In Defense of "Underage" Drinking

Mercurial Times ^ | March 1, 2002 | Aaron Armitage

[maxwell]

And don't think we aren't grateful for that fact. Nyuck,nyuck,nyuck.

Bwahaha... You and the rest of FR, dude/dudette...

[southern rock]

However, the downstream reality is that we're now having increased problems with kids around the age of 13 being admitted to emergency rooms in hospitals with acute alcohol poisoning. What to do in such circumstances?

Umm... Let their PARENTS deal with it.

[A.J.Armitage]

Beer at age 18 is fine for me, but no hard liquor.

What makes you think it's any of your business to decide what someone else can drink in the first place?

Plus drinking a lot isn't good for one's health. It makes people fat and ruins their liver. Plus, it is a waste of money that could go elsewhere.

And these don't apply to 22 year olds?

[truenospinzone]

All states have specific statutes defining the age of adulthood, or "age of majority". It isn't just an "accepted standard". At the age of 18, the federal government no longer places on parents the obligation of support. At that point, "adulthood" is an established fact, by law. The driver's licence issue you bring up even supports this - at sixteen, you are allowed to drive, but your parents are obligated to provide insurance for you. You are still considered a "minor".

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"Ah! So your hobbies are O.K. and untouchable, yet you can sit back and decide if other people's passtimes are "worthy". Gotcha!"

No you didn't "get" me, but you did get me to laugh a little while sitting at my computer. Bible reading by myself, along in my room, is my constitutional right and does not have an affect on anyone else's lives whatsoever. Over the age of 21, I have no problem with people drinking their lives away. But the underage drinking laws are there for a reason. In this case, state government is the moral restraint that stops a lot of drunk driving accidents from happening.

[LibertyGirl77]

I think your screen name is pretty ironic.

"Freedom for me but not for thee?"

[headsonpikes]

"Control freaks run for office. Normal people do not wish to ban people from activities..."

I read your reply and laughed out loud.

I agree with your apparently unintended dichotomy. ;^)

Control freaks are not normal people.

They are the new, improved uber-citizens.

Lead pensions for all, I say. ;^)

[FreedominJesusChrist]

That part of my statement was my own personal treatise on why I don't drink. #1, I like being and looking healthy, #2, I have better things to do than to dedicate my life to closing down the bar, #3 I would rather spend my money on other stuff, like an education, clothes, etc.

[A.J.Armitage]

The main problem that I have with Libertarians, is that they are way too optimistic of human nature.

Suppose you view human nature as being totally depraved. What form of government would this lead to?

drinking is such a bad habit, and young people can spend their money and time doing something more profitable and worthwhile.

Smoking is a bad habit. Playing the lottery is a bad habit (oh, wait, the government's behind that one, guess it must be okay). Should these be illegal?

And if you ban those, how can you be sure that the extra time will be spent on something worthwhile? Won't they just watch TV instead?

[FreedominJesusChrist]

Freedom in Jesus Christ, spiritual freedom, means freedom from the slavery of sin. I am not referring to political freedom here.

[southern rock]

Bible readingBinge drinking by myself, alone in my room, is my constitutional right and does not have an affect on anyone else's lives whatsoever.

[Illbay]

In fact, "the government" is us. It is WE THE PEOPLE who have decided these things, and at the state level.

The Libertines wish to gloss over this fact, so they can keep pitching their manure about the J.B.T.s.

The drinking age will NOT be raised, no matter how they cry and whine. The drug laws won't be relaxed no matter how the scream and shout.

And why?

Because WE THE PEOPLE don't want those changes.

They will moan, b**** and continually complain, but that's all they have.

[FreedominJesusChrist]

If you recall, one has to be a certain age before they can buy cigarettes and lottery tickets.

[Illbay]

But by that logic, why aren't we clamoring to raise the drinking age to 25?

Because we have reasoned, debated, discussed and deliberated, and we have decided that 21 is a reasonable age.

Of course, I'm not the one to talk to. I wish they'd never repealed prohibition.

[LibertyGirl77]

So, you have no problem with your freedoms, and the freedoms of other 18-20 year olds, being unconstitutionally violated by the federal government as long as it's a violation of a freedom you don't exercise regularly?

[FreedominJesusChrist]

"Binge drinking by myself, alone in my room, is my constitutional right and does not have an affect on anyone else's lives whatsoever" Hah, maybe in your wildest dreams, besides, alcholics are the type that like to drink alone. Ladies that have a drinking habit end up paying for it. I can always tell who are the girls that drink and party non-stop, because they look like hell.

[LibertyGirl77]

1st amendment? I think you need to reread the part of the constitution that talks about states' rights.

[southern rock]

Because WE THE PEOPLE don't want those changes.

In case you failed to notice, we DO NOT live in a democracy. What the majority of the people "want" is irrelevant. The majority cannot ban any one single person from peacefully minding his own buisness and excercising his rights.

[RnMomof7]

Interesting post AA..I have never approved of the 21 law....

[A.J.Armitage]

And he has the right to purchase beer, if the state he chooses to reside in views 18 year olds as mature enough to handle it.

No, he has the right to purchase beer, if he can find a willing seller. No one's rights depend on whether the government thinks he can "handle" it.