And Valium is, of course, legal with a prescription. Why shouldn't marijuana be as well?
But we all know this "Medicinal" argument is just bullsh*t. It's just an effort to get a foot in the door, before forcing it open to the much greater demand for recreational usage. This is incrementalism in progress.
So we should prohibit a treatment that is effective for a wide range of conditions, because people will also use it recreationally?
If it is provided in a non-recreational form and to treat real medical conditions, (Not fake ones like they did in California "medical" marijuana scams) I have no objections to it.
So we should prohibit a treatment that is effective for a wide range of conditions, because people will also use it recreationally?
You side step my point. My point is that this clamor to legalize it for "medical" purposes is just a vehicle to open the door to a general legalization for recreational purposes.
The usage for real verified medical purposes is miniscule compared to the usage which will occur for recreation.
"Medical Marijuana" is the Ryan White of the legalize drugs push. Ryan White, if you will remember, is the non-homosexual child who was infected with AIDS by a blood transfusion, and thereafter served as the public face for pushing the government to pump billions into curing this specifically homosexual disease.
It was a feint. It was a propaganda tool to get what they wanted while hiding what was really happening from the public. That's what "Medical Marijuana" is too. It's just a tool.