Actually, they spend a lot of money on advertising against drunk driving, not against actual drinking. The government has never established what parameter constitutes a drunk, what constitutes binge drinking, or what litmus test describes an alcoholic. And it doesn't matter, because you've illustrated my point. Private alcohol use and abuse, while not illegal, is neither endorsed nor opposed by the government.

Quote:

We live in a representative republic and the government already tried to outlaw alcohol. The public didn't like it and demanded it be repealed and it was repealed.

Yeah, that's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that the 18th Amendment was passed by the Senate, without public referendum, under the pressure of special interest groups. The public did demand it be repealed, and it was repealed, but not before millions upon millions of tax dollars were wasted, a violent ethnic gang culture created a black market upon which crime empires were built (and which last to this day), and a culture of corruption in law enforcement pervaded every major city in the country. But, hey, that's just another way of looking at it.

Quote:

There is no such demand from the public to repeal laws regarding marijuana being illegal. If there was such an outcry from the public, the government would react. Politicians do afterall want to get reelected. Most politicians in most districts get reelected by promising to crack down on drugs. That includes marijuana. Most of the public agrees.

Actually, just to use California as an example, Prop 215 was passed by a wide margin (56%, more than any president could claim in his wildest dreams) eleven years ago, but was shot down by the Supreme Court. Politicians don't listen to the public as much as they listen to lobbyists, and the law enforcement lobby (ie the Prison Guards' Union, which is the largest opponent to legalization) and alcohol lobbies are more effective at getting politicians' attention. Since the only politicians that are pro-legalization are third-party (read: unelectable), it doesn't seem to be something coming up on the radar of our fine elected incumbents.

Beyond the speculated popularity of a national referendum on pot legalization (which will never happen), why should we even need a referendum? I don't need, or want, the masses' blessing or endorsement to make a lifestyle choice. Marijuana should not be illegal for myriad reasons, none of which are because people like it or don't like it. Justice and law are based on the Constitution, not majority rule.

Quote:

Regarding your comment about big fat heart attacks, some governments are already starting "prohibition" laws on regulating dietary intake. Here in NYC it is now illegal to use certain types of cooking oils in restaurants that contain trans-fat. Do you agree with that government interference?

Why would I? Considering what you know of my political beliefs, why the hell would I condone a fucking French Fry law?

Quote:

Your comment about pill popping shoppers is more indicative of a corrupt and unethical medical establishment than an indictment on government itself. Most prescription medication has valid and sometimes lifesaving uses.

No, my comment on pill-popping is because the government acts as a subsidiary of the pharmaceutical business. You've said so yourself--Why should you smoke marijuana and pay the hippie down the street when you can get Marinol in pill form from Solvay Pharmaceuticals?

And aside from cancer or AIDS patients who prefer smoked or rendered marijuana over the Solvay version, what about the people who get prescribed fucking happy pills? People with stressful lives can come home from a hard day's work and pop a Xanax, or a Valium, or a Zoloft, and essentially, they're self-medicating. They have a prescription because there is no government endorsed test to see who gets to have anti-anxiety meds and who doesn't, and that's because the pharmaceutical lobby in this country wants it that way.

As for pot's "safety", I can guarantee that a lot more people have died due to complications from prescribed anti-anxiety or pain management drugs than have from smoking or eating marijuana.

Quote:

Are you saying.... In your mind, drug use is a lifestyle choice that the government or society in general shouldn't have a vested interest?

Yes, drug use is a lifestyle choice. Law enforcement should stick to "victim" crimes, protecting The People from violence, fraud, and corruption, not from themselves. They should punish those who hurt others, not those who might hurt themselves. There is the inevitable argument that drugs lead people to hurt others, and if that is the case, they should be held accountable for their own actions regardless, thereby making the point moot. Drug use in and of itself should not be a crime. Or I should say that it is not a crime, though it is currently treated as such.

Quote:

I agree with you in that statement. Unfortunately the government is involved with molding the thought processes of children in today's society. But that is a discussion for another thread and another topic.

No, the idea that the government is involved in taking the role of thought molder for children away from parents and other role models is inherent to this discussion, here and now. I don't want to pay for anti-drug rhetoric propaganda in the schools, because it doesn't work, and in my opinion, it only does more damage.

I don't want my child to grow up in an environment of government-induced fear and paranoia about adult issues. It is my job to introduce my child to the world in all its marred up glory. My job to tell him what is right and what is wrong. I don't want my child to be told that because I occasionally responsibly hit the reefer, I am a fucking criminal, that I support terrorism and the murder of Colombian judges and marijuana is the gateway drug and I'll become a junkie and steal the TV and beat Mommy and all the other unfounded bullshit that comes spewing out the mouth of the Ministry. Let the government stick to what it does best--defense, infrastructure, and basic services, and let me talk to my family about drugs.

It has taken me a good long time to bleed out that D.A.R.E. Nancy Reagan Just Say No Won't Someone Think Of The Children bullshit that they pumped up my ass since I first started kindergarten. It's taken me a long time to figure out that the world is not a horrible, loathsome place, that not everyone is out to get me, and that I don't need the bosom of my mother to run to or Johnny Law to help guide me. Johnny Law can't help me. Johnny Law won't help me. And I don't need him to. I'm free.

When are you going to figure it out?