What makes marijuana “immoral?”
The same thing that makes drunkenness immoral.
I had this debate on another thread. Alcohol use is always made equivalent to drunkenness. But you can have one without the other, any usually, people who drink do not get drunk.
A person can have a glass or two or even three, depending on their body type and the length of time ingesting and the alcohol level in the drink; without being impaired.
A person can not smoke a joint without being impaired.
Deliberately impairing your rationality and judgement is immoral.
I will not defend drunkenness any more than I will defend getting stoned.
But a limited amount of alcohol does not make you drunk.
Lest you think I am defending my favorite drug at the expense of yours, I assure you, I do not drink at all. I don’t like the taste of any alcohol being the reason.
Some like to equate marijuana with caffeine; I say again, a person can drink quite a few cups of coffee without getting high; but you are high if you smoke one joint.
“but you are high if you smoke one joint”
And you are drunk if you drink a gallon of whisky too.
So it’s all about the quantity then?
Should half joints be legal?
Apparently you never tried the lame sh!t that Chico brought across the border on his last run.
Oh, I see. We shouldn’t ban alcohol per se—we should only ban drunkenness. The government should regulate the number of drinks a person may have per night. I gotcha.
Speak for yourself. Many people aren't impaired by pot at all or can function even better on it.
Some people are fine even if they smoke until their lungs collapse yet some people can barely walk after inhaling half a lung full.
Each person is unique and it should not be up to the incompetent government to decide what herbs and medicines EVERYONE can use. If anyone has to make the decision, it should be your personal doctor.