Psychedelic drugs should be legalized for recreational use.

A debate is more about the points made than technicalities pertaining to them. While I somewhat conceded one initial point (not the other, which I intend to address shortly), that does not mean I cannot make further valid points in my argument. Even if I had conceded both initial points entirely, it would not mean I had lost the debate, as the points made in the first round are not the only points that matter or can be made in a debate. I would like my opponent to allow the voters to decide if I have won or lost this debate without his own input or opinion. Psychological Dependence My opponent brings up the issue of psychological dependence/addiction in a light that makes the issue seem exclusive to hallucinogens. This is not at all the case. A psychological dependence is applicable to almost anything. An example of this is marijuana. Marijuana, like hallucinogens, is not physically addictive, but can result in psychological addiction with prolonged usage.[1] Other things one can become psychologically addicted to include books, pets, healthy eating, exercise, water, and garbage.[2] Psychological addiction is a risk that comes with almost anything, and therefore the argument that hallucinogens should remain illegal on the premise of psychological addiction holds little to no weight. Hallucinogens Compared to Other Substances My opponent states that my argument about methamphetamine compared to hallucinogens in irrelevant, as methamphetamine is not legal. The legality of a product (though methamphetamine was at one point legal) does not deter people from usage, and the same is true with hallucinogens. My point, to be concise, was that in comparison to fellow illegal substances, hallucinogens cause far less harm. The same is true of marijuana; marijuana is slowly becoming more and more accepted in a legal sense. To address the rebuttals to both my other two examples and make a new point, I would like to discuss my opponent's statement that hallucinogens are immediately dangerous. This is not necessarily true, and is subject to a case-by-case point of view. The health complications he lists""for example, seizures""are the equivalent to potential side effects of prescription drugs in that they do not always occur. Oftentimes, people ingest a psychoactive drug and have no negative side effects. Therefore, this argument is flawed, as it is so supremely subjective. My opponent mentions that Abilify and nicotine have risks of health problems in the long term; hallucinogens carry none of these long term risks. My opponent did not refute my statement that Abilify carries the risk of neurological damage. Lethal Side Effects My opponent argues that using a hallucinogenic drug can produce lethal side effects, regardless of dosage. This comes with the territory of putting any foreign substances into the body, and it is a risk many are willing to run with prescription and legal medications. The drug Chantix, used to help people quit smoking, has been known to cause serious skin reactions, cardiovascular events, night terrors, insomnia, nervous system disorders, and eye disorders, as well as depression, hostility and suicide thoughts.[3] No drug is without its side effects, and psychoactive drugs are no exception to this rule. To say that hallucinogens should remain illegal because they can have negative side effects is an argument that holds no weight, as countless legal drugs have side effects of the same caliber or worse. Inconclusive Research My opponent argues that a single study is inconclusive in regards to determining if there is a link between mental illnesses and use of hallucinogenic drugs. The study I referenced was conducted by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology. In this study, the researchers analyzed survey data collected between year 2001 and 2004 from over 130,000 randomly selected Americans. Over 22,000 individuals in the study (13%) had taken hallucinogens at some point. Individuals in the study between ages 21 and 64 had tried psychedelics before.[4] The study concluded that there was lack of association between psychedelic drugs use and metal health issues.[4] The same study suggests that the idea the drugs caused mental health problems came from a small number of case studies in which these patients were already suffering some form of mental illness.[5] Granted, this is only a single study, but no evidence can be so simply cast aside and disregarded. I would like to mention that, to this point in the argument, my opponent has been entirely reactionary, rebutting my points but providing no new arguments of his own. That being said, I would like to thank my opponent for partaking in what has been a very stimulating and intriguing debate. [1] http://www.webmd.com... [2] http://www.cracked.com... [3] http://news.menshealth.com... [4] http://www.myglobalvision.com... [5] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...