In the article, JESSE McKinley lists some reasons given by Pat Robertson for supporting marijuana legalization for recreation and medication. Pat Robertson claimed marijuana should be treated as beverage alcohol and he didn’t find any difference between a marijuana smoker and a no-smoker. Secondly, it costs a lot of money and caused increasing rate of crime to put people who smoke marijuana or do the business involved marijuana into jails. Because of his identity and status, his attitude to marijuana impacted the hesitating people in a ballot to decide to support marijuana legalization. Even though, Pat Robertson said he didn’t encourage people to smoke marijuana, meanwhile, he didn’t think people should be punished. He said “I think on this one, I’m on the right side” (2012, XXVI, 43).
Pat Robertson’s statements sound reasonable, but they are not, actually. Firstly, marijuana used for recreation should be regarded as a non-staple food like beverage alcohol. The important difference between them is that the function of beverage alcohol to people is clear but the function of marijuana not yet. Scientists know marijuana is a kind of hallucinogens and people will have illusions after smoking marijuana; but it is not clear for how marijuana works on brain nervous system and what are the sequelas after smoking marijuana for a long time. For a government to allow a kind of food or non-staple food to be used generally, they should guarantee they are safe and harmless at least. There is nobody who can guarantee marijuana is safe and harmless to health for a long time using at present. So it isn’t an appropriate time to decide using marijuana legally or not.
The second reason about financial issue is a little ridiculous. A government has the responsibility to supervise and educate people who commit crimes even they are “nonviolent offenses” (2012, XXII, 37). A judge can’t sentence people are innocent just because it is expensive to sentence they are guilty.
Lastly, I need to talk about Who are eligible to vote for marijuana legalization. I think they should be marijuana smokers or their families and marijuana experts because only they can really know what happened or will happen on a marijuana smoker. Obviously, Pat Robertson didn’t smoke marijuana and won’t try, so his opinion isn’t persuasive. As an ordinary person, I want to say human being should keep distance from the scientific puzzles like marijuana because nobody can make sure they aren’t sleeping “demons”.
References
McKinley, J. (2012, March 7). Pat Robertson Says Marijuana Use Should be Legal. The New York Times. Retrieved March 10, 2012 from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/08/us/pat-robertson-backs-legalizing-marijuana.html?_r=1&src=ISMR_AP_LO_MST_FB
Crystal,
ReplyDeleteThat is a controversial topic to blog on.
If you've been following my discussion with Mart at "Is society becoming less moral?" you've probably already inferred that I've agreed for some time with what Robertson is now advocating. In fact, I would go further than Robertson and argue that all or almost all recreational drugs should be legalised, including heroin, cocaine and yaa baa. Like Robertson, I would not generally advise people to use drugs, nor would I ever use them myself, but I think his supporting reasons are correct.
I am very curious to see how your classmates respond: will they agree with Robertson, whose reasons are clearly stated in your source, or will they argue that those reasons are wrong or inadequate?
Should be an interesting discussion. Thanks for this topical post on a social issue which is serious in many different ways.
You support legalization drugs for recreation because you maybe not know their magic power.People especially teenagers are curious to try something new for fun,it is a normal mental activity.They can continue or quit.But they will be addict and lose other interests in life once they try drugs.They can't help to use drugs and lose control to themselves,so they need help from governments and laws. Their families hope so.Isn't it the sense of gorernments'existence?
ReplyDeleteIn her comment at Mar 10, 2012 09:53 PM, Crystal presented an argument in favour of criminalizing drugs. I think her argument is a common one, and it does sound plausible. But ...
DeleteBut I also think that there are two problems with this argument:
1. if it were true, exactly the same argument would require criminalizing alcohol, throwing wine and been drinkers into prison, and executing the sellers of whisky and champagne.
2. although it's a popular idea, I don't think that Crystal's idea is actually supported by any facts. In fact, I think the relevant facts support a very different idea.
What do you think?
Is Crystal's thoughtful argument at Mar 10, 2012 09:53 PM a good reason for making drugs (all drugs?) illegal?
Does it show that Pat Robertson, Pamela Hartmann (p. 227) and I are wrong to think that popular recreational drugs should be legalized, at least for adults?
If you were me, how would you now reply to Crystal?
ReplyDelete1. What do we need to do to persuade her to change her mind? How would this help to persuade?
2. What else could we do? How would this work to persuade?
Which do you think is easier: 1. or 2.? (When you are clear about what 1. and 2. are, you can think about this question.)
I'm kind of hoping someone might support me here. But it's OK if everyone thinks I'm wrong.
And there is also the complementary question: Why might I not yet be persuaded by Crystal's arguments?
DeleteIf you agree with Crystal and think I'm wrong, what are the two things (for 1. and 2. above) that you need to do to persuade me to change my mind?
When should we change our minds on these sorts of questions? They are certainly very important issues not only for individuals but for entire societies, which makes them excellent topics for us to practice critical thinking and clear expression on.
Since we are starting chapter 7 in Quest this week, I thought a new poll might help get us thinking about the issues likely to come up in "Medicine and Drugs: Addictive Substances", and this blog by Crystal on Pat Robertson's proposal that marijuana be legalized is a very useful starting point.
ReplyDeleteSo, what do you think? And why?
You already know what I think, and we know that Crystal disagrees, with me and Robertson, unless she has changed her mind. The first vote in favour of legalizing all recreational drugs for adults to use is mine. How are you voting? And why? Feel welcome to add a comment explaining your reasons.
And for another opinion, the editorial in today's Bangkok Post, "Chalerm can seize drugs and the moment" presents a view that is poorly reasoned but I suspect very common. I'm pretty sure that the author, Saritdet Marukatat, does not agree with Pat Robertson, and certainly not with me.
And today The Bangkok Post is editorialising on the same popular topic in "War on drugs full of holes".
ReplyDeleteAnd in Britain's Guardian on March 15, "'Hidden' drug users who won't be found burgling your home to fund their habit".
ReplyDeleteIs there any morally relevant reason for the law to treat heroin and yaa baa differently to beer, champagne and whisky? I cannot think of any reason, but perhaps someone else can.
There is now one vote for each of the options on the drug laws poll.
ReplyDeleteThe vote for legalizing all popular recreational drugs is mine.
Although I obviously disagree, I can understand why someone might vote for the last option, that all such drugs be illegal: cocaine, beer, wine, heroin, cigarettes and so on.
The one that most interests me is the votes for the middle option, that some drugs be legal and others illegal. Why? What is the reason for discriminating between different drugs in this way? How should it be decided which drugs are legal and which illegal?
Have you voted yet?
DeleteAs the BBC News report "Whitney Houston drowned after cocaine use, says coroner" shows, I don't think anyone can argue that drugs are not unhealthy and dangerous to the point of being life threatening. Drugs are definitely dangerous, even life threatening.
ReplyDeleteAll of the popular drugs that people use for fun are unhealthy. And in some cases causes serious problems, such as death.
I don't much love pop music, but I do have some very happy memories associated with Whitney Houston's songs in the late 1980s. It's sad that her drug problems probably caused her death.
The BBC news provides further evidence that alcohol, as wine, whisky, champagne, beer, etc., is the most harmful of all of the popular recreational drugs that people regularly use, causing "a drinking culture that last year contributed to one million alcohol-related violent crimes and 1.2 million hospital admissions" (2012) in the UK alone..
ReplyDeleteI think it is obvous that alcohol actually causes far more personal and social harm than marijuana, yaa baa or heroin. Alcohol is the most serious, dangerous amd actually harmful popular drug of addiction.
So, should alcohol be illegal, and the alcohol suppliers executed for their dangerous addictive drug dealing?
It's nice to see some good sense, some honesty and some moral decency from a political leader, when so many are still promoting the popular immorality, irrationality and foolishness that is usual in discussion of drug problems.
ReplyDeleteSee "Guatemala's president urges debate on drug legalisation" in today's BBC News.
Perhaps more countries will soon join those who have replaced unjust and immoral drug policies with something much better, as Pat Robertson is now advocating for the US concerning marijuana laws.
Sadly, Thailand seems to be moving in exactly the wrong direction under its current government.
This is my thesis statement which explains why all recreational drugs should be legalized:
ReplyDeleteThe sale and use of all illicit drugs be legalised for reasons which appear to be purely economic but are essentially humane: increased tax revenue, decreased law enforcement costs, lowered corruption, and reduced drug related crime; nor is legalisation likely to lead to any sharp increase in the number of addicts.
There is no good reason I can think of why some drugs should be illegal for adults to buy, sell and use.
Can you think of any reason why some popular drugs should be illegal?