When you're finished arguing both sides I'll jump in.
Yet you demand that it be approved for everyone because it "works" for you. As far as we both know, the effects you're experiencing could be purely psychological.
"What gives you that right?"
Me? Am I in charge?
There's a reason for the FDA and the drug approval process. If marijuana cured cancer, I could see bypassing the process and making it immediately available.
But marijuana cures nothing. And whatever it does do, there are 10 existing FDA approved drugs that do it better.
It's obvious you can get marijuana for what ails you. What's your problem? Smoke your dope and let us be.
Making a true factual statement is arguing both sides? Nice dodge there Paulsen. You know as well as I do that many FDA drugs are not for all people, this one is just the same.
As far as the effects go, they are positive, you seeking to derive how is simply beside the point and indeed another dodge.
Oh yeah there is a reason all right, it's called control.
Name the ten drugs that 'do it better' and I will name you the ones I have taken that didn't. Keep in mind that a handfull of doctors gave up trying to come up with what youjust claimed you could.
By golly I think you are finally coming around. You say "Smoke your dope and let us be"......you should know that is all that is being asked for.....let us be. There is hope for you yet!
Your intellectual honesty is breathtaking. Freedom from harassment would seem to be fundamental right for any other personal activity that didn't harm any others. What harm is it to you if marijuana were legal?
And more importantly cui bono in this war on drugs? As far as I can tell your argument rests on letting the bureaucracy decide what is good for us. Except that the bureaucracy makes its living on harassing the smoker, hardly an objective source.
I can tell your wearing down, RP. I'm still waiting to see the master debater portrayed so pretentiously on your homepage.