Write a paper that responds to the questions: Assess the ethics of the war on drugs. Should drugs be legalized? Why / Why not? Provide justifications for views from the required readings in Chapters 21 and 19.

Please consult the readings in chapter 21, “Drugs”, for the pro and con perspectives. Then, choose the article with which you agree most and lead your paper with arguments from that article. Next, counter that article with the views of an opponent. You will do so by critiquing the first article you discussed with arguments from the other article. In addition, supplement one of these articles with one of the readings assigned from chapter 19 on terrorism and one reading from another chapter Finally, conclude the essay by responding to the opponent’s arguments with views of your own.

I attached the whole chapters this time. You get to pick an article from the readings in chapter 21, “Drugs”, for the pro and con perspectives. Then, choose the article with which you agree most and lead your paper with arguments from that article. ( There are about 3-4 articles in each chapter, again you pick which one will connect most with other chapters). Next, counter that article with the views of an opponent. You will do so by critiquing the first article you discussed with arguments from the other article. In addition, supplement one of these articles with one of the readings assigned from chapter 19 on terrorism and one reading from the third file I am attaching which is about morality (Moral reasoning) Finally, conclude the essay by responding to the opponent’s arguments with views of your own.

Please note,

-As usual try to include examples about the terrorism in Libya.

-Do not forget to cite at least 7 references from the articles I am attaching.

-Also good to note that all of the writing are from the articles I am providing. NO outside resources except if you're including something about Libya or you want add something about Morality.

-The structure of this paper is a common one for philosophers. Begin with an argument with which you agree, counter it with views of a reasonable opponent. Then, respond with counterarguments to the latter's arguments. You can develop your own ideas in this final counterargument. You may integrate the third article in whichever way you see fit.

Please let me know if you have any questions.