increase on kids taking prescription drugs. We all know about ADD/ADHD increases and the fact that teachers have bullied parents into putting their kids on dangerous drugs sickens me. But of course, IT'S FOR THE CHILDREN.

Where does it end?

Like I said, Slon, don't even bother. Nobody's going to take crap like that seriously. It's not even worth a response.

While researching the Cannabis controversy, I've come across some good one liners and quotes.

Children are not experienced enough to know better then to not grab broken glass, turn on the stove, eat drain-o, etc. Therefore, it is the instinctive duty of the parent's to insure that they do not hurt, scar, or kill themselves ....at least until they are 18.

All right, all of you fundamentalist screwballs,

First off as I said if you think there is no good counterpoint to a position you have on any issue, ANY issue, than you aren’t thinking about it. And I know like many issues, its hard to be honest with yourself let alone anyone you are 'debating' with. Especially if you have to end up taking some sort of responsibility for the negative effects of the choices you have made if you find out that you are on the wrong side of an argument.

Getting beyond all the meaningless op-eds and news clippings that you guys think proves anything or informs you about something, here are the things that a person who is honest with themselves and actually has some experience with can admit or at least consider.

Even with legalization, you won't have a free for all. You can't have an airline pilot smoking weed or a surgeon. So no matter what, there is going to be some form of prohibition.

Marijuana IS addictive. Potato chips and used cars are not. That makes a difference, especially when its mind altering.

Therefore we are talking about addicts when we are talking about the downside. And plenty of child abuse stems from that addiction, as do many many other problems which is why there are addiction programs and MA programs for that exact sort of thing. It doesnt usually lead to child abuse like alcohol, but it does lead to neglect, which can be as bad. And it is not a random outlier, it is a significant effect. Admit it or not, I don’t care.

European countries are different in many many ways (poverty levels, population, diversity), so what works in one doesn’t necessarily work in the other.

You know damn well, that that 100th hit of weed had way less effect than the first and left you wanting more. For the right chemistry and right personality (and there are many) that CAUSES the use of harder drugs.

SOMEthing will always have to be prohibited. We are only having a debate about which. I'm sure the ready availability of something wouldn’t have any effect at all on the usage of it right? All the 'studies' show that, and humans have no effect on the environment either. Give me a break.

But I'm debating religion with bunch of choir members, and there's no room for even the chance that there might not be a God. I get it.

Well, you seem to think that what they want to with their bodies is overrided by what you want to do with their bodies.

I refuse to even discuss something that preposterous. Go away.

Indeed. Problem?

If not, lets move on.

__________________
Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if Labor had not first existed. Labor is superior to capital, and deserves much the higher consideration.

Guess who?

You don't see the problem with forcing children to be slaves?