If it is a social event outside the work place/hours, you can drink but don't get fucked up and vomit in a pint glass. If weed is legal, you can go outside and smoke like tobacco but, again, don't get fucked up and try to hump a pot plant or something.
Simple.
Just imo: if you don't drink but have a problem with others doing so then there is something wrong with you, not with the people who drink.
And speaking from experience, the people who do have a problem with others drinking tend to be motivated by religions that conflict with accepted ideals of liberal democracy (i.e. they look down on people who drink, believe they are unclean/mad/whatever).
However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk.
But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever.
Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone.
One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.
Considering it's almost certainly illegal to spark up a cigarette in that same context, since there are laws against smoke indoors almost everywhere, I question whether it actually is "just as legal" for you to spark up a joint.
But what I can tell you from my experience in Seattle, if you failed to be discrete about eating a brownie, you'd find yourself hounded by people who wanted some too.
Sparking up a joint in hotels or university buildings is unlikely, as smoking is already banned indoors. But greater acceptance of sparking up a joint elsewhere may well be coming. When I traveled around Uruguay in the time after marijuana was legalized, I occasionally found that customer-facing people like a bicycle repairman or greengrocer were smoking a joint while serving me.
Go to the south of France and get a job there, you’ll see a very interesting take on this topic.
Yeah. It’s honestly really annoying. This is a big problem in tech, too, and I’ve seen it lead to a lot of alienation between employees. I don’t think alcohol belongs in any kind of professional setting at all. Should I be able to spark up a joint, too? That’s just as legal as alcohol here.