Fortunately, you don't get to decide whether others can fly or not.
It has nothing to do with Political Correctness, it has to do with
individual responsibility.
No one is suggesting that a pilot should fly when he or she is ill or
affected by medications,
but the "one size fits all" solution that FAA medical requirements impose do
not apply to gliders, period!
If this is such a hard concept to grasp, one wonders how one ever passed the
written and
practical tests to get a certificate in the first place.

There many reasons for not having a FAA medical, among which is the
impossibility of documenting
many of things in one's medical history. Many folks have not lost their
medical, it merely ran out and
they chose not to renew it. In addition, prescription drugs affect people
in different ways.
What might put you under the table, could go unnoticed by me.

Since you are so devoted to solutions that require a law suit, perhaps we
should do as some Doctors are doing; they
are refusing to treat malpractice lawyers for routine or non-essential
medical conditions. As a proponent of law suits to
get your way, perhaps the gliding community ought not to allow you to have
tows or operate your glider. After all, one
does not wish to be sued. Let me say it again so that you understand: no
element of Part 67 applies to glider pilots.
The reasons are myriad and have been discussed often here. Why is it so
hard to grasp?

Allan

"Chris OCallaghan" wrote in message
om...

However, if anyone were harmed by a glider pilot taking drugs for a
condition that precluded him/her from obtaining a third-class medical,
I would heartily endorse suing the pilot or his estate.