Which one is more dangerous "
for you" is fairly subjective depending on your use of both substances. FOr people who are predispoosed to be alcoholics, alcohol is certainly more dangerous, but for people who consume recommended or safe levels of either, both are innocuous. As somebody who is pro-marijuana I'm tired of the stupid argument "smoking a joint every day is just like having a glass of wine with dinner," because it isn't. Most people who have a glass of wine with dinner aren't becoming intoxicated, where as most people who smoke every day are becoming intoxicated by that. If you're having a
bottle of wine with dinner every night, then I think it's a more applicable analogy. But very few "defenders" of alcohol would ever defend the consumption of a bottle of wine every day. But, of course, this is completely subjective. There are people who are relatively unaffected by both (me, it takes me
a lot of smoking to get high; it takes me
a lot of drinking to get properly drunk).
Which one is more damaging for society is alcohol.
Though, that alcohol has been an acceptable beverage for tens of thousands of years in virtually every human civilization known to man, has created an environment where alcohol consumption is a reliably known thing. It's created reliable ways of producing, distributing, consuming, and enforcing the consumption... We have reliable techniques for testing someone's alcohol toxicity, we generally have a reliable scale to know when somebody has had too much to drink to do things that they shouldn't do after drinking. We don't yet have that for marijuana.
Something that I like more about drinking than I do about smoking is that I have a known quantity for what's going to get me properly drunk or what's going to affect me in 2 or 3 hours. This isn't the case with weed for me, where variance in THC levels can differ based on the strain, how it's prepared, and how it's ingested. Now, as marijuana becomes more ubiquitous, you'll see a normalization and reduction in variances, but it will still take decades to get this to a reliable level that's widely known and measurable.
An issue with marijuana that's going to be a problem for legalization is the edibles market. Somebody in the industry needs to step in and make clear labeling and clearly expressed amounts in each serving. This is currently a wild west market, and while some stores are properly labelling, it's not universal and it needs to be. In comparison to alcohol, this would be like going to one store and buying a budweiser that has 4.3% alcohol, and then going to another store and buying a similarly labeled budweiser that has 18% alcohol. Because alcohol has been culturally acceptable for all of human history in every major civilization the world over, it is now a known quantity. Most beers are between 4% and 7%, specialty beers may be higher, but everything is adjusted for it. Most bars that serve high ABV beers are specialty bars, and they serve them in specialty glasses, and the price jumps up. Drinking 4 budweisers has a predictable effect on most people who have drank budweiser before, where as even seasoned weed smokers can get knocked off their tits with a single edible which may not be clearly labeled or distributed, and because the effects set in at a varying rate, it's difficult to assess the affects. My wife smokes mostly every day, but we had weed gummies a month ago and she got properly wrecked because the edible isn't a known quantity. Further, alcohol has a distinct taste and beers or drinks with higher alcohol levels are fairly easy for most people to assess immediately... When I have a strong drink at a bar, I go "Ugh... that's fucking all booze," or "Jesus, this is strong." Our palettes are equipped to recognize high alcohol levels almost instantly.
As marijuana becomes legalized in more states, I am hoping a big player in the industry steps up normalizing the edible market, because the more that it becomes available, you're going to hear several high profile cases and it's going to create a stigma of danger for the drug that could continue to keep it illegal. The Maureen Dowd article is a good example of this, and legalization advocates shouldn't just brush it off, because it'll be a problem for the legalization movement.
One causes cancer. (totally legal)
One helps cancer patients. (illegal)
Seems backwards, IMO.
Your point isn't lost, but FYI, Alcohol is not totally legal. It is a regulated substance that has federal restrictions on its creation, distribution, advertising, sale, and consumption.