Thursday night was alive with political discussion as Biola professors and students gathered in the Café banquet room to discuss issues from this week’s election.

The hour-long discussion about economics, gay marriage and marijuana was led by professors David Peters and Scott Waller of the political science department, and Andy Draycott and Richard Langer of the biblical studies department.

Looking at Prop 19

Proposition 19, also known as the Regulate, Control and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010, is a California ballot proposition on the legalization of marijuana growth and use. The proposition, which was rejected by voters Tuesday, would have allowed local governments to regulate these activities while imposing fees and taxes on marijuana related activities.

Waller was against the proposition. “You don’t want your doctor to be high while he is performing an operation on you,” Waller said.

The Controlled Substance Act supports Waller’s arguments. The act classifies the marijuana plant as a schedule one drug, a drug with a high tendency for abuse, that is not sold in pharmacies and is in the same camp as heroin or ecstasy. According to federal laws, despite its long history of use as a medication, cannabis is classified as a new drug and legal access is only possible through an investigational new drug application issued by the Food and Drug Administration.

Waller then introduced the California “Easy Voter Guide” that included information on Proposition 19. The “Easy Voter Guide” informed Californians on how and why they should have voted.

“It is against the law to use marijuana,” Waller said, reading aloud from the guide. “Prop. 19 would allow persons 21 and over to grow marijuana for recreational use.”

Waller gave a hypothetical argument in favor of Proposition 19. “We are wasting money on convicting people for just using marijuana,” Waller said, playing devil’s advocate with himself.

However, Langer said that, as Christians, “it is good to make a mental decision between God’s will and society’s morals.”

“I wish we could have anti-adultery laws, but it wouldn’t go over like the anti-drug laws,” Langer said.

Panel addresses economic situation

The panel also discussed economics. With the economy in a downward spiral, the professors answered the questions with words of hope.

“We are called to be generous givers, even if that’s for social programs,” Draycott said. “We should not have a ‘what makes me richer’ mindset when we vote.”

Peters agreed. “When we vote we think of how it’s going to affect our family,” Peters said. “What should we do? We should be prepared to give our brothers and sisters assistance. The rich are getting richer while mainstream America is left out. We seek the Lord around us to ask what we should do.”

Gay marriage still a central issue

The evening’s discussion came to an end with the topic of gay marriage.

“There are strong Scriptural teachings on this view,” Waller said. “We need to be a community to show Christ’s likeness and love, while not going soft on the truth.”
Many opposed to Proposition 8 deem the proposition unfair and claim that marriage is more of a legal issue, canceling God out of the equation.

“The importance is getting marriage right,” Langer said. “We need long-term stable structures to maintain our generations.”

Jackie Garcia, a political science major, commented on the political discussion.
“I learned a lot this evening,” she said. “I was heading into election day somewhat ignorant until tonight. I’m now confident in my ballot.”