Speech On Marijuana Legalization

Thesis: There is a significant amount of attention in today’s world on weather or not to legalize marijuana. The prohibition of marijuana is holding up the improvement of social and economic developments.

If citizens allow the government to have more control, then society should fear the government will have too much power. Citizens should be able to have privacy and freedoms, in order to not let the government control their lives. If no one stands up for their freedoms, soon the freedoms will be easily taken

A. We need to petition to pass legislature that legalizes marijuana for patients that need it.

Governments need to have rules, laws and regulations so they have control over the people, but too much control can be oppressive to society. Government control should be equal to the rights of the people; having too much control conflicts with the rights of the people and their life, liberty and happiness. There are arguments to both sides of governing power and it’s effect on society, but one thing is certain, and facts show that an overpowering government can lead to adverse effects on the people. In “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut and Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, it is evident that an overpowering government can lead to a lack of freedom and place little to no value on one’s life.

In a case where it would be justified, is when a crisis could have been prevented. The Boston marathon bombing is one case that brought on a new effort to concentrate on anti terrorism. The two men that were accused of the bombing could’ve been heavily monitored, which may have prevented the entire incident. They had to communicate somehow, and cell phones probably came into play. But that still may not give the government the right to spy on everyone.

The purpose of government is to protect the unalienable rights of its citizens from violation. Basically, guaranteeing and enforcing the bill

The government is not at blameless, all powerful entity meant to control and inhibit its people. instead, the constitution outlines the governments responsibility to protect our rights. The declaration of indepence defines our unaleinable rights as life,liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Constitution further elaborates on these principles through the bill of rights, We are free to express ourselves as we see fit, free to worship any god, and free ti bear arms among many other

When morality and ethics are involved during lawmaking, trying to compromise these laws with society and what they believe is proven to be nearly impossible. The government's goal is to provide a framework that protects individual rights as well as protect the society from the dangers of someone else’s actions. If the government can set standards that ensure the safety of American while keeping individual rights, American people will most likely feel heard and strive to provide a greater and better community. The hope of the government is to create better communities and limit immorality behavior among American

Ronald Reagan once said, “Government’s first job is to protect the people, not run their lives.” In many ways, this statement applies to governments all around the world. People deserve the freedom to participate in the government, live their lives in peace, and not have the strict rules of the government keep them from doing so. However, in some cases, the government does need to control people’s lives to a certain degree to keep people and their rights safe.

In a democratic society, it is generally considered the Government's role to promote morality and justice within its citizens and seek to restrict supposedly immoral and unjust acts. Thus if an act is to be considered immoral, it seems obvious to suggest that the government is justified in restricting it regardless of whether it is harmful to others. However, since everybody has a different understanding of morality and freedom, no Government could legitimately restrict an act on the basis of it being 'immoral'. Thus it seems more plausible to suggest that the Government should only restrict actions which everybody can agree should be restricted. However it's not clear where the line should be drawn or how a consensus on the issue could be

Any obligation a state’s subjects feel stems from the government’s justifiability and moral defensibility. These two factors must be strong enough to compel the subjects into following government order instead of following alternative pursuits to accomplish individual goals. Legitimate government actually has this ability, while illegitimate authority merely purports it. However, even legitimate governments have parameters that limit what the state may ask of its subjects. These parameters are derived from the subjects, based on what they feel is appropriate for the government to do and what they will allow the government to do without

The fundamental guide to our government, the US Constitution, lists the obligations of government. Among these obligations is the promotion of the general welfare of the people of the United States. (D'Augostino, 2008) Personal safety is a primary advantage of public order. Sanction against and

The government’s main duty according to the Harm Principle is to keep society functional and civil.

If I give you a number, like 158 million of people in the world do something. First you will say It is a big number, but what they do. Well 158.8 million of people use cannabis; which is 3.8 % of the world’s population. When we talk about cannabis there are people who are for its use, other who are against it, but neither of them can deny the fact that cannabis has for a long time been prized for the solid and sturdy fiber in its stalks, and therapeutic mixes delivered by its female flowers, the crucial merchandise got from cannabis profoundly affected its restorative use and spread on the planet. Therefore, today I’d like to inform you about the history of the medical use of cannabis by focusing on three major periods: The ancient time, the

Have you ever been opposed to something or had a preconceived notion about a particular thing that you knew nothing about? How many of you have a stance on the legalization of marijuana? If so what are you basing your decision off of, what evidence has led you to come to your own personal conclusion. Just like any other controversial topic there are a lot of opinions but little facts. Today we would like to lay the facts out, from medical effects and uses, to the “budding” industry that is on the cusp of becoming extremely large and profitable. These things we believe will prove enough for serious consideration of Title 35 under the Pennsylvania Statues that makes distribution and possession of marijuana illegal.