The Hand here again - McGrath, I was just beginning to agree with your first paragraph when it was spoiled by glancing at the second one - which is a red herring I'm afraid. You're right about tea, coffee and chocolate. However, the difference between those three and pot is in the reason for using them, which in the case of pot is to become intoxicated. I personally consume very moderate quantities of tea, coffee and (gasp) chocolate for the sole reason that I enjoy the taste - do you know anyone who smokes cannabis simply and solely because they enjoy the taste? Of course you don't! And, conversely, I've never met a tea, coffee or chocolate consumer whose use of those commodities is for the sole purpose of intoxication, they'd have palpitations or migraine long before they achieved that Nirvana! (LOL)

So, a red herring? Of course it is - you've attempted to gain some sort of advantage here by comparing a horse with a dromedary, the last refuge of a scoundrel (albeit a likeable one!) who secretly knows, deep in their hearts, that they're arguing in defence of something which common sense (and Christ knows, there's been little enough of that from the Yea-Sayers) tells them is indefensible, but whose desire to appear to the world as a clever, deep-thinking radical prevents them from admitting it.

And in case you're planning to drag up 'medicinal purposes' - I'm already a supporter of the argument for Cannabis on prescription for bona-fide medical use.

And now, you'll be glad to know, The Hand's up again, absolutely, completely, finally. Bye.