The funny thing is you keep mentioning "The public must know how prohibition hurts society" but you don't seem to mention "The public must be aware of the dangers of marijuana".
You're selfishly trying to advocate for liberal use of your pet substance without much consideration for the potential wider implications.
I'd attempt to have a reasonable discussion with you but anyone who says "I can just take meds for schizophrenia" is clearly not actually thinking straight. I've engaged with you on marijuana before, and each and every time you look past the issues related to ensuring that it is available but that it is also safe, because you don't care, you just want to be able to use your drug as much, as cheaply and as conveniently as possible.
"Using psychedelics isn't always stupid" - Until we get some data to substantiate that I'll stick with my personal experience, everyone I've ever met that's been an enthusiastic advocate of drug use has been a disappointingly mediocre person.
Are there side effects to cannabis? Sure.
But lets look at the rate of schizophrenia cases vs the rate of cannabis use. Since the 1950's cannabis use has skyrocketed but the percentage of schizophrenia has remained steady at 1 percent.
There are problems with eating too much cannabis but this could be helped by educating new users via clear warnings on the packaging and budtenders being forced to warn customers. At the end of the day, in almost all cases of eating too much edibles you end up in the ER for discomfort. People aren't dying from it like you see from cigarettes, alcohol, fast food and prescription drugs.
Now, having acknowledged the drawbacks, I fully believe the benefits of legalization outweigh these problems. Especially when you compare other vices we tolerate as a society that kill hundreds of thousands of people EVERY YEAR. Cannabis edibles can send you to the ER because of a bad trip and a fraction of the population may trigger their latent schizophrenia but it won't kill people. This distinction cannot be overstated.
Now you say I look past issues when debating and I honestly don't know what you're refferring to. Maybe I refuse to agree with you but that doesn't mean I'm not addressing your points.
And there is plenty of data that brilliant people have used psychedelics and benefitted from their use. Not all of them turn into an obsessed advocate like Timothy Leary but the man who discovered LSD, Albert Hoffman, was incredibly intelligent and while he regretted LSD being used as a party drug in the 60's he explained the drug had untapped potential and secretly microdosed annually until he died at the ripe age of 102. He was not a senile, mad scientist. He gave sharp, articulate speeches about LSD to large crowds even at the age of 100.
You don't know brilliant psychonaughts for 2 reasons:
1) Most people aren't brilliant and most people haven't tried or disclosed the use of psychedelics.
2) You refuse to use google to look up historical examples.
George Carlin, Iggy Pop, Lewis Black, Marilyn Manson, Carl Sagan, Patton Oswalt, Robin Williams, Quentin Tarantino, Sarah Silverman, Stephen Fry, Ethel Kennedy, Jean-Paul Sartre, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Oliver Sacks, Anthony Bourdain, Stanley Kubrick, Eckhart Tolle, Havelock Ellis, Lewis Black, Abraham Maslow (Of Maslow's hierarchy of needs), Ray Charles, Eric Clapton, Doc Ellis, Jerry Garcia, Bill Hicks, Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, John Belushi, Kevin Smith, Eminem Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, Matt Groening, Angelina Jolie Jim Morrison, Francis Crick, Aldous Huxley, Trey Parker and Matt Stone, Richard Feynman Jimi Hendrix, John Lennon, Paul McCartney and many, many more have used psychedelics.
If you think these people are mediocre then I'd like you to list your accomplishments.
