The whole point of all of these decentralized peer 2 peer blockchains is censorship resistance. That's it. The code doesn't (and shouldn't) make subjective measurements about the transactions or their payloads. It's job is not to evaluate the content, but to enable frictionless and censorship free transacting. That is the point of all of this. It's freedom. A hammer can be used to build a house or kill a person. It doesn't mean hammers should be selectively illegal. Society can enforce and regulate it's problems itself outside of the constructs of infrastructure, which is what it should have been doing all along. If a particular society has problems with people killing people with hammers, or sniffing paint, it needs to be addressed the tough way... at the human level.

Blockchain infrastructures should not cater to jurisdictions or particular sensitivities selectively. That is a slippery slope. Today we say "okay let's make an exception for not selling drugs, but everything else is okay..." and then tomorrow it's "well certain books are too controversial... we should outlaw certain books too". This is why the hard fork in Ethereum set a dangerous precedent as well. It's also critical to understand that with blockchains the centralization has shifted from the code and database to the people with commit access. We should always be vigilant about government agencies leaning on devs to make commits that introduce censorship selectively in to the code. You aren't always going to like what people sell on the market, but your choices are to not participate in those markets.

tl;dr - Guys all of this stuff is about your right to privacy and civil liberties, not about "drugs".