Search Results: debate topics

NOTE: I am not condoning anyone to break the law in any way, shape, or form. This forum is simply for theoretical conversation purposes.

-----

This was a topic that me and my college buddies talked about.

Alcohol and tobacco here beyond a certain age are completely legal to use...and are known to cause psychological or physical addiction if used in excess, but are not TOO damaging to your body in moderation.

-----

When it comes to "illegal/controlled substances" such as cocaine, crack cocaine, ecstasy, acid, (crystal) meth, 'shroooms, etc.,

It can said that meth and crack cocaine should be avoided at all costs because of very high potential of addiction and ensuing damage to oneself.

It's a common consensus for people to believe that occasional marijuana use isn't as damaging as occasional tobacco use.

Salvia is a completely legal hallucinogen, and after talking to people in my college years they've told me that salvia is more of a scary/intense "trip" than any other substance deemed illegal that they've ever tried.

Therefore, can it be fair to say that "legality" isn't the be-all, end-all indicator of a substance's safety?

-----

But with some of the others "illegal substances" previously mentioned, it can be debated if occasional use of said "illegal substance" is safer than occasional use of alcohol or tobacco.

Vote on substance that you feel is the most "safer" to use in comparison to occasional alcohol / tobacco use. If you think all of them are more dangerous than alcohol or tobacco use, vote option "E"

Reply as much as you like, sharing experiences or testimonies of other people and their usage. Please be respectful of other people's views.

Before going to law school, I was an accountant. It's interesting viewing the law through the lens of accounting. Debits and credits. Rights and duties. What you learn in accounting is that debits and credits should always balance. As I look at areas of the law, especially those dealing with gender and family, it's amazing to see how legal rights and legal duties (liabilities) also balance.

In fact, a common theme in the law of parental rights is that "rights and liabilities go hand-in-hand." If a parent is responsible for child support, that parent also has custody or visitation rights.

After the sexual revolution, the rights of men stayed the same, as the rights of women increased. Yet, what also happened was that the legal duties and liabilities of women also increased! It was like a social partnership. Some women believed they would only be getting "more rights" and were surprised to find out that additional or new legal duties, liabilities, obligations, or responsibilities were imposed on them - corresponding to their new legal rights.

There is really no debate here, because the topic is quite antiquated. I imagine or hope that we live in an America (USA) where most people hear "equal rights" and think "duh!" There will always be outliers, but in the grand scheme of things, the bulk of the bell curve is what counts.

I'm curious to hear from men and women what their view is on this topic, assuming you live in America or the USA, but feel free to answer or vote if you're from outside the USA.

Thanks : )