Resolved: The Federal Government can legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp

I negate that The Federal Government can legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp and do so for the following three reasons. 1. marijuana impairs human functionality. 2.marijuana contains dangerous carcinogens. 3. marijuana has negative effects on the human reproductive system. Resolutional analysis- 1.Interpret the resolution as the government legalizing medical marijuana and industrial hemp, because my opponent lumps their purpose and legal issues together in his contentions. for the pro to win, they must show that the USFG can legalize BOTH marijuana and industrialized hemp. The resolution states that "The Federal Government can legalize medical marijuana and/or industrialized hemp" however, the government cannot legalize marijuana because it is bound by the governmental legitimacy to protect and serve its citizens. for the remainder of the round i will negate this resolution through asserting that marijuana is bad for the health of united states citizens. lets get cookin (no pun intented) Contention 1- marijuana impairs human functuality marijuana impairs human functuality in countless ways, perhaps the most notable is its adverse effects on the user's short term memory. according to the national institute on drug abuse,damage to short-term memory occurs because THC alters the way in which information is processed by the hippocampus, a brain area responsible for memory formation. http://www.nida.nih.gov... additionally, according to the division of drug and alcohol abuse "Studies of marijuana's mental effects show that the drug can alter sense of time, and reduce ability to do things which require concentration, swift reactions, and coordination, such as driving a car or operating machinery. " http://www.well.com... What's more is that marijuana can be psychologically detrimental to those who use. according to the DDAA http://www.well.com... of marijuana may become psychologically dependent. They may have a hard time limiting their use, they may need more of the drug to get the same effect, and they may develop problems with their jobs and personal relationships. The drug can become the most important aspect of their lives. legalizing medical marijuana would be unethical because of the long term effects on short term memory, and the psychology of those it is precribe to. Furthermore, is it not the role of pharmacutical drugs to make the user more competent than they were before? shouldn't drugs increase the overall health and well being of an individual, rather than diminish them? Contention 2-Marijuana contains carcinogens research has shown marijuana cigarettes contain more tar and higher levels of certain cancer-causing chemicals than tobacco cigarettes. according to the American Cancer Society in 2000"DNA mutations have been found in respiratory system cells of marijuana users and several case reports have found an unexpectedly high number of marijuana users among patients with cancers of the head and neck region, including the mouth, tongue, throat, and larynx." "The study looked at the relationship between marijuana use and head and neck cancers in 173 patients diagnosed with those diseases who were compared with 176 cancer-free patients." The average user in this study had two to three times the risk of non-users. Additionally, in her book Marijuana as medicine, PHD janet elizabeth joy warns that "several marijuana users are at greater risk for mouth, larnyx, pharnyx, lungs, and esophogaus cancers, than the average cigarette smoker."http://books.google.com... Again I stress the role of pharmacuetical drugs in the Medical World. if common drugs such as zoloft or aderall had more known cancer causing agents than the average pack of cigarettes, do you really think they would be in the medical field today? this is why we see million dollar lawsuits against pharmacutical companies and the private companies developing drugs with hidden side effects. however, these side effects aren't hidden, they're well known and ridden within the drug that my opponent proposes to impose on the medical industry today. Contention 3-marijuana has negative effects on the human reproductive system. according to the DDAA, "Some research studies suggest that the use of marijuana during pregnancy may result in premature babies and in low birth weights. Studies of men and women may have a temporary loss of fertility. These findings suggest that marijuana may be especially harmful during adolescence, a period of rapid physical and sexual development." addtionally according to AAFP marijuana Reduces testicular size Lower testosterone levels Decreased libido Menstrual abnormalities Impotence Change in sperm morphology/motility Infertility Gynecomastia Abnormal ova Fetal exposure Prolonged childbirth Reduced fertility in offspring should i go on? ON TO THE PRO my opponents first arg can be summed up in this statement halfway through his contention "The Federal Government can legalize marijuana by removing it from the list of Schedule 1 drugs pursuant to findings in various medical journals, studies, and reports showing it's benefits for medical use." However if you look to his definition of Schedule 1 Drugs, it states that "Schedule I drugs are classified as having a high potential for abuse, no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States, and a lack of accepted safety for use of the drug or other substance under medical supervision." as i stated in my first contention, marijuana has a high potential for abuse, and has an ENORMOUS lack of accepted saftey for use of the drug. look to all three of my contentions to see why medical marijuana cannot be accepted as a "safe drug". to his contention 2 he uses the example of the prohibition act to justify legalizing marijuana. however, when was the last time that your doctor prescribed you gin and juice for that cough you had? thankfully, unless your doctor is snoop dog, that hasn't happened yet. my opponent tries to assert that medical marijuana should be legalized because the government can override state prohibitionary laws. first, this isn't true in any way, for the constitution states in the tenth amendment The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. No where in the constitution is it declared that the the states have ratified marijuaa use, so the USFG can in no way adopt this system because those rights are reserved to the states. Good luck my esteemed opponent!