But I'd also like to address the final question in the prompt: are there any potential problems with basing an argument entirely upon scientific facts? Usually, I don't think there would be, but since we're expanding the scope of legalization past medical usage of marijuana and into the recreational usage of marijuana, this topic is already leaning towards a social issue. In politics, legalizing marijuana isn't as prevalent of a topic as immigration or foreign affairs, but it is a topic nonetheless. In homes, especially in the very state I'm getting my education in, the legal age for smoking marijuana is 21, and parents are encouraged to sit down with their kids and have "the talk". Following closely behind is the trend of what's cool and what's not: when I asked one of my friends what she did over spring break, she told me about how "people were just out smoking weed in one of the public parks; it was a little bizarre but pretty sick". Like all other controversial topics in this day and age, the usage of marijuana is becoming a political issue, a social issue, a cultural issue, a countercultural issue, and an issue that will definitely become more prevalent in our generation for years to come. The problem with basing an argument entirely on scientific facts is that this argument isn't just about marijuana anymore, but it's about people using marijuana. Inevitably, the legalization of marijuana will have an enormous impact on people's lives, and while understanding the science and the research of marijuana can go a long way in supporting a position, it wouldn't be the wisest thing to base an entire argument purely on scientific fact. (Thanks for posing this question, I had a lot of fun thinking about it!)

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/science/review-stoned-a-doctors-case-for-medical-marijuana.html?searchResultPosition=7

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/27/health/politicians-prescriptions-for-marijuana-defy-doctors-and-data.html?module=inline

https://www.mass.gov/info-details/health-effects-of-marijuana#mental-health-

When discussing the legalization of medical marijuana, it might not be the best decision to base an argument purely off of scientific fact, but also to consider circumstance. Not everybody lives in the same place, comes from the same background, or has to deal with the same medical issues as others do. In a New York Times article, one patient said that marijuana greatly helped her deal with symptoms of a chronic disease and insomnia, and while another patient also saw the same benefits in his usage of marijuana, he also experienced auditory hallucinations at his job (which is potentially harmful in any career path) and retarded reaction times while driving. With medical marijuana, regulation is more important than ever – clinics and pharmacies can't just be distributing cannabis left and right – but regulation can't be the only thing we're focused on. Researching marijuana has become more important than ever before, especially with the gradual legalization of marijuana, both medical and recreational, in the United States. We need to draw the line between regulations that set boundaries and regulations that hinder research.