Utilitarianism in Legalization of Marijuana

| 1 Comment | No TrackBacks

In this New York Times article, Kirk Johnson shares the discussion being had on the legalization of marijuana in accordance with the legalization of alcohol. He uses utilitarianism to look at the costs and benefits of legalizing marijuana based on the results from legalizing alcohol. He references prohibition and talks about the outcome of the situation in that time period. He identifies possible actions and consequences, and assigns values to the costs and benefits of legalizing a drug so many perceive to be so harmful. In talking about who would be affected, specifically the people in Washington state and Colorado, he quantifies values.

In terms of Deontology, Johnson briefly touches on the virtues and vices of viewing marijuana like we view alcohol. He talks about the desire some of these states have to make marijuana legal considering the economic growth it would instigate. However, there are some people in the same states who are focusing more on the vices, saying that should marijuana usage become legal, it would be a "'Largely state-sanctioned fraud," according to Colorado's attorney general, John W. Suthers. His belief is that "We have thousands and thousands of people lying to doctors, saying they have a debilitating medical condition."


When it comes down to the ethics of legalizing a drug, it really depends on whom you're talking to because everyone's sense of morals and ethics differ to some extent. Through careful consideration of hypothetical imperative, it all comes down to what is "right" and what is "good" for a person, which begs the question of what are our Welfare rights and how do we classify this? Is it in everybody's best interest to legalize this drug? Is it possible to regulate marijuana like we do alcohol? Do we even want to lump marijuana in the same category as alcohol after some of the major problems alcohol usage has caused? When we can answer these questions with a uniform response, we can then come to a moral and ethical agreement on whether or not legalizing marijuana will be beneficial or detrimental to our society.

No TrackBacks

TrackBack URL: https://blogs.psu.edu/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/321769

1 Comment

Legalizing marijuana is and has been a large debate for many years. A lot of people have both positive and negative issues with the legalization and I do too. There are some positives to legalizing it in my opinion. Even though the government has some legal uses for marijuana, I think if it was legal they could make a lot more money if they had complete control over the distribution. I also think the legalization could lower the crime rate. A lot less violent acts would occur because a lot of crimes and murders are over drugs and a lot of people would even get into those situations if they could get the same stuff legally. Some negatives are definitely over use of the drug and of course very easy access to the public. The legalization of marijuana ethically to me is on the fence. I can't say it is right but I also cant say that its wrong.

Leave a comment

Subscribe to receive notifications of follow up comments via email.
We are processing your request. If you don't see any confirmation within 30 seconds, please reload your page.

Categories

Pages

Subscribe

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by MONICA LEE CONSBRUCK published on January 26, 2012 7:41 PM.

John Stewart and Stephen Colbert taking jokes too far? was the previous entry in this blog.

Hollywood Moguls, SOPA, Obama is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.