Some interesting topics came up at work today, in conversations with doctors, patients and co-workers. One such topic (brought up by a patient) was the legalization of marijuana. Involved in the conversation were the patient, her daughter, the doctor and myself. Everyone seemed to feel pretty much the same way: that pot is more or less harmless, when compared to other drugs, alcohol and tobacco. Also mentioned was that if it were legalized, it could be taxed and regulated. So you'd think the government would be all for legalization.
Same subject arose later amongst co-workers. The same doctor, myself and two other employees were talking. Everybody had more or less the same feelings described earlier. The doctor even pointed out that, as far as total effect on overall body health, alcohol and tobacco/nicotine are far worse than marijuana. Also agreed upon was that the same rules should apply to smokers as to drinkers. Such as acceptable (legal) levels and DUI penalties, etc. so what's the big deal that makes it different?
The other topic of note was gay marriage, and the separation of church and state. If the two (church and state) are completely separate entities, then why are gays forbidden to legally marry on grounds of it being morally (religiously) wrong? One person even went so far to say that marriages should not be performed in churches - that "marriage" is a legal arrangement and therefore should be handled by legal officials. Here I disagree. People should be able to get married wherever the hell they want to get married. You have to go to the courthouse and do the paperwork before you can get married, in a church or otherwise. Legally married, that is. So whose business is it where they perform the ceremony? Or how old they are (as long as they are legal adults)? Or whether they are gay or straight? If the church (any church) chooses not to recognize a gay marriage, then so be it. But why does that dictate the government's stand on the issue?