I also disagreed with the parent comment, but meta point: I'm not sure down voting is fair in this situation. Parent seems genuine and earnest in their comment. It seems like it'd be enough to simply reply with the counter point...
It isn't promotion of bad science journalism. It's a crap story, but there are 3 other links in there too. I'm strongly pro-legalization and think the concerns are overblowon, but a lot of people are using the 'bad science' complaint to silence a point of view they dislike.
It's true, I do find the old 'think of the children' appeal to emotion, and the trotting out of the 'gateway drug' myth to be distasteful. However, I'm not silencing anyone's point of view--I don't have admin rights on HN, just the ability to rate comments.
The poster is attempting to incite our fear for the children as a reason to fear the legalization of marijuana. He neglects to mention that Colorado has a 21+ policy, just like alcohol. He's ultimately arguing for a nanny state since he feels he is incapable of raising his children without them consuming the drug.
In short, he's sensationalizing, and that's not doing anyone any good.
