Drug Legalization and Morality
Morality代写 Drug Legalization and Morality：Is it morally permissible to take mind-altering and potentially damaging drugs?
Is it morally permissible to take mind-altering and potentially damaging drugs? Morality代写
Morality is about doing what is right and shunning evil. Fundamentally, morality is a rational enterprise on which human base their cognitive reasoning. In this regard, one requires knowledge of what is good and evil as well as how both can be pursued. It hence becomes the intellectual ability to make rational decisions about life and the world around you. The theory of morality is the use of knowledge to achieve morality. Morality代写**范文
Therefore, moral reasoning is significant to live a moral life. It can be argued that people have an obligation to exhibit rational decisions because it is the basis of morality. Hence, the basic obligation is to do good and avoid evil. It makes rationality and moral judgment one and the same thing. Thus, we have an obligation to be rational because we have an obligation to be moral.
In the above context Morality代写
It is not morally permissible for one to suppress his/her cognitive faculties for the reasons other than the proper functioning of the body. The logic does not exclude recreational drugs as they are done for pleasure and enjoyment which is not essentially for health, medical and nutritional values. It is against morality which demands that we act rationally by doing what is right and avoiding that is evil. And hence the act of suppressing one’s cognitive functioning to achieve pleasure and enjoyment is repugnant to the obligation of being moral. People have a moral obligation to their well-being. Morality代写**范文
The primary claim in this article is not that it is wrong to engage in recreational and pleasurable activities but rather how we engage in them that might suppress our cognitive ability. In essence, what these recreational and enjoyable activities do to us must be good but not impair us to do evil or lower our cognitive reasoning. It is not bad to seek pleasure and enjoyment to the extent. That it is not interfering with rational decision making and well-being. Therefore, we cannot define pleasure in isolation as it can be an immoral pleasure. But rather pleasure is something that is good for our health and does not impair our rational thinking.
There is an argument that temporary impairment of the cognitive capabilities for pleasure is not against moral obligations.In his article, De Marneffe believes that drugs can be used for recreational purposes (De Marneffe p. 185). Here the author failed to recognize the moral aspect behind the drug use for pleasure. He further argued that drugs used for recreational drugs should remain illegal to avoid addiction. I find that argument the application of the double standard in as far as drug effects to human health is concerned. If the society does not approve to the use of drugs as they are considered to impair cognitive abilities.
Then it can be concluded that, even though they are used for recreational purposes, is against the personal obligation to being moral. Reason being, obligation to morality is not conditional on the application that it can be suspended at convenience. Application of morality is without exceptions in everyday life. That is, everything that bears person well-being without exception of pleasurable activities should be done within the bounds of moral obligations doing what is good and shunning evil.
Therefore, drugs may have negative impairment of cognitive functioning and rational abilities. Morality代写
Such negative impairments include immediate effects by hallucinogens like a hallucination, mood swings, delusions, psychosis, and paranoia. Marijuana, on the other hand, has immediate effects like dysphoria, paranoia, poor judgment, psychosis, and impaired reasoning. Notably, drugs that have psychoactive properties affect people by lowering reasoning and rational judgment. Thus, even if some drugs are used for recreational intentions and they have cognitive impairment effects, they are morally not permissible.
Should some currently illegal drugs be made legal in the USA? If so, which one and why? Morality代写
The conversation about the legalization of drugs in America has been so interesting and has attracted diverse opinions particularly from the proponents of drug legalization. In his essay, Boaz stated that the problem with drugs is the laws against them. According to Boaz, the law has created a conduit through which drugs manufacturers and dealers have the financial stability to continue with their trade. (Boaz p. 209) Further, the law has led to unnecessary violence because of drug prohibition. Most drug legalization proponents see the need for Food and Drug Administration to regulate currently illegal instead of making them illegal to avoid addiction, overdose, and violence.
However, I find this irrational and a weak argument in favor of drug legalization. Morality代写
The given reasons for drug legalization are not rational and does not amount to the moral obligation that people have in doing that is good and avoiding evil. These drugs are harmful to cognitive functioning and reasoning as well as bad for general body health. Hence, legalizing them and then regulating them amount to condemning people to immoral practices that will produce a population of people who are cognitively impaired and irrational in decision making.
Moreover, legalizing some drugs like marijuana is against the state’s commitment to promoting autonomy. Morality代写
Although autonomy is used as the basis for an argument in favor of drug legalization, for a person to be termed autonomous. There are conditions that one needs to fulfill to have a rational use of autonomy for a good life. Development of autonomy does not matter whether it is a personal decision or imposed by the law as long as it is for the common conception of a better life. As such, the government comes up with conditions that define the structure and procedures of one exercising autonomy. Morality代写**范文
In this regard, the analogy of a free market can be used to describe the development of public autonomy through laws and regulations. For a free market for existing, the government has a role in promoting it through policies make it possible to have freedom of exchange and contracts as well as ownership of property. Hence, the exclusion of these structural elements, it would not be possible to have a free market that makes businesses autonomously flourish.
Therefore, because the state is committed to creating and protecting public autonomy. Morality代写
It has that obligation to make sure that the exercise of autonomy is not impaired. Since people need unimpaired cognitive functioning to have uninterrupted autonomy. It then can be said that the state has an interest in promoting the cognitive capacity of its citizens. Hence, the state is obligated to put up structural measures and procedures that will see autonomy is respected by promoting and protecting the environment that will make it possible to have unimpaired autonomy. Morality代写**范文
Therefore, it is the work of the law to put restrictions on things that might interfere with cognitive functioning. And since recreational drugs like marijuana which are currently illegal impair cognitive functions which are the primary element of unimpaired autonomy, should continue to be illegal.
How would addicts be treated with respect to treatment or the law? Morality代写
Addiction is a disease and should be treated like any other disease. Most are the times when addicts are denied treatment which is not only meant to improve their lives but also that of others. Addicts should be treated with respect to treatment to make them regain their lives.
Contrary to Shapiro’s believe that drugs are not by themselves addictive and that people get addicted because of their interpretation and circumstances rather than chemical components of the drugs. But I believe that drugs have varied addiction levels depending on their chemical constituents (Shapiro). These chemicals cause addiction. Also, Shapiro proposed that drugs should be decriminalized and regulated for addiction and overdose rather than prohibiting them. Which has resulted in high addiction rates.
Legalizing drugs use will only aggravate the situation as people have the freedom to use them anywhere anyhow and it might also be difficult to regulate. Therefore, the best option for addiction is the treatment of addicts. Treatment is a legal and moral obligation for the state to continue promoting and protecting autonomy.
Work Cited Morality代写
Boaz, David. “Drug-Free America or Free America?” Disputed Moral Issues. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Pp. 182-188.
De Marneffe, Peter. “Addiction and Drug Policy.” Disputed Moral Issues. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2011. Pp. 204-210.
Shapiro, Daniel. “Decriminalize, Don’t Legalize.” Disputed Moral Issues. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2011.