Marijuana Legalization Despite being legal in 11 states, marijuana is still highly controversial across the United States. The major debates center around its usage as a medicine and whether it should be available for recreational use, like alcohol. There are currently 55 million American adults (16.9%) who use marijuana in the U.S., including 43% of college students. Advocates view cannabis use as a personal choice and argue that laws infringing upon that choice infringe upon individual liberties. They also say that prohibition prevents those in need from receiving proper medical treatment and that enforcement often targets minorities and other at-risk populations unfairly. Prohibitionists question the validity of marijuana's medical use and believe the risks to public health, safety, and civic order outweigh any potential benefits. They also fear it will become a gateway drug if it's made legal for recreational use. As more states have legalized marijuana, the debate has expanded, with advocates calling for clearing low-level marijuana convictions, using marijuana as an alternative to opioids, and examining the economic potential for marijuana cultivation in agriculture. Evolution Although most scientists accept the evolutionary theory that humans evolved from primates, many Americans still reject it. According to the Pew Research Center, about 1 in 5 U.S. adults believe that life on Earth has never changed. Those who support evolutionary theory tend to believe in Charles Darwin's natural selection views, which are considered the primary process behind evolution. Others agree with Darwin's premise, but prefer to use more modern scientific theories to explain how change occurs. The push back against evolution is often rooted in religion. Those who believe humans were created in the image of God are often called "creationists." They contend that evolutionary theory conflicts with teachings in the Bible and the Judeo-Christian concept of a God who alters human events. This perspective is sometimes called the theory of "intelligent design," claiming that life couldn't have arisen by chance and must have been designed by an omnipotent being. This disagreement is most prominent in discussions around education. Many Evangelical Christian groups resist teaching evolution in science classes because Darwin's ideas conflict with their worldview. Others advocate for including intelligent design in public school science curricula alongside the scientific theory of evolution, which has sparked debate about the separation of church and state. Global Climate Change The debate over global climate change centers on a series of questions: Is global warming real? Is it caused mainly by human activity? How harmful is it likely to be? What can we do about it? Rising global temperatures, warming oceans, and shrinking ice sheets all indicate that Earth is warming in response to increased greenhouse gas levels, which are mostly due to human-made emissions. The planet's average surface temperature has risen about 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit since the 19th century due to increases in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Environmental groups believe humans have a moral obligation to stop climate change before future generations pay the price. To that end, they support policies that help reverse the long-term effects of climate change. Some skeptics argue that the dangers of climate change are exaggerated, while others accept global warming as real but dismiss evidence that suggests it's connected to human activity. This perspective leaves climate change skeptics to reject calls for regulatory limits on emissions, arguing that the economic cost outweighs the environmental impact. Global climate change also impacts economics, politics, and foreign affairs. Government regulation, suppression of scientific data for political gain, and international agreements on climate change often play a role in the debate. Free-Market Capitalism There are two main viewpoints in the debate over free-market capitalism: those who favor economic regulation and those who prefer a free market. According to the Cambridge Journal of Economics, market governance must hold a "balance between economic and social goals and between individual and communal goals." The ideal system encourages efficient but responsible use of resources that aligns with the interests of individuals, corporations, and society as a whole. Supporters of regulation believe that free markets are inherently unstable, unequal, and prone to boom and bust cycles. In order to achieve a functional, fair economic system, they believe government control is necessary, to soften the effects of good and bad economic periods and prevent systemic imbalances. Economists who favor a free-market approach argue that government interference is what causes ups and downs in the first place. They claim that regulation misallocates resources and creates -- rather than softens -- market instability. According to them, a healthy market with maximum long-term growth and fewer highs and lows comes from a free market. Other issues in the debate include privatizing public resources or utilities, the legislative push and pull over regulatory oversight, and the outsized role that money plays in our political system. Privacy Rights The right to privacy is a controversial issue that centers on conflicting priorities between individual privacy and public safety. Over the years, the U.S. government has expanded its capacity to conduct mass surveillance on its citizens in the name of protecting national security interests. Privacy rights advocates argue that government surveillance violates the Fourth Amendment, which prohibits unreasonable search and seizures. They also express concern about private enterprises, like Google and Facebook, that can gather and store vast amounts of personal data. Those who support mass surveillance believe that the threat of terrorism and foreign interference outweighs the right to privacy, arguing that the government should be able to protect Americans through any means necessary. Sharing personal information through social media and e-commerce also creates privacy issues. Many people willingly disclose things like financial data, addresses, and credit records to private entities, which can then be hacked by internet thieves. Vaccines Vaccines have revolutionized global health with life-saving immunity from certain diseases. Polio, smallpox, tetanus, and other infectious diseases are no longer deadly because of innovative vaccines. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), vaccines prevent thousands of Americans from getting infected by diseases each year. Immunization is the best protection against these diseases, especially for children with weak immune systems. They may also help bring the COVID-19 pandemic to a speedier end. But there has been some opposition to vaccines in recent years. The push back against vaccines comes for different reasons, including fear, misconceptions, and mistrust of science. Anti-vaccine activists are often referred to as anti-vaxxers. Some of the most persistent arguments against vaccines include a widespread fear that vaccines cause autism, that natural immunity is better than being inoculated, and that vaccines contain harmful chemicals. Over the years, public health officials, physicians, and medical experts have debunked these claims. Despite that, anti-vaxxers still argue that vaccines can be dangerous and contain hazardous or poorly-researched substances, creating risks that outweigh the benefits. Meanwhile, vaccine supporters believe all parents have a responsibility to comply with medical advice on vaccine administration, protecting their children and strengthening herd immunity for society as a whole. Animal Rights Animal rights advocates believe that animals should be able to live free from use in medical research, hunting, agriculture, and other industries that benefit humans. The central conflict here is about conflicting priorities: protecting animals or serving humanity's needs. According to Gallup, 39% of Americans consider animal research immoral. Gallup found fewer people support medical testing on animals, buying and wearing clothing made of animal fur, and cloning animals in 2020 than they did in previous years. Animal-rights activists argue that animals deserve similar or equal rights as human beings, free from captivity, abuse, or neglect. Additionally, the animal rights movement believes it's immoral to eat animals or use them for labor and research. This also extends to protecting animal habitats from displacement or destruction for purposes like dredging rivers, trawling, agriculture, and urbanization. Opponents of animal rights do not typically advocate for cruel or unnecessary animal abuse, but they believe animals are not equal to humans and that it is morally justified to use animals to benefit human society. Most prominently, they believe that animal research can lead to medical discoveries and improved quality of life for humans, such as testing antibodies on animals to fight against COVID-19. They also argue that animals do not think or feel emotions such as pain, fear, or loneliness. Most people fall somewhere between these two viewpoints. For example, many people support animal rights, but still eat meat. Others are repulsed by animal abuse, but still support using animals to advance medical research. Religious Freedom Religious freedom is considered a fundamental human right for every American. The First Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." Yet, religious liberty continues to be controversial in its execution. Discussions about religion and politics are often polarizing because they dig deep into how people view the world. As the adage says, "don't mix religion and politics." The First Amendment compels the government not to show preference to a specific religion or take away an individual's ability to exercise faith. It also ensures that neither the state nor the church has the power to rule over each other. Under the First Amendment, Americans have the right to practice any faith or to have no faith. Legally, they can do so without fear of government coercion, even in public. In practice, the fiery disagreements over how freedom of religion can and should be expressed have led to clashes over God's mention in the Pledge of Allegiance, displaying the Ten Commandments in public spaces, and businesses denying service based on religious belief. The issue is particularly prevalent around Christianity, which appears in many aspects of public life in the United States, despite not being the official religion. Many people with pro-religious views argue that religious freedom means they have a right to make choices about who they serve or employ and what they display or do based on their religious values. Others argue that religious freedom means not having to follow the trappings of a specific religion in public spaces or required pledges, and also not being denied access to goods, services, or jobs based on their religious beliefs. Abortion The abortion debate has long been one of the most controversial topics in the United States. It centers on a fundamental disagreement over the question of bodily autonomy, as expressed through a person's right to terminate a pregnancy. Abortion became legal in every state following the landmark 1973 Supreme Court case of Roe v. Wade. Every state has at least one abortion clinic, and in 2017, 18% of pregnancies ended in abortion. The debate typically splits into two common viewpoints -- pro-choice and pro-life -which both wrangle with religious, moral, and philosophical beliefs. The pro-life perspective argues that life begins at the moment of conception, and therefore abortion is equivalent to murder. It is seen as an act of violence that can have physical, emotional, and psychological repercussions, even if the pregnancy resulted from rape or incest. Pro-life supporters believe that government intervention to prevent abortions is justified. On the other side, pro-choice argues that people have the right to choose to have an abortion because they have bodily autonomy -- complete control over their own bodies. They believe that it is immoral for the government to make medical decisions on behalf of pregnant people. Thus, the pro-choice perspective opposes federal, state, or local laws that restrict access, impede funding, or create legal obstacles for getting an abortion. Gun Control Gun violence has been a heated debate topic in the U.S. for years. Mass shootings and other acts of gun violence kill nearly 40,000 people every year in the U.S. The gun control debate largely hinges on interpretations of the Second Amendment. It reads: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Advocates for gun rights argue the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" means that the government cannot control the possession of firearms. Thus, they oppose any laws that impact their ability to buy, carry, or accessorize guns. By contrast, gun control advocates focus on the part of the Second Amendment that says gun rights are meant to be "well regulated" by local, state, and federal legislative bodies. They push for stricter gun control laws, including more extensive background checks, regulations on assault weapons, and banning high-capacity magazines. Today, the debate has escalated due to the high rate of gun violence and the rising frequency of mass shootings. In 2019, there were 417 mass shootings in the U.S., according to data from the nonprofit Gun Violence Archive (GVA). The increasing prevalence of mass shootings has sparked fierce debates about the sale of assault rifles, background checks for gun buyers, and the connection between gun violence and mental illness.
