Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
3 Historical and modern definitions of the deadly sins
3.1 Lust
3.1.1 Extravagance
3.2 Gluttony
3.3 Greed
3.4 Sloth
3.4.1 Acedia
3.4.2 Despair
3.5 Wrath
3.6 Envy
3.7 Pride
3.7.1 Vainglory
~~~~~
Abuse of alcohol might be indicative of spiritual issues. Not only is it beyond the government's power to legislate morality absolutely, but in today's society --every sin on the list is utilized commercially for profit.
12 step programs certainly seem to focus on 'Why' people abuse alcohol--for some there is a genetic predisposition and others have different issues.
The Duggar family manages to isolate itself from the World. Admirable--but I don't want to live that way.
Last edited by TakeAhike; 01-29-2011 at 07:45 AM..
Ah, but what you fail to grasp is that it's a power that has been explicitly excluded from government, and the 14th Amendment insures the restriction applies to state and local as well. It hasn't been ruled on since 1961 by SCOTUS to the best of my knowledge, and even then the jurisdiction attempted to defend the practice on secular grounds, even if it was disingenuous. Go into court arguing 'religious tradition' and you'll get tossed on your ear quicker than Sherman went through Georgia.
The 14th Amendment does no such thing. The 14th Amendment, aside from allowing all individuals born inside the United States to be regarded as citizens, allows for equal protection under the law. It's regard to the states is that the state cannot abridge your life, liberty, or property. This relates to the fact that your property cannot be taken away, you can't be put away in prison, etc, without equal protection under the law. You know, the right to an attorney, the right to have your case heard, etc. It relates nothing to alcohol, as prohibiting alcohol takes nothing away from anyone. Why are drugs outlawed? I mean, under your reasoning, they shouldn't be, for your liberty is being taken away. However, drugs actually destroy one's life, the same as alcohol does to many people.
Quote:
Please. This is an argument to ban it altogether, and we tried that. It was a dismal failure, just as we're seeing now with the 'War on (some) Drugs'.
I wasn't making that argument, specifically, in the quote to which you're responding here, but let me ask you this. Do you really believe that allowing liquor stores, bars that serve alcohol, etc. has no effect on the people of a community and the subsequent quality of life? If you say no, then you basically have to say that people are not going to attend such establishments. However, you have to admit, some will be pulled into such establishments and will become alcoholics as a result, which in turn will destroy families, children, and ultimately this can result in greater crime.
If you condone drugs and alcohol, the effects become more pronounced. You'll have more alcoholics and more druggies. Look at the Netherlands or Denmark. When they legalized marijuana, the number of kids addicted to marijuana "shot through the roof". This affected society as a whole.
It is true that you'll never totally eliminate it, but you can lower its use through regulation and eliminate the bigger problems. When you claim that the banning of alcohol didn't work, it's a matter of how you look at it. Fewer people did drink, and those who continued to drink took it underground. You're never going to stop everyone, but as a whole, you do stop many. The same is said for drugs.
Quote:
Boy, you've bought the propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
Communities don't need standards? There shouldn't be standards with regard to dumping trash? No standards to preventing massage parlors, drugs, etc.? Do you honestly think a lack of standards brings about a good community? Seriously, you can't believe such. It seems that you refuse to face reality.
Quote:
No, they don't, or at least they shouldn't. By restricting someone from engaging in commerce you have limited their liberty. Limiting liberty should have a very good reason. And on this issue, there isn't one.
So pro-alcohol advocates' voices silence those who disapprove of alcohol? I see, so you believe that your points of view are so superior, that you'd deny those who disagree with you to have a say in their communities.
Alcohol is a drug that destroys lives. Why you refuse to acknowledge this, I do not know. It tastes like garbage, as well. Thus, it has no redeeming quality. People drink it to escape reality or to loosen up, but in the end, they only end up hurting themselves, by either destroying themselves, their families, or behaving in a way that is not their true selves. They also may end up killing someone on the road.
Your argument for limiting commerce and liberty is ridiculous, for someone could advocate that they have a right to do anything, any harmful thing, and that they should be constitutionally protected. Can you yell "fire" in a crowded theater? No. It's because it presents a hazard. Alcohol does the same.
I believe the reason you're so for alcohol is because you must partake of it at times, to some unknown degree.
Quote:
Yeah, in backwater hick towns where they're so stuck in the past most of them probably don't even realize the Civil War is over. Heck, I bet most churches in those areas have spittoons so folks can chew tabaccy while wearing their Sunday-go-to-meetin-best.
Oh yes, you start with the stereotypical, hate-filled rhetoric, laced with an arrogant, superior tone. To disagree with you is "backwater" and "hick", set "in the past" (typical argument against those who are more conservative) and people who do so "chew tabaccy". Not realistic.
Please read the First Amendment to the US Constitution.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
It doesn't matter what the majority religion is...that's the point. The gov't is supposed to be neutral and not pass laws for one religion or establish a national religion. You are free to practice your religion to your heart's content, but just let the rest of us alone. Keep our gov't out of the religion business.
That's the point. We're all free to worship or not worship as we choose, and the gov't is not supposed to make any law that prefers one religion over another, whether or not that religion represents 99% of the population or 1%. If you cannot understand that concept, then you completely miss out on the meaning of America, and that's where my ignorance comment comes from.
I have not advocated that there is a national religion, or that there should be one, only that Christians are the dominant religious group, and that it has been so since this nation's founding. It is a part of the religious-cultural element of this country. Since this country is populated by a mostly Christian population, it is going to have an influence in the democratic process, that all people of voting age who are registered are allowed. After all, people have a right to vote for candidates they desire, even those who'd openly state that they're anti-alcohol. If their candidate is voted in, then their say is heard. That's part of what America is about. This isn't a violation of the Constitution, for alcohol is not a constitutionally-mandated concern delegated to the federal government.
This is NOT a federal issue. You must not get it that the federal Constitution has nothing to do with it.
I know there are some very Conservative Christians living in the panhandle of FL--where they can buy alcohol on Sunday. A military environment--they seem to cope with this issue pretty well. Ask a member of the military how important this aspect of life is--since their lives are on the line defending the US Constitution--all over the world. The individual that I know wouldn't give you a verbal response---but a look that conveyed volumes.
Just because you are Christian doesn't automatically equal that you are opposed to Sunday sales. As I said earlier, there are many different kinds of Christianity, all with different views, and many individuals, all with different views.
I don't really see a point in debating with Stars&StripesForever anymore. This person is entitled to their opinion on the subject, no matter how crazy it is. Most of us know that if put to a vote in Metro Atlanta, it would pass. Most of us also know that most people drink alcohol socially or in moderation, and that alcoholics are the minority. If they didn't have alcohol they would find another way to "cope" with their issues.
True, but that doesn't mean that their loose interpretation is Biblical. Lutherans are probably the most pro-alcohol Protestant denomination, but very few live in Georgia. Still, their take on alcohol doesn't mean that it is Biblical. For many people, drinking alcohol, even "in moderation", drags them into a world of alcoholism. The Bible speaks out against the "strong drink" and drunkenness as being sinful. Given that it is easy for people to be dragged into drunkenness, the idea of drinking, which is apt to make people sin, shouldn't be condoned.
For the umpteenth time...this is not relevant.
You practice your religion. You read your bible and believe what you want. Don't drink; don't buy alcohol on Sunday; whatever you believe. No one will try to force you to drink or to force you to buy alcohol on Sunday.
All I want...speaking for myself...is to be free to practice my religion, which is atheism, without interference from you or from the gov't. I also want to be free from the gov't respecting the beliefs of one religion...YOURS...to the inconvenience of others.
SHOCKING NEWSFLASH....Some people do not share your religious beliefs. In fact...the majority of the world does not share your religious beliefs. Christianity is a minority religion worldwide, and the fundamentalist southern baptist type of Christianity is a minority of US Christians.
Just because you are Christian doesn't automatically equal that you are opposed to Sunday sales. As I said earlier, there are many different kinds of Christianity, all with different views, and many individuals, all with different views.
I don't really see a point in debating with Stars&StripesForever anymore. This person is entitled to their opinion on the subject, no matter how crazy it is. Most of us know that if put to a vote in Metro Atlanta, it would pass. Most of us also know that most people drink alcohol socially or in moderation, and that alcoholics are the minority. If they didn't have alcohol they would find another way to "cope" with their issues.
true--futile to debate further, etc.
Catholics can be pretty conservative--a number of them consume alcohol rather freely. lol--Not to judge all Catholics by one member--but Mel Gibson who practices some esoteric form of Catholicism--doesn't support stem cell research or abortion--certainly has issues with alcohol. If he couldn't buy it in CA on Sunday--I'm certain he has the resources to send a plane anywhere in the world to obtain a bottle or case of whatever he drinks.
It's true that some people become alcoholics. Some people also become murderers or shoot up schools. Should guns be banned? Some people become addicted to pain killers. Some people become addicted to the Internet. The list goes on and on. I guess I fail to realize how alcohol sales on Sunday will send a community spiraling into disaster. It is already something that is available so you're not introducing something drastically new to the community like heroin stores or something.
Kids in Denmark addicted to marijuana? What are they doing? Sitting around watching tv and eating cheetos? Marijuana is not addictive and is safer than alcohol. You can't overdose on it. That is another can of worms.
In regard to taste sure maybe Budweiser is terrible but their are alot of great beers out their. Personally I'm a big fan of Ranger IPA. There is a whole subculture dedicated to trying and reviewing beers in an intelligent manner. Most microbreweries create more specialized beers with more flavor than just a bland Miller Lite. There is even a website dedicated to the appreciation of beer called beeradvocate.com.
Similarly many people are just as fanatical about wine. There is an art to producing an excellent tasting wine or beer and many people enjoy that. So it's not all about going to the liquor store and getting trashed on some Colt 45 then going home and beating your wife. It has everything to do with the type of person consuming the alcohol and what kind of person they are. If you are already in a community where intelligent people reside then they are more likely to be more of the aficionado type than the raging alcoholic type.
I do agree that alcohol causes problems for some people. There is no ignoring that fact. I'm just curious if alcohol sales on Sunday would directly correlate to an increase in alcoholism within the community. Perhaps if someone had some stats for places that sell alcohol on Sunday versus those that don't we could make a statistical comparison. If the stats show a correlation then I would have no problem agreeing that it is bad for the community.
Catholics can be pretty conservative--a number of them consume alcohol rather freely. lol--Not to judge all Catholics by one member--but Mel Gibson who practices some esoteric form of Catholicism--doesn't support stem cell research or abortion--certainly has issues with alcohol. If he couldn't buy it in CA on Sunday--I'm certain he has the resources to send a plane anywhere in the world to obtain a bottle or case of whatever he drinks.
In general, the church has not issue with alcohol, except if you drink to excess and beat your wife, kids, etc. My wife is from a large New England Catholic family (think Kennedy type family with less money), and I'm here to tell you that they may be conservative on some issues, but drinking isn't one of them.
It relates nothing to alcohol, as prohibiting alcohol takes nothing away from anyone.
It does not relate directly to alcohol, no. But it puts the restriction of not pushing religion upon state and local governments. Barring the sale of alcohol on Sunday out of religious tradition is most certainly out of bounds.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
Why are drugs outlawed? I mean, under your reasoning, they shouldn't be, for your liberty is being taken away. However, drugs actually destroy one's life, the same as alcohol does to many people.
Indeed. I maintain that if an amendment was necessary to ban alcohol (and it was, for there is no other constitutional authority that would allow it) it should also be required to ban drugs. It's not the first time our constitution has been ignored. Nor, sadly, will it be the last.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
Do you really believe that allowing liquor stores, bars that serve alcohol, etc. has no effect on the people of a community and the subsequent quality of life?
Yes. I think it improves it. Wine, women, and song are entertaining, if you do not wish to participate that is your right, but it is not your right to tell others they cannot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
When they legalized marijuana, the number of kids addicted to marijuana "shot through the roof".
There is not now, nor has there ever been a kid, or anyone else for that matter, addicted to marijuana. It's physiologically impossible. It absolutely should be legalized, though, and as a practical matter almost is. Simple possession is all but ignored by law enforcement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
Communities don't need standards? There shouldn't be standards with regard to dumping trash? No standards to preventing massage parlors, drugs, etc.?
What's wrong with massage parlors? Dumping trash randomly is not only unsightly, it can spread disease, and should be controlled. If someone wants a massage, not only it none of my business, it is their right as a sentient human.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
I see, so you believe that your points of view are so superior, that you'd deny those who disagree with you to have a say in their communities.
No, you are entitled to voice your opinion. But our government is limited, and is not empowered to do anything that might be advocated. Your opinion is silly, and tyrannical, but you're entitled to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
It tastes like garbage, as well. Thus, it has no redeeming quality.
That is your opinion. I happen to disagree, as do many others. But to argue about it is akin to arguing about which color is best. It's nothing more than a personal preference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
Your argument for limiting commerce and liberty is ridiculous, for someone could advocate that they have a right to do anything, any harmful thing, and that they should be constitutionally protected. Can you yell "fire" in a crowded theater? No. It's because it presents a hazard. Alcohol does the same.
Alcohol and other drugs generally only (might) harm the user who chooses to take them. We not only don't have the obligation to protect people from themselves, IMO we don't have the right to. Yelling fire in a theater has the realistic potential to hurt or kill others, and it's likely to happen. Alcohol does not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
I believe the reason you're so for alcohol is because you must partake of it at times, to some unknown degree.
Absolutely. Almost daily. And I do many other things that would curl your toes. I smoke. I use marijuana. I partake in orgies. I drive over the speed limit. I fly small airplanes for fun. I swim after eating. In short, I enjoy my life. You would prevent that if you could, ergo you are dangerous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stars&StripesForever
To disagree with you is "backwater" and "hick", set "in the past" (typical argument against those who are more conservative) and people who do so "chew tabaccy". Not realistic.
I calls 'em how I sees 'em. 50, 75, 100 years ago it was much more common for society to accept tyranny from religion. Much of society has moved on from that, but some backwater places have apparently not caught up. They will, some day.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Please. This is an argument to ban it altogether, and we tried that. It was a dismal failure, just as we're seeing now with the 'War on (some) Drugs'.
