I have no problem with it. I know for a fact it can be used to help people with cancer. I lost a dear friend to it and he smoked so that he could still eat. He smoked before that too but when he really needed it I was thankful he could legally have it. In Oregon you can grow your own plants if you have a medical marijuana card. I have no idea how it works anywhere else.

I've known too many pot abusers and seen the damage recreational use can cause. Nothing you say to me can undo what I've seen.

But I think the benefits outweigh the risks under certain circumstances.

Alcohol. Gambling. Video games. Fast food. Sex. Fast driving. Cough syrup. Internet. Porn. Shopping.

And on and on and on. Which of those would you outlaw due to their rather strong potential to lead to life-ruining addiction/abuse?

We all know your staunch pot opposition, but it doesn't change the brilliantly sardonic point of CP's post. If someone is using marijuana for medical purposes, specifically a situation approved by Dr. Morrigoon ... would your approval be revoked if they also happened to enjoy the experience while benefitting from its medicinal elements??

No, I'm not denying that people find the experience enjoyable. What I'm saying is that the benefits must outweigh the significant risks. To me, recreational use does not do that, but relief of significant pain that is not successfully addressed by other existing drugs does.

And as far as the alcohol argument goes, until I get drunk sitting next to someone downing a pint, I don't find the two comparable. Remember my stance on tobacco.

Or is it you can only smoke pot for medicinal purposes, but you have to swear to not enjoy it.

I think you guys are painting me with an unfair brush here. Again, I'm not denying people might find it enjoyable. But I think its use carries significant risks, and therefore should only be used when necessary, not just desired.

So does alcohol. You may not get drunk sitting next to someone who is drinking, but if they get on the road after they've been drinking the risks are pretty damn significant.

Using (part of) GD's list, do you think that

• Alcohol should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Gambling should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Video games should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Fast food should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Fast driving should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Cough syrup should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Internet should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Porn should only be used when necessary, not just desired?
• Shopping should only be used when necessary, not just desired?

Of all those, I'd say cough syrup is the only one that I haven't seen cause severe damage in someone's lives from "recreational" use as well. So, I understand Goonie's concern, but fail to see why these things are different, if they do cause the same kind of damages, if not worse.

What I've personally witnessed or have known someone affected by each one:

• Alcohol - spousal abuse, child neglect, child abuse, early death, welfare
• Gambling - spousal abuse, child neglect, foreclosure, poverty, suicide, avoiding repayment of debts, welfare
• Video games - addiction, spousal neglect, child neglect, medical issues
• Fast food - medical issues, avoiding repayment of debts
• Sex - disease, rape, molestation
• Fast driving - "accidents", one fatal (not the erratic driver, of course)
• Internet - addiction, spousal neglect, child neglect, dishonesty, stalking
• Porn - addiction, sexual abuse
• Shopping - spousal abuse, child neglect, foreclosure, avoiding repayment of debts, poverty, welfare
• Marijuana - addiction, abuse, neglect, avoiding repayment of debts, welfare

Goonie, maybe if you shared with us exactly (don't need to give names/relations) what your negative experiences have been with pot, we might understand you more.

But, even with what I've seen in the list above, I don't think any of those things should be made illegal (well, fast driving already is, and that's only because it has a direct and immediate impact on other lives, so I do support that one).