Douglas N. Husak's A Moral Right to Use Drugs
In Douglas N. Husak’s A Moral Right to Use Drugs he attempts to look at drug use from an impartial standpoint in order to determine what is the best legal status for currently illegal drugs. Husak first describes the current legal situation concerning drugs in America, citing figures that show how drug crimes now make up a large percentage of crimes in our country. Husak explains the disruption which this causes within the judicial system and it is made clear that he is not content with the current way drugs are treated. The figures that Husak offers up, such as the fact that up to one third of all felony charges involve drugs, are startling, but more evidence is needed than the fact that a law is frequently broken to justify it’s repeal.
Husak attempts to discuss drug use legality aside in order to prove his argument. He looks at drug use in a three fold manner exploring; the reasons Americans use drugs, the justifications behind the war on drugs, and a discussion on which drugs, if any, should be affected by the law.
In understanding Husak’s beliefs on the reasons for drug use it is first important to look at his definition for recreational use verses drug abuse. Husak defines recreational use as either consumption for enhancement of an experience, such as at a concert, or for alleviation from boredom, like while doing household chores. Husak admits that there are gray areas between this recreational approach and the universally reviled drug abuse. However, Husak is right in saying that drug use that occurs in the ghetto is not recreational, and goes on to explain that rich white people are even more likely to use certain drugs, notably ...
... middle of paper ...
...enough time explaining the benefits of legalization. I agree with his assertion that the burden of proof should lie on the heads of those limiting our freedoms and therefore I personally am not bothered by his attack strategy, but in the grand scheme of trying to further his cause Husak would be served well by discussing the issue in terms of why legalization would help our society.
I respect this piece a lot and what I would really like to see is some of Husak’s ideas form implementation, such as educational programs. This article does a lot to tear down the old beliefs that are hurting our society, which is an important first step. Yet, those of us who favor change must remember that removing old views does not bring freedom, it leaves a gap. Freedom is attained when we replace that gap with a morally and legally sound new set of ideals and rules.
...hile African Americans went through journeys to escape the restrictions of their masters, women went through similar journeys to escape the restrictions of the men around them. Immigrants further strived to fit in with the American lifestyle and receive recognition as an American. All three groups seemed to shape up an American lifestyle. Today, all three of these perceptions of freedom have made an appearance in our lives. As we can see, the transition of freedom from race equality to gender equality shows that freedom has been on a constant change. Everyone acquires their own definition of freedom but the reality of it is still unknown; people can merely have different perceptions of freedom. Nevertheless, in today’s society, African Americans live freely, women are independent, and immigrants are accepted in society. What more freedom can one possibly ask for?
In the article “The Legalization of Drugs” by Douglas Husak and Peter de Marneffe, both philosophers have a debate as to whether to criminalize drug users or not. Husak argues for legalization of drugs. While Marneffe argues against the legalization of drugs. The article states “Since alcohol is currently legal, this condition is not likely to change soon. It is necessary to defend the prohibition of any drug against the background of legalized alcohol.
Throughout “Chasing the Scream” many intriguing stories are told from individuals involved in the drug war, those on the outside of the drug war, and stories about those who got abused by the drug war. Addiction has many social causes that address drug use and the different effects that it has on different people. In our previous history we would see a tremendous amount of individuals able to work and live satisfying lives after consuming a drug. After the Harrison Act, drugs were abolished all at once, but it lead to human desperation so instead of improving our society, we are often the reason to the problem. We constantly look at addicts as the bad guys when other individuals are often the reasons and influences to someone’s decision in
Tired and overworked students will try anything to get that extra edge to stay up all night and study. Students, specifically college students, find solace in a little pill called Adderall. Adderall is a drug used for treatment and control of neurological disorders that affect adults and kids, specifically those with attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) and narcolepsy. Formerly known as Obetrol, it was first approved on February 21st, 1996 by the FDA and was in the warehouses by March 11th, 1996. However, Adderall was used as a substitute to caffeine, speed, or to even reach a natural high by students at high pressure college and prep schools before it was a drug known to aid people with ADHD (Kent 2013).
He includes ethos, pathos and logos to defend his argument. He adds pathos to amplify emotion, logos to include facts and ethos to gain the audience’s trust. He uses his own opinion to choose his argument, but he defends this by using the toulmin style argument. He does have a rebuttal in his argument which is when he says that the government interfering in one’s choice to take drugs is only okay when it’s in the matter of a child taking drugs or adding education on children to not take drugs. But then argues that it is not okay for the government to interfere with an adult’s choice in taking drugs or alcohol. Friedman makes his position in the argument very clear and the audience can see his position throughout the whole argument. The author did a good job of picking a side in the argument and being able to defend it with
Human; relating to or having characteristics of a person(Merriam-Webster). A human is truly just a soul combined with characteristics of other people, and this is proven by Jenna Fox; the main character in The Adoration of Jenna Fox by Mary Pearson. After finding out what her body is made up of, Jenna along with other characters think she is not human. Despite this Jenna Fox has always had the key elements it takes to be a human been. Jenna for one has a past and memories that make up her life even after the accident. More importantly it is unfair to call her a “monster” when she shows characteristics similar to that of other humans. Needless to say, Jenna just as any other human isn’t perfect, and she later learns that in order to be one hundred percent human she must have the same chances of succeeding in life as any other human would. Jenna Fox is human because she has a soul regardless of her differences.
This expression clearly shows more ethos by reminding us that the quote of equality is of great importance today as it was the time it was written. In the light of Martin Luther King’s “I Have A Dream” speech, which happened on the same exact day as this speech that year, President Barack Obama connected his speech closely to Martin’s, both in the importance of unification and very similar in language and structure. Our president takes us to the past, telling us that freedom was closer to being taken rather than given.... ... middle of paper ... ...
Jing-mei and her mother have conflicting values of how Jing-mei should live her life. She tries to see what becoming a prodigy would be like from her mother's point of view and the perks that it would bring her as she states in the story "In all my imaginings, I was filled with a sense that I would soon become perfect. My mother and f...
Lately it seems that drug policy and the war on drugs has been in the headlines quite a lot. It is becoming increasingly apparent that the policies that the United States government takes against illegal drugs are coming into question. The mainstream media is catching on to the message of organizations and individuals who have long been considered liberal "Counter Culture" supporters. The marijuana question seems to be the most prevalent and pressed of the drugs and issues that are currently being addressed. The messages of these organizations and individuals include everything from legalization of marijuana for medical purposes, to full-unrestricted legalization of the drug. Of course, the status quo of vote seeking politicians and conservative policy makers has put up a strong resistance to this "new" reform lobby. The reasons for the resistance to the changes in drug policies are multiple and complex. The issues of marijuana’s possible negative effects, its use as a medical remedy, the criminality of distribution and usage, and the disparity in the enforcement of current drug laws have all been brought to a head and must be addressed in the near future. It is apparent that it would be irresponsible and wrong for the government to not evaluate it’s current general drug policies and perhaps most important, their marijuana policy. With the facts of racial disparity in punishment, detrimental effects, fiscal strain and most importantly, the history of the drug, the government most certainly must come to the conclusion that they must, at the very least, decriminalize marijuana use and quite probably fully legalize it.
From reading the book, I have developed my own stance that the book education system is similar to today’s education system. I can relate with the text because I have noticed most of my history fails to mention successes of the Negroes. In fact, I was astonished that Dr. George Washington Carver had invented peanut butter. I can relate to chapter four’s solution because in my school system, Teach For America teachers who were from different areas and ethnic backgrounds were ill equipped to teach African American students while an older teacher would be able to raise test scores and teach students
...s to enjoy basic human rights that embrace family, personal relationships, and individualism. Today’s society is able to comprehend how with the technological advances Huxley’s world could be a reality, but with the privilege of a democratic society, civilization would not allow the medical intervention for reproduction, the conditioning for happiness and consumerism.
Jing-Mei tries to live up to her mother’s expectations but feels that her mother expects more from her than she can deliver. She doesn’t understand why her mother is always trying to change her and won’t accept her for who she is. She feels pressure from her family when she is compared to her cousin Waverly and all her accomplishments. Soon the conflict grows to resentment as her mother tests her daily on academics, eventually causing Jing-Mei to give up while her mother struggles to get her attention and cooperation. Her mother avoids arguing with her daughter early in the story, continuing to encourage her to strive for fame. Her mother’s next assignment for her daughter is piano lessons. This goes along pretty well until her mother forces her to participate in a talent show. The daughter’s failure on her performance at the talent show causes embarrassment to her mother. Conflict is evident when two days later, after the talent show, she reminds her daughter that it’s time for piano practice and the daughter refuses to obey her mother. The conflict that the daughter feels boils over in an outburst of anger and resentment towards her mother for trying to make her something that she is not. Harsh words are spoken causing the mother to retreat and not speak of this event ever
College can be a challenge with endless papers, tests, and other tasks. A pill that allows extreme focus helps accomplish necessary tasks. Adderall is a prescription medication given to patients with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (Jaffe). However, this drug has become known as a “smart drug” around college campuses (“Daily News & Analysis”). About 6.4 percent of college students have taken Adderall without a prescription (Carver). At more competitive schools, about twenty-five percent of students have taken Adderall (Pantovich). Students take the drug with hope to improve a grade. However, in the long run, the student only hurts himself or herself.
One of the most prevalent misconceptions, Benson and Rasmussen, contend is the notion that a large percentage of drug users commit nondrug crimes, what might be called the “drugs-cause-crime” assumption implicit in the government’s drug-war strategy. If true, then an effective crackdown on ...
65-92 Riga, Peter J. " Legalization Would Help Solve The Nation's Drug Problem. " Greenhaven Press. 52-54 Rosenthal, A.M. " The Case For Slavery." Kennedy, Kennedy, and Aaron 370-372 " Two Crucial Issues in the Argument for Drug Legalization."