"Since you can't objectively state why one drug should be preferred over another.
Sure I can. How about this:
"21 USCS Section 811. Authority and criteria for classification of substances.
c) Factors determinative of control or removal from schedules. In making any finding under subsection (a) of this section or under subsection (b) of section 202 [21 USCS Section 812(b)], the Attorney General shall consider the following factors with respect to each drug or other substance proposed to be controlled or removed from the schedules:
(1) Its actual or relative potential for abuse.
(2) Scientific evidence of its pharmacological effect, if known.
(3) The state of current scientific knowledge regarding the drug or other substance.
(4) Its history and current pattern of abuse.
(5) The scope, duration, and significance of abuse.
(6) What, if any, risk there is to the public health.
(7) Its psychic or physiological dependence liability.
(8) Whether the substance is an immediate precursor of a substance already controlled under this title.
Pretty darn objective, huh? I can live with it. Can you, or would you like to offer some changes?
This deserved a separate post.
No, it is legal for us to be drunk smokers. Who said it was fine? (Moreover, who said the Pilgrims were drunk smokers?)
It is because of that attitude held by you and your ilk that most of the laws are written. You, who think that because something is legal, it's "fine" to do it. No wonder we have so many laws.
What happened to self-restraint? Character? Morality? Self-respect?
You look at the laws and say, "Hey. It's not illegal so I can do it and don't you dare impose your morals on me!", right? I bet I'm right.