Dear people who believe that it should be your choice what you do with your own womb: please apply the same ethics to your synapses, and exercise them accordingly in the voting booth.
2- The argument is different.
The question underlying abortion is about the status of the unborn baby. Is it a separate life that needs to be protected by law or is it part of you. If it is part of you at first, when does it become an individual?
The question about drugs is about self harm. Should we let people harm themselves? To what point drug use is considered self harm? How should we categorize drugs (most people agree that heroin is bad, psychedelics are more debatable)? Are substance bans effective?
Until recently it was pretty hard to find any politician outside of the libertarian party who would even go on the record as being pro cannabis, though former house Speaker Boehner now works for the industry. But if you look at public intellectuals, there have been lots of conservatives opposed to both abortion on demand and drug prohibition. As far as I know both have been the editorial position of National Review for decades, and William F Buckley was quite vocal on the moral failings of the war on some drugs.
Theocons like Pat Robertson have been calling for cannabis to be regulated like alcohol for over a decade.
The Mercer family, who were the primary funders of Trump and Bannon-era Breitbart are certainly pro-life. They also are the single largest donors to MAPS in support of the FDA trials on MDMA therapy for PTSD.
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/25/nyregion/new-jersey-marij...
Abortion is a pressing practical issue People may be very vocal about it.
Psychedelics is mostly an issue of recreation, even without a few millennia of consumption ingrained into culture like alcohol.
So the efforts people exert to legalize each are commensurate to how pressing each issue is.
The issue comes that there arent exactly a lot of candidates talking about legalization, especially beyond marijuana.