Abolition of Alcohol

[Spirit of Light]

This to me is an important topic and will eventually be a topic discussed around the world because of the dire consequences this drug of choice inflicts upon the individual, the family, the community, the Nation and on to the entire body of humanity.

I unfortunately live in a Nation that pride themselves on getting drunk, and that mentality is expanding as the world is locked down.

I long for the day when the business of Alcohol is seen for what it has become, a killer of humanity.

So this OP shows my stance, that alcoholic beverages are not needed they are a drug of choice and all recreational drugs need to be Abolished. America tried, so what will it take?

What is your stance, what is your view?

Edit I added this so the intent of this OP is known, as my wording might not have shown that is the case.

"So this OP is all about choice and this OP is to explore why we would choose to abstain, if there was no law, or if we may again consider that a law is needed."

Regards Tony

It is a difficult topic to answer because even I myself stay fully away from alcohol or other forms of drugs, it would be wrong of me to force others to think and do like me.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It is a difficult topic to answer because even I myself stay fully away from alcohol or other forms of drugs, it would be wrong of me to force others to think and do like me.

That is indeed a wise choice and a very wise move.

Regards Tony

 

[Martin]

I don't think prohibition worked out too well last time. I reckon they should legalise all drugs, and take out the criminality.

 

[oldbadger]

What a waste! See a woman in Delhi says that alcohol will kill Covid-19, not vaccine.

Oh dear!
The poor woman heard right, but for use only as a steriliser. Trumpy would probably inject it!

Mind you, that's a good excuse for getting totally sloshed!
Wifey: 'Your sloshed again!'.
Hubby: 'Its protection from Covid!'

Luv it.

 

[GardenLady]

As others has said, prohibition was tried and was repealed here in the US. In fact, prohibition created a niche for substantial growth in organized crime.

Certainly, alcohol can be destructive for some people. IMHO a problematic relationship with alcohol it is a symptom, an indication that something is wrong. But I also recognize that for some people, it is a problem from a biological perspective.

My mother was an only child and her mother was an alcoholic. Being the only child/daughter of an alcoholic mother amounts to abandonment, and it has colored her entire life. So I do see the potential destruction.

Personally, I favor education over prohibition.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

This to me is an important topic and will eventually be a topic discussed around the world because of the dire consequences this drug of choice inflicts upon the individual, the family, the community, the Nation and on to the entire body of humanity.

I unfortunately live in a Nation that pride themselves on getting drunk, and that mentality is expanding as the world is locked down.

I long for the day when the business of Alcohol is seen for what it has become, a killer of humanity.

So this OP shows my stance, that alcoholic beverages are not needed they are a drug of choice and all recreational drugs need to be Abolished. America tried, so what will it take?

What is your stance, what is your view?

Edit I added this so the intent of this OP is known, as my wording might not have shown that is the case.

"So this OP is all about choice and this OP is to explore why we would choose to abstain, if there was no law, or if we may again consider that a law is needed."

Regards Tony

I have a similar view toward the harm of religion as you do to the harm of alcohol.

It seems the difference between us is that I think trying to legislate away either alcohol or religion would violate important personal freedoms, and you apparently don't value those personal freedoms enough to want to protect them.

If you were successful at convincing me not to value these freedoms either (you won't be, but for argument's sake), then getting rid of your religion would be a higher priority for me than getting rid of alcohol.

TLDR: be careful what you wish for.

 

[SalixIncendium]

There are a lot of things one does not have to have experienced, nor faced in life so they can have an intelligent decisionbased on the best available information.

I have not faced or experienced the dropping of an atomic bomb, but can still make an informed and sound conclusion as to the benefit of abolishing the Atomic bomb as a way to peace.

Regards Tony

Please tell us in what way consuming alcohol is at all similar to dropping an atomic bomb. Do people consume alcohol and drop atomic bombs for the same reason?

You asked for my stance, I gave it to you, and you reply with a silly comparison. How are you helping humanity with these actions?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yes indeed that is the truth. There will be people that an partake in a responsible way.

The interesting point to consider is that alcohol, no matter how responsible you are, effects the capabilities of the Mind. That is why there are laws in relation to driving while intoxicated. Without those laws many responsible people would be less responsible.

So why would an intelligent person want to dull the capacity of their mind?

From a person that does not drink, sitting in a group that does, I can say that the capacity on intelligent conversation deminishes the more people consume, yet they remain unaware of this and even think they are offering great wisdom.

I know this as I am usually the dedicated driver.

Regards Tony

Having someone in the group whose hobby is looking down on the rest of the group isn't exactly a recipe for intelligent conversation either.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Oh dear!
The poor woman heard right, but for use only as a steriliser. Trumpy would probably inject it!

And what about the second link. That was an honorable MLA (Member of Legislative Asembly)?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

But how many will stop there? I am not advocating legal abolition, but education for all that it is unwise to start, even in moderation.

The vast majority of people stop there. Abuse is far, far, far less common than social or occasional drinking. If we are going to educate, then let's not pretend that billions of people don't drink with no negative consequence. Alcohol in moderation won't hurt you. But alcohol abuse will.

 

[oldbadger]

And what about the second link. That was an honorable MLA (Member of Legislative Asembly)?

After hearing Trumpy's ideas anybody else sounds reasonable.

 

[Vinayaka]

The vast majority of people stop there. Abuse is far, far, far less common than social or occasional drinking. If we are going to educate, then let's not pretend that billions of people don't drink with no negative consequence. Alcohol in moderation won't hurt you. But alcohol abuse will.

Like everything else, I see it on a scale, and don't see the clear cut line between alcohol in moderation versus alcohol abuse. Take the guy who quietly sips 6 beers a day, after work. It's not really moderation, but nor is it abuse compared to the guy who downs a 40 every day. For years I drank 1 or 2 beers a year. Is that abstinence, or moderation?

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Like everything else, I see it on a scale, and don't see the clear cut line between alcohol in moderation versus alcohol abuse. Take the guy who quietly sips 6 beers a day, after work. It's not really moderation, but nor is abuse compared to the guy who downs a 40 every day. For years I drank 1 or 2 beers a year. Is that abstinence, or moderation?

Sure, I agree that there's a range. And putting a actual number to recommended portion will have varied results, but it does make it more handy to talk about from both a health and legal perspective.

A-la there is no specific point we become an adult and no consensus on when it's appropriate for humans to make adult decisions like medical and sexual consent. But most people can have a rational discussion on when is 'too young,' and can work to a number agreement even knowing it's not perfect.

For drinking this is as good as anything else.

According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, drinking is considered to be in the moderate or low-risk range for women at no more than three drinks in any one day and no more than seven drinks per week. For men, it is no more than four drinks a day and no more than 14 drinks per week.

Mayo Clinic Q and A: Is daily drinking problem drinking?

 

[Windwalker]

Well I would agree, it is a subject that is intrinsic to our spiritual development.

Regards Tony

Banning alcohol for others is important to your spiritual development? How does banning it for others, make you more spiritual?

I get abstaining from it for your own development may be important, but I don't get how imposing your practices on others helps you grow spiritually? If anything, that only serves to make the ego stronger. Spirituality has to come from a place of one's own intentions for themselves, not their intentions to control others lives. Does God ever force his will upon the world, or is it all invitation only? Do you think force is God's way, or is invitation?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There are a lot of things one does not have to have experienced, nor faced in life so they can have an intelligent decisionbased on the best available information.

I have not faced or experienced the dropping of an atomic bomb, but can still make an informed and sound conclusion as to the benefit of abolishing the Atomic bomb as a way to peace.

Regards Tony

To use your analogy properly, banning all uses of alcohol would be like eliminating all uses of nuclear technology. All of it.

Not just nuclear bombs, but also nuclear power and radiation for cancer treatment.

Just getting rid of nuclear bombs would be akin to advocating for responsible consumption of alcohol... i.e. the opposite of what you're arguing for.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

If a significant amount of people get hurt as a result of a manufactured product or use of that product, we withdraw it from sale or restrict its use.

Not going to happen.

If you have the ingredients for bread, you can make alcohol.

If you have fruit - any fruit - you can make alcohol.

 

[Windwalker]

I'm not in favor of taking away choice in this matter, but people need to be educated that it destroys more than enhances life.

Of course yes. I said from the outset that there a plenty of educational programs, warning labels, doctor's advice, etc., that help people make more informed choices.

Prohibition however is the opposite of education. It's forcing one groups beliefs and values upon others for something that can otherwise be largely used responsibly by them. That's puritanical and self-righteous to ban it for all, and no one wants anyone else's religious belief pushed down their throats by the arm of the law. There is a reason we separate church and state.

 

[InvestigateTruth]

And cup-cakes? French fries? Hot dogs? I can point to the science that calls them all dangerous.

What else would you ban?

Some of the things can be banned, some things just cannot.
Indeed, there should be a control on restaurants and food sellers to ban anything that is scientifically proven to be harmful. If someone decides to make fries and hot dogs at home and consume it is their own business. If someone wants to make wine at home for themselves, it is their own business.

But to produce and sell to others is best to be banned in my opinion.

Drugs and pornography are two other things that needs to be banned. These are just harmful to people and society.

 

[Windwalker]

Some of the things can be banned, some things just cannot.
Indeed, there should be a control on restaurants and food sellers to ban anything that is scientifically proven to be harmful. If someone decides to make fries and hot dogs at home and consume it is their own business. If someone wants to make wine at home for themselves, it is their own business.

But to produce and sell to others is best to be banned in my opinion.

Drugs and pornography are two other things that needs to be banned. These are just harmful to people and society.

There are governments on this planet who view religion as harmful to society. Are you in favor of a government banning your religion because they deem it harmful to society? Or do you think allowing people to choose for themselves what they partake of as the better path to peace and overall well-being?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Some of the things can be banned, some things just cannot.
Indeed, there should be a control on restaurants and food sellers to ban anything that is scientifically proven to be harmful. If someone decides to make fries and hot dogs at home and consume it is their own business. If someone wants to make wine at home for themselves, it is their own business.

But to produce and sell to others is best to be banned in my opinion.

Drugs and pornography are two other things that needs to be banned. These are just harmful to people and society.

Before arguing that things you disapprove of should be banned (edit: or that their sale should be prohibited), maybe ask yourself if there's anything you value that others may disapprove of.

After all, a culture where people run around banning things isn't going to limit its impact to just the things you find offensive.