Lose the War on Drugs
I agree with Earl that the prohibition experience shows why it's pointless to ban certain substances. I often favor a society in which government allows people to do any thing, while culture encourages people to do the right thing.
I don't "get" pot and I never liked pot. But I've also seen, based on my Muslim teetotalling background, how counterproductive it is to ban a popular substance, since a) it pushes it underground, turning ordinary people into criminals, and b) it adds to its popularity by giving it a compellingly rogue quality.
It's the same reason I side with the Amethyst Initiative folks in seeking to lower the drinking age: Making something off limits often guarantees it'll be inordinately coveted by those who aren't given permission to have it. Hmm, maybe marriage falls in that category too....
Except nobody is being prevented from getting married. They just can't marry the same sex, or their dog, or six women, or the couch. So, no, don't think that's the same category.
Also, although I really like this statement:
I often favor a society in which government allows people to do any thing, while culture encourages people to do the right thing.
...that shouldn't apply to kids. And anyone who works around a university should know full well that most undergraduates are just still kids. Tacitly encouraging drinking in that population is not necessarily such a hot idea, as many parents would agree.
Diane -- we may need to redefine what adults are, if they're really still kids. We allow a girl to go to war at 18 and allow her to vote for president, a right long granted only to adult male property-owners in many republics. Past generations also expected a 14 year old to get married and start raising a family. So we have to figure out what works for our changing times.
As for the marriage thing, my main point is that, if you absolutely forbid someone from marrying their couch, they'd take to the streets to get that right. Life's too short to create and fight all those battles, and I believe a small government approach becomes wise here in light of that. I guess I do still have some libertarian in me....
I tend to agree with your second paragraph more than your first. The kids today are not the same kids who were expected to start earning their living at 14. Our culture has moved the "age of responsibility" up further and further (primarily 18 or 21, depending on the issue), and with good reason. We have somewhat glorified this half kid/half adult period known as adolescence, we have greatly extended the time period for "educational preparation" from previous generations... all this tends to a later date of expecting complete maturity (or at least what passes for it).
And now science agrees! All that research about the brain not being fully developed till early 20s certainly militates toward moving more things in the direction of 21, not more things in the direction of 18.