Legalizing marijuana in your given state, province or country has the additional benefit of being able to place a tax on the commercial sale of a drug normally sold on the black market: since they've passed legalization bills, California, Washington and Colorado have all generated more than $1 billion. This is a sum of money too small to ignore (although not necessarily in contrast to the overall budget of these states). Where should states/nations invest this revenue? Some ideas proposed include directing funding towards awareness campaigns, public schools, or human services. Since the United States is currently in an opioid epidemic, it also seems wise to consider forwarding resources to address this public health crisis concerning more dangerous drugs. Given the money comes from vending citizens an unhealthy substance, what's the most ethical solution?

Many people agree that, if marijuana is less dangerous than alcohol and smoking (two legalized substances), marijuana ought to be legalized as well. But given that there are plenty of other drugs both less and more dangerous than alcohol, it seems using alcohol as a an arbitrary cutoff point is rather random. In my opinion, its worth fleshing out our reasoning a bit. Given there are plenty of arguments for legalizing the recreational use of relatively "safe" drugs, at what precise level of danger do you think drugs should be banned by the government? Should ALL drugs be prohibited/legalized? What other cutoff point would you propose?

In the United States, how has the illegality of marijuana been used in the past to disproportionately convict and charge people of color? How should this history be taken into account when examining the broader question of legalization?

Geriatric depression, along with dementia, is one of the most common health issues the elderly face. Depression can often lead to suicidal thoughts. Alternatively, many "healthy" older adults fear dying in hospitals, in an unfamiliar environment, surrounded by tubes and machines. Anticipating further physical or mental deterioration, these people may decide it is better to end their life on their own terms. To further cloud the ethical waters, it is not always clear to which group a given elderly person belongs to. In many societies, the concept of suicide is often considered a taboo subject. However, this is inimical to structuring reasonable, respectful debates. Given that this is a pressing issue, its important that open, serious discussion is held. For autonomous, aging adults, is it ever possible for suicide to be considered a "rational" option? If you disagree, what are some alternative methods of treatment you'd suggest instead? If you agree, where would you draw the line? In general, how does this subject link with geriatric depression? What about elderly people battling terminal illnesses with no sign of treatment? Or those suffering particularly painful illnesses? More personally, how does your particular country/culture handle this sensitive issue?