YES Network.com

If someone is terminally ill, and marijuana eases their discomfort and suffering in their final stages, then so be it. Even if it only serves as a placebo, who is getting hurt? Lets be compassionate to the dying, and not apply the same standard we would to a "healthy" individual using it. If we equate one to the other, we are simply being Puritanical and ultimately doing more harm than good.

On an aside... I think the widespread cigarette bans are rediculous. I am not a smoker, myself, but I find it disturbing that local governments are essentially outlawing smoking in all public places. I can understand restricting the practice based on the size of the establishment, given information on 2nd hand smoke, but in large restaurants and bars? I have a problem with governments, be they local, state, or federal entering into the realm of personal choice and deciding what is and what isn't good for us. If I choose to smoke, that should be my choice - again, the only acceptable limit should arise when my choice impacts another individual (ie: 2nd hand smoke). Interestingly enough, the same discussion could be had about marijuana...

The trans fat ban falls under the same logic, however. If I want to clog my arteries with trans fats, then that should be my choice. We are headed towards a very sterile society, in which we will not have to worry about the burden of making choices about what we put into our bodies, or how we spend our time. The wheel is very much in motion for the government (be it local, federal, or state) to decide what is "good" and what is "bad" for us.

The issue is not "trans fats" or "smoking" in and of themselves. Its the principle of the matter. What business does the government have in deciding on matters of personal choice?