VANITY: Sunday Alcohol Sales....Blue laws good or bad?

Georgia Dawg

[NinoFan]

Your statement sounded very objectivist in nature, so no, the question was not irrelevant.

[Froufrou]

In the case of Albertson's, it is not a matter of law but of company policy. They reserve the right to refuse service to anyone, as does any purveyor of commerce.

[metesky]

Blue Laws were always only kept by the unconnected anyway. On Cape Cod, years ago when these laws were still in effect, one went to a certain variety store in Hyannis to get beer on Sunday and to a pharmacy in Harwich for that bottle of "medicinal" Jack Daniels.

If one craved company on a Sunday when the bars didn't open until noon, one went to a certain Leaning Tower of Pizza on Rt. 28 in West Yarmouth where the back door was always open to early worshippers.

[Froufrou]

That may be a little before my time, pilgrim... ;o) Although we prob'ly still do, in TX.

[NinoFan]

Actually, the tradition used to be more about doing business on Sunday than it was about selling alchol on Sunday. As the scope of the laws fell due to greed, only the more offensive stuff, such as alcohol, remained restricted.

[stuartcr]

Then what's the use of voting about it?

[Maceman]

Well I guess I was not one of the connected.

[Froufrou]

Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. Depends on the drunk and the consequences. I don't like a lot of things and I put up with them. I like to think of it as being a law-abiding citizen, but that's just one of my idiosyncracies.

[stuartcr]

How long does it take to go to the store where you live?

[linda_22003]

Then keep Sunday as a quiet day, as we generally do. You are not forced to take part in commercial enterprises on any day of the week.

[Froufrou]

I think you're right. IIRC, there were other things that were forbidden, like toys and ladies stockings. I think it was that you could only buy food and certain supplies...?

[NinoFan]

The referendum in question has been defeated in recent years, so you can't say democracy hasn't had its say. What gets annoying is when a community soundly rejects a proposal to change the law and reaffirms its tradition, but the opposition keeps trying to change the law with the intent of eventually just wearing people out and having them say, "Heck with it." It's a rather puerile method if you ask me, but oh well.

[humblegunner]

The point is to respect the sabbath whether or not one observes it.

I fail to see what restricting my grocery purchases on Sunday achieves toward respecting the sabbath.

[stuartcr]

Didn't you read all of what michael.sf said?

[Protagoras]

In the case of Albertson's, it is not a matter of law but of company policy.

No problem.

[wireman]

Trust me, it isn't.

If (or when) it becomes your problem, the person is breaking the law and then I wholeheartedly recommend that a severe penalty be meted out.

You're up in arms about booze and tobacco today Froufrou!

[LexBaird]

I'm not talking about your family's tradition. I'm talking about the community tradition which in many places in the South (as well as other parts of the US) involved the prohibition of the sale of certain kinds of things on Sundays.

So, you would have no problem with the States of the Mountain West prohibiting you by law from buying any booze or tobacco at any time. It's a regional tradition not to partake of these.

The South has a lot of cultural customs. Let's make biscuits and gravy mandatory Sunday breakfast. Let's outlaw unsugared tea. Let's arrest anyone not in church on Sunday morning for vagrancy. Cultural customs are great, but they shouldn't be the basis of the law, because not following local tradition shouldn't be illegal. If the traditions are true and strong, they'll take care of themselves without John Law's help.

[NinoFan]

Tinkering with U.S. laws about alcohol to promote "good social values" was unheard of in the days of our Founders.

Nice try, but this is misleading. Yes, while the anti-alcohol movement was definitely late 19th-Century/early 20th-Century, laws relating to the Sabbath in general WERE in place at the time of the founding. Laws were based MUCH more on tradition, especially religious tradition, than they are now. Contrary to historical revisionists on the right, the Founding days were neither a Libertarian's nor a Libertine's utopia.

[Protagoras]

The whole comment is irrelevant, it's not about me, my philosophy, you, your philosophy, or anything else. It is about the subject matter and the concept behind these laws and the proper role of government in a free society.