Marijuana is Disgusting and Ought to Not Be Legalized, For Various Reasons Other Than The One Stated

Oh, is that so? I haven't provided a reasonable argument? Forgive me if I sounded too opinionated in the first argument. I suppose you missed or disregarded the part where I made my main point. My main point is such: There is not enough research about the harmful health effects of marijuana. You told me that people should be given the freedom to choose whether they want to do harmful things or not, didn't you? That they shouldn't have to deal with restrictions, but instead be informed about the risks they are taking. And I agree with that- to a point. First off, people have less of a chance to engage in risky behavior like marijuana (and we seem to agree that there are health effects) if there is a government institution backed up by the government in its entirety. The government has weapons, resources, and power; thus, it can strongly deter people from making bad decisions- when this is used in conjunction with the information intended to deter people from doing these things, like you mentioned (and the purpose of that information is indeed to deter), then you have the best combination for deterrence from risky or illegal behavior. The fact is, the information by itself is not nearly enough to deter people. Why do I keep insisting that abuse of the hemp plant is risky? Well, obviously for the known health risks, and also for the fact that any time you make an uninformed decision, especially one that already has risks associated with it, you are making a big gamble. Weed is known to be harmful in many ways but that alone is not enough cause to ban it (at least in some people's eyes). What really vexes me is that people know there are risks, know that more conclusive research is needed, and yet blindly push for legalization without even thinking about how they might have a hand in possibly the downfall of our nation. What if it's like tobacco, only worse? What if it can cause cancer? There needs to be more research, and people will need to remain patient. Believe me, if I could get a complete summary of reports from labs around the nation stating that weed is cleared to go, backed up with cold hard statistics and irrefutable proof, then I would give your argument more merit. However, you are correct in saying that I have a belief system that has a part in me taking this side of the argument, and I apologize if that has led you to believe it is the main reason I'm opposed to legalization. The primary reason for my doubts and fervent opposition is the one stated in the paragraph above. Back to what I said before... The importance of regulations on choice. You must concede that there is no such thing as true liberty. Humans are, obviously, imperfect, and that imperfection is the reason concepts like complete liberty can't apply. Government, and rules, will always exist because people want protection from threats. It's in our nature to band together to survive in the natural world. Now, what if weed is far more harmful than we know it is presently and it is legalized? Well, you've taken away regulations on choice, and the people who can't find other pleasures in life, or just don't know how serious the consequences are will destroy the lives of themselves and others, creating national chaos and adding to other problems like alcoholism and abuse of other drugs, including tobacco. I did mention the greater good (one of the many things you lovingly put in quotation marks for me). In my book, anyone who denounces government, or reasonable regulations, to an extent at least takes for granted the relative stability of their country. If we didn't have rules, we wouldn't have other things, like cars, vacations, restaurants and whatnot. The need to survive would come before the need for enjoyment. That's why not only do people need to be informed, they need to be forbidden from doing certain things as well. If, and only if, legalization of weed occurs without the adequate number of adequate studies being conducted, then our leaders and us ourselves could inadvertently setting ourselves up for a situation comparable to that of China prior to the opium wars. Instant gratification is more desirable to most people- and thus its needs to be regulated on a larger scale. And by "instant pleasures" I meant the things that are accepted by most of society to be representative of the most inherent risks, and can be experienced through instant gratification as opposed to delayed gratification. Everything is relative, and there needs to be a certain threshold with "acceptable" written on it. Marijuana, for all we know, could completely hinder our country's progress and well-being if legalized. It could be, relatively, ten times worse than, say, cheesecake. Mm, cheesecake.