Having been designated as the one to write the introduction to our group's paper, I've produced the following paragraphs. I wasn't sure what the exact tone should be for this, and since the tone of the first essay was a bit less formal than my own, I was unsure of how formal to make the tone of this portion. Usually my process for writing these sorts of things is to make sure that I hit all the necessary points as clearly and concisely as possible, then add in whatever passages or phrasings that may serve the context better. Also, since the first essay includes an introduction of its own, I didn't want to end too definitely so as to make the shift from "formal introduction" to "essay introduction" too jarring or aimless.
In the course of the last several decades, a brewing debate
over the legalization of marijuana (also known as cannabis) in America has
heated to a boil. At the time of writing, twenty-five states in the Union have
granted some degree of legality towards the drug’s use, bypassing its
prohibition on a federal level. In this paper we will analyze the potential
political, economic, health, social, and moral effects of federal marijuana
legalization, addressing some of the more salient talking points that have
surfaced in various mainstream debates and scholarly articles.
One of the major
considerations taken in these essays is the difference between medical and
recreational consumption. Authors Olivia Reagan, Devin Ward, and Korynne
Haymond assert that the political, economic, and health effects of cannabis use
merit its legalization for medical use only, and that recreational use should
remain under prohibition. Concerning the social and moral implications of
public marijuana consumption, author Joachim Austin argues that there is no
appreciable detriment to federal legalization of both medical and recreational
use.
No comments:
Post a Comment