Yes, we can. It's called "biochemistry" and it's a science well over a hundred years old.
Yeah I guess your right, but biochemistry doesn't cover the element of how society would use drugs.
You mean aside from all of the research been put into studying marijuana from the past 70 years?
There's research that shows marijuana has both good and bad effects. Problem with most of the research is that we can't use a truly random sample. For example, with my schizophrenia study, how do we know that the people who just happened to smoke weed were already at risk for schizophrenia. Or with a study that said weed smokers don't do well in school, how do we know that it's not the other way around.
Everything in this paragraph is uneducated and stupid. Nothing here is of any factual value. You did no research on the subject and ignored everything previously said in this thread. I cannot even begin to type an argument. Everyone is dumber for reading this and you should feel bad.
First of all, barley anything in this topic is researched or of factual value. Second, my paragraph makes sense with logic. If people abuse one legal and socially accepted drug, what makes you think they aren't going to abuse a different drug. McDonalds isn't the only food that obese people abuse.
Now on to my other argument why legalizing recreational marijuana is morally incorrect and bad for society: Let's once again assume that marijuana doesn't cause any major permanent harm, so if it was legal we would basically have instant pleasure with not side effects or guilt. That would be horrible for society. Instead of people figuring out productive ways to use their time, we have people who just deicide to get high. Once they are high, the chances of them getting anything done is pretty much 0 for awhile. We don't want society to look like
this, do we?
Is any of the possible risk really worth the chance for some stupid people to feel good? It's not something we
need like food, or even caffeine in todays fast-paced society.