Should marijuana be legalized?

According to this article, public opinion on marijuana has changed.  The newer generation is more open to changes socially and economically than older generations in America.  Justice John Paul Stevens, although from the older generation and age 94, believes that marijuana should be legalized by the federal government.  Justice John Paul Stevens is retired now, but said that, "There isn't much difference between marijuana and alcoholic beverages."  Many people are starting to compare marijuana in its illegal state to alcohol during the 20th century in the "dry" or prohibition era.  According to this article, from 1920 to 1933 when alcohol was illegal, Will Rogers said, "Prohibition is better than no liquor at all."  Will Rogers knew that even during the period where alcohol was supposed to be illegal, he could always get a drink somewhere.  I believe that marijuana should be legalized so that laws can be set regulating it.  For example, alcohol has laws about not being able to drink and drive, not being able to buy or drink alcohol under the age of 21, etc.  If weed were to be legalized, there would be so many standards on it that it would be more difficult for adolescents to get their hands on it.  This would mean that more responsible young adults would be consuming or smoking marijuana.  With weed being illegal right now, it makes it easier for young adults and teenagers to gain access of it.

Protecting the Unborn

According to this article, women will not be able to receive an abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy.  This bill will be signed by Mississippi Gov. Phil Bryant who is looking forward to signing the bill that will ban the abortion of a half term pregnancy.  Bryant says, "This measure represents a great effort to protect the unborn in Mississippi."  I agree with this statement completely.  I am pro choice to a certain point.  Yes, I would rather see someone go through with a pregnancy, but I do know that there are many reasons why women would not be able to have a child due to financial issues, age, timing, etc.  However, I don't think that it is right for women to have an abortion after 20 weeks.  As the length of the pregnancy increases, the riskier that the procedure becomes.  The bills exceptions would be that abortion would still be an option after 20 weeks if the woman would face death or permanent injury due to the pregnancy, or severe fetal abnormality.  In order for the clinic to determine the fetal age, the woman would undergo a sonogram.  Senator Deborah Dawkins argues that this bill would affect poor women.  "..Those who have money and want an abortion could still travel out of state to get one."  Sen. Dawkins argues that this bill will be unfair to poor women because they would not be able to afford to travel out of state.  However, this bill just puts limits on when women are allowed to receive abortions, not completely outlawing them.  Women would have 20 weeks to make a decision, so this bill should not pose a threat or seem as if they are targeting women, or specifically poor women.  Senator Angela Hill voted for the bill and said, "This is not about the women's body.  This is about the life of an unborn 20-week baby."  This bill is meant to protect someone who is incapable of protecting themselves.