Indeed we should fund this together on an individual basis voluntarily and not by the point of a gubment gun.

I agree. The obvious logical conclusion is to legalize all drugs. We could then actually start working on the real problems like addiction and crimes that cause real harms.

I suppose you would agree to prohibit by law the use of coffee, sugar, cigarettes, alcohol, and other gateway substances since use of these substances has been shown to lead to more powerful "stuff". More to your point, legalizing a "gateway" substance should actually lower the urge to move on to a stronger substance that would be illegal since one would no longer have to deal with the criminal element to acquire the "gateway" substance.

Legalizing marijuana would naturally allow funneling of profits from criminals that don't mind breaking the law anyway to law-abiding entrepreneurs. This would bankrupt the monstrous illicit trafficking military "gangs" that harm so many. Of course, we will never completely get rid of this type of blight but surely we can have so much better than what exists today.

Yes. That is Jared's strawman...doctors that don't get rewarded for coming up with treatments/cures. He created this to say that profits will not drive cures. And no facts were given to back him up.

Indeed I am referring to Frederic Bastiat. It is a fallacy to consider only the benefits from crime prevention/clean up when discussing crime's consequences. The resources used for this activity could have likely been better used for something else more constructive. So, crime actually makes us all poorer by channeling limited resources to less constructive activities than they would have been otherwise.

Your inquiry about strawman.

My point is, when applied abstinence is much better at preventing pregnancy than contraception. Is it so unrealistic to expect someone to practice abstinence? If the fact that abstinence is 100% and contraception is not in preventing pregnancy is taught at least they will know their chances for whatever choice is chosen.

Something you created out of thin air without facts that you use to tear down to attempt to prove your point. In other words, I think you don't have any facts to prove your point.

As individuals we do not have the right to kill somone except in self-defense of imminent danger. Any killing after the fact is revenge. If I do not posses the right how can I grant the right to my government or to sociey. I can not. Therefore, society can not possess the right to kill someone as a punishment.

No. It is not fair and it is very harmful to all.