2006-06-28 02:16:54 · 11 answers · asked by rosecitylady 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
PRO:
marijuana can act as a pain killer for patients. most of its usefullness is in patients with glucoma and/or cancer. Marijuana relieves pressue on the sinus cavity and the pressure behind the eyes. This pressure is associated with glucoma. Cancer patients undergoing chemo or radiation have almost no appetite, but still have pain and need to eat. Marijuana relives their pain and lessens their nausea accociated with food.
Marijuana does not have any of the side effects or other pain killer.
It it impossible to overdose on marijuans. No patient could decide to go take the whole prescription and kill themselves, unlike pain killers.
CON:
negative social stigma of it being an illegal narcotic.
Seen as a gateway drug to many.
Lung damage from smoking(puff for puff a joint deposits more junk than a cigarette, but usually people smoke way more cigarettes than joints.
2006-06-28 02:28:22 · answer #1 · answered by AFontOfUselessInformation 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm what you might call a conservative Christian. I only share that because so many people think that we're all wacko-conservative on everything. But, I personally believe that you should at least use marajuan for medical purposes. I believe that God made the stuff. And, if God made it and put it here, it has a useful purpose. If it's prooven to help in the healing process, by God, use it!!! An article the other day was talking about the possible use of scorpion venom in the treatment of cancer. If it works, use it.
And, if you're going to allow the consumption of alcohol for intoxication, you should allow the use of other drugs as well, especially the ones that seem so much safer and less addicting than alcohol.
Peace.
2006-06-28 02:26:23 · answer #2 · answered by Hesed 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What a good question.
I have never in my life smoked Marijuana
But if I was in pain and this eased it then I would certainly try it. With age comes illness and pain ,and nowadays its not nessersary to suffer and is marijuana helps then it should go on the national health
2006-06-28 02:31:53 · answer #3 · answered by puzzled 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if nothing else will releave the suffering, then marijuana should be a legal choice, prescribed by a doctor and bought at the pharmacy. There will be abuses though.
2006-06-28 02:24:16 · answer #4 · answered by ? 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For: is excellent on the treatment of prostate cancer.
Against: is a good business that keeps lawyers, policeman, and builder working doing new jails.
If it is legal much of the delinquency associated will disappear, when there is no money to buy differnet individuals.
2006-06-28 02:32:24 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
if oxicontin, codene, morphene, vicodin, and valium are legal, why the heck shouldn't a naturally growing weed be legal? Its way less harmfull than abusing one of the afore mentioned drugs
2006-06-28 02:21:41 · answer #6 · answered by Hans B 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a tongue-in-cheek excuse...
Kind of like claiming alcohol is for "medicinal purposes"...
(wink-wink). Everybody knows what the score is.
2006-06-28 02:21:50 · answer #7 · answered by J.D. 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
for for its helps deal with pain, it doesn't cause lung cancer like tobacco which is legal, it's not addictive like tobacco which is legal.
as for against there is no real reason
2006-06-28 02:21:14 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Its harm is greater than its use.
2006-06-28 02:20:26 · answer #9 · answered by YA!!! 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
will make the patient high.
2006-06-28 02:19:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋