2. The pro-side believes that marijuana is not harmful at all and will only benefit the U.S. They argue the economic benefits as well as the medical benefits from the legalization, as well as the right to do with one's body as they choose. The side that does not want it legalized argues the negative health benefits, as well as the crime associated with the drug, and the detrimental effects it could have if legalized across the country.
3. Both sides agree that each side has factual and effective arguing points. They also agree that this issue is at the forefront of debate and this decade will see the biggest change and reactions regarding the legalization of marijuana.
4. A large ideological difference in the debate is the issue of using marijuana for medical purposes. Those who successfully use the drug and see positive side effects support it greatly, and there is a group believes the medical benefits are a hoax and the side effects are minimal.
5. Marijuana is not in everyones ideas and beliefs. Each side does not ask their audience to take action, as not everyone in their audience beliefs in the drug and its uses. Currently, the arguments of this debate are tailored toward a smaller audience of the U.S.
6. I am going with the pro-side. I am taking this side because there are tremendous amounts of information and articles available that show the positive benefits of the drug and give great examples supporting it. I feel that with these examples I will be able to design an effective public argument that convinces my audience on my side of the debate.
7. The legalization of weed for medical and recreational purposes has happened mostly in this past decade and this generation of humans. Prior generations were taught that marijuana is bad and illegal, and they hold dearly those beliefs. The pre-determined belief of older generations that marijuana is bad will be the single largest threat to my argument, in my opinion.
 |
| Wikimedia Commons. Context, April 22, 2009, Public Domain |
No comments:
Post a Comment