When the state legalizes something (alcohol or drugs), it not only removes the legal consequences but it also takes away the moral stigma from the use of the formerly illegal product. I implies that the state sanctions that use. Meanwhile, the tradeoffs that are made ignored by dilettantes, sophists, and sophomoric ninnies.
When the state legalizes something (alcohol or drugs), it not only removes the legal consequences but it also takes away the moral stigma from the use of the formerly illegal product. I implies that the state sanctions that use.
By that 'logic' the state also sanctions the legal activities of cheating on one's fiancee and insulting one's spouse. Sane people know that this ridiculous conclusion invalidates your ridiculous premise ... but then, sane people don't let government define their morality.
Meanwhile, the tradeoffs that are made ignored by dilettantes, sophists, and sophomoric ninnies.
What do you claim is being "traded off" against what else? Can the government legitimately trade away individual liberties for some other good allegedly obtainable thereby?