Let’s not forget that bug pharma and the alcohol lobbies are against the legalization of any serious competitor. That equates to politicians being against it.
Conservatives, per se, are not against legalizing marijuana, as it is not a true conservative position. However, many who do not understand true conservatism, but who yet claim to be “conservatives”, often rail against marijuana use.
Now, that being said, the OP illustrates the typical confusion of those who do not understand the true ideals of either conservatism or liberalism.
In 1996, the populace of California and Arizona voted to legalize marijuana use for medicinal purposes. The Clinton administration threatened the enforcement of federal law to prohibit the citizens of California and Arizona from using medical marijuana.
So, why are liberals against legalizing marijuana?
Big Pharma is already in on it:
“MARINOL® is a synthetic version of a naturally occurring compound known as delta-9-THC. Delta-9-THC stimulates appetite and reduces nausea and vomiting by binding to special receptors found in the nervous system.”
“A cannabinoid dose-related “high” (easy laughing, elation and heightened awareness) has been reported by patients receiving MARINOL® in both the antiemetic (24%) and the lower dose appetite stimulant clinical trials (8%)”
http://abbottgrowth-us.com/products/marinolproductinformation/0,998,12413-2-0,00.htm
To expand on this comment, a good example would be those who rail against the “conservative” George W Bush administration, when he ran his administration like a Wilsonian democrat.
Cite? I’ll have to say, I have never heard of either tobacco or alcohol lobbying on this subject. I suspect this is one of those “oh, it must be true” kind of things.
Neither party holds the same ideals as they did 100 years ago. Your point is…?
Let’s take a look at the situation in the Netherlands (where I live).
In case you’re not aware, it’s technically illegal to grow, possess or sell marijuana over here.
Now, because the overall consensus is that enforcing most of these laws WRT marijuana will do more harm than good (health wise, financially and legally), the laws regarding possession and growing are not enforced if it’s for personal use - basically, a couple of plants or a few grams of MJ is allowed - and licenses can be handed out by the cities for shops to sell MJ.
This part of the system is supported by the majority of political parties (the only ones who are vocally against it are the Christians), and by pretty much all of the larger cities (who do the majority of enforcement).
But there is no system in place for production. This means, that all those shops that are “legally” allowed to sell their products, must make all kinds of illegal deals to get their stock. This is a very obvious problem, and it’s an obvious opportunity for organized crime to take hold of.
The major cities are actually in favor of legalization of production. The Christians are very much against - at leas on the national level. But most of the other major parties - even the ones that appear to be at least in principle in favor of legalization - are very careful not to turn this into a big debate. There’s no voters in it. The people in favor of legalization will vote for them (or not at all) anyway, while there are still plenty of people - mostly older ones, the rural voters, the people who are “tough on crime” - who don’t like the idea and they might lose their votes if they made it a big issue on the campaigns.
Let’s confine this discussion to marijuana legalization and leave out other issues like torture. And Der Trihs, assertions that conservatives and opposed to pleasure, music, and kindness do nothing for this debate.
Chalk up another conservative for legalization. On Bricker’s scale, I’d be a “1”. Legalize it, tax the hell out of it, and you’ve created a painless new revenue stream for the State and/or Uncle Sugar.
It hasn’t helped that politics can’t keep its paws off science. Many of the studies of MJ/THC have been biased going in, resulting in a lot of propaganda against it. On the other side, the pro-groups have done a lot of the same. So we have a whole lot of biased studies drowning out what true knowledge is out there. Thus we’ve essentially removed science from the mix, making it more about dogma, money and headlines.
How does this differ from your feelings about alcohol and tobacco? And if it does not differ, do you think the government reaction should still be different?
The criminalization of pot is primarily (imo) legal desocialization. Instead of being able to offer a toke to a random passerby, starting a conversation and maybe finding some common interests and making a friend, the thought police have us looking our shoulders for citizen narcs. Fear, more fear.
As others have said, its not all conservatives… but likely social conservatives. And, I think this is primarily due to an image problem. THC is already legal in pill form.
How about telling us what “conservative” actually means instead of snarking at those who supposedly have the wrong impression.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard this argued before. What is the basis of your theory?
[disclaimer]I’ve never inhaled the shit.[/disclaimer]
But, inexplicably, I love the stink and the folks it seems to attract. I have found that a good doobie is much like a campfire. Enough said? If not, I will go on, but please, don’t Bogart.
In a more serious vein in answer to OP, legalizing mj would put a lot of people out of meaningless (anti-social) work, My fav bumper sticker is “DARE to think for yourself.”
Bricker, could you explain why you oppose legalization of marijuana? Is it because you think it would further societal disorder, or would increase health problems, or because you think it’s a gateway drug, etc?
I’m not looking to even comment on your views here; I’m just curious. I mean, I figure that way we at least know why one conservative opposes legalization.
While I disagree, for the most part, I do thank you for explaining it to me.
Sure, but are there any examples of conservatives with that opinion? 
And I truly thank you for asking here. Saves my starting a thread.
So, do you inhale … I thought not. Me neither.