Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Defense of "Underage" Drinking
Mercurial Times ^ | March 1, 2002 | Aaron Armitage

Posted on 03/04/2002 10:49:56 AM PST by A.J.Armitage

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-288 next last
To: FreedominJesusChrist
It is not some horrid abridgement of one's freedom

I'm more than willing to wager that there are quite a few 20-year-old Republican Christians currently serving stateside in a military branch of our government who would fiercely disagree with you on that point.

51 posted on 03/04/2002 11:41:57 AM PST by truenospinzone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
"The health people are idiots, but they still do it, because they don't want people to be hurt."

And how can you possibly know their intentions???

It is at least NAIVE to assume they are motivated by such a trite reason. All humans I know are far more complex than that.

Control freaks want control; this is no mystery.

52 posted on 03/04/2002 11:42:12 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
You've never observed this?

LOL, no. I only have seen people try to regulate what they perceive to be dangerous. Be it for good reason or no. I have yet to see people try to regulate something just because it's not their "cup of tea".

53 posted on 03/04/2002 11:43:09 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
Like I said before, are underage drinking laws really that bad? I think you people are over-reacting and getting all mad about something that isn't even a big deal.
54 posted on 03/04/2002 11:43:26 AM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: freeeee
That's the problem with neo-cons, they think your freedoms end the same place their vices do.

The alcohol industry has a study that shows 50% of their product is consumed by 5% of their customers. In other words, these brewers depend on addiction, the same as the drug dealers. They, however, are allowed to buy legality.

55 posted on 03/04/2002 11:43:27 AM PST by steve50
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I am not even 21 years old yet, but I don't think that the drinking laws are that bad or anything worth the vapid crowing that is going on here.

Of course not. Because YOU don't drink. I think your tune would change pretty darn fast if there were bible-reading laws passed.

56 posted on 03/04/2002 11:44:03 AM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
An "underage" drinker also has property rights.

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.

57 posted on 03/04/2002 11:44:31 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: truenospinzone
I have quite a few relatives that are currently serving in the military and they have more important things on their minds other than witching about underage drinking laws.
58 posted on 03/04/2002 11:45:09 AM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: truenospinzone
All of the examples you gave involved non-adults.

Reread. The voting age involves adults. Further, it doesn't matter. My point was that different situations call for different solutions. Where in any law is an "adult" defined? Why are you assuming that if one has the right to vote and enter into a contract, he is an adult, but one that has the right to drive is not (keep reading before you respond)? Yes, adult is generally accepted to mean 18 or over, but the law itself doesn't make any distinction. It simply says: drive at 16; vote and contract at 18; drink and buy a handgun at 21. If you disagree with those ages, that's fine, but it would be arbitrary to say there should be a distinction between driving and voting age, but none between voting and drinking age.

59 posted on 03/04/2002 11:45:13 AM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
It is not some horrid abridgement of one's freedom and does more good than harm.

So, we have levels or degrees of "abridgement of one's freedom"?

This is exactly why our freedom and liberty are in such trouble now - people such as yourself saying "small" encroachments are ok, because you feel it doesn't affect you.

60 posted on 03/04/2002 11:45:36 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
I'm not talking of the past. I speak of modern times. Of people that have been born and raised under generations of those who were bred in freedom.
61 posted on 03/04/2002 11:45:52 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
"I think your tune would change pretty darn fast if there were bible-reading laws passed."

I don't know if that was some kind of lame joke or not. But your whole scenerio is ridiculous, it is called the 1rst Amendment.

62 posted on 03/04/2002 11:47:34 AM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: maxwell
am not about to go out and do any nude picketing for it..

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

63 posted on 03/04/2002 11:49:48 AM PST by techcor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
Well, it does affect me in that I am not 21 yet. But I could really care less about drinking laws.
64 posted on 03/04/2002 11:50:10 AM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
,,, you're quite right. There should be less government in the lives of people. I'd support that sentiment 100%. In this case though, where I am the minimum drinking and voting ages are both 18. The minimum age for entering into a contract is also 18. All three of these things require a level of understanding and responsibility on the encumbant. 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?
65 posted on 03/04/2002 11:51:10 AM PST by shaggy eel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
Control freaks want control; this is no mystery.

Control freaks run for office. Normal people do not wish to ban others from activities simply because they don't like to do the activity themselves. Why aren't they out there trying to ban surfing, or playing golf?

66 posted on 03/04/2002 11:51:37 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I don't know if that was some kind of lame joke or not. But your whole scenerio is ridiculous, it is called the 1rst Amendment.

And I assure you that 100 years ago the concept of "gun control" would have been called ridiculous, you know, because of the 2nd Amendment.

The point being..... you are all for laws that you do not perceieve harm YOU, or stop you from doing something you want. 99% of federal laws are unconstitutional. Its just a matter of time before you are imprisoned for owning a Bible.

67 posted on 03/04/2002 11:52:09 AM PST by FreeTally
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
You still haven't answered whether or not you think all drugs should be legal for ANY age.
68 posted on 03/04/2002 11:52:54 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
So would you extend this argument to all drugs. No age minimum to purchase any drug whatsoever?

By gum, you've got it!

What of parents who do not wish for their minors to do them? How do they control a convenient stor from selling crack to their 16 year old if it is all legal at any age?

What if a parent doesn't mind Junior having a spliff now and then? Should it still be illegal?

Your argument undermines itself. You're trying to argue from parental authority to a policy that takes authority away from parents and gives it to the government.

69 posted on 03/04/2002 11:52:54 AM PST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Like I said before, are underage drinking laws really that bad?

On their face, a lot of people would say no, but let's look a little deeper:

Treating legal adults (18-20 year olds) like children.

And far, far worse, the fed blackmailing, yes blackmailing the states. This part is a huge deal. It showcases the fed's willingness to disregard its constitutional charter, and to rule in ways more accustomed to an organized crime racquet. Blackmail deserves and should earn no respect for legitimacy, and I will give it none even if it has happened for a long time, and even if its done for some altruistic reason.

I think you people are over-reacting and getting all mad about something that isn't even a big deal.

I'm not over-reacting or getting angry. I'm merely voicing objection to the law, in a calm rational manner. That's all.

70 posted on 03/04/2002 11:53:23 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
I must have missed something in this article. Nothing said about the thousands of innocent people murdered at the hands of drunk drivers.

Ever seen or heard a husband, wife and their baby burned to death in their vehicle after being rear ended by a drunk driver? Ever seen several of your friends wrapped around a tree (all killed) because they thought they were just having a little fun drinking and than thought they would all go for a drive?

Personally if you want to drink yourself silly I don't care, but when you put innocent lives in danger after making the choice to get in your car and drive while drinking, you should be charged with murder if you cause a wreck and kill someone.

71 posted on 03/04/2002 11:53:58 AM PST by shellylet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
If this is the result of a 'family story' keep in mind it's probably been overblown - allowing you a sip just to see the expression on your face is hardly allowing you to get drunk.

Yeah, it probably was overblown. Deal with it.

72 posted on 03/04/2002 11:55:27 AM PST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
Bump for an article I wholly agree with (well, except for that WOD stuff...)
73 posted on 03/04/2002 11:55:31 AM PST by LibertyGirl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
By gum, you've got it!

So if parents are cool with littel 10 year old jimmy snort'in a few lines, you think there should be no gov. intervention? This is rich...

BTW, pot, used by prepubecents causes major stunting of sexual maturity. Can even cause permanent sterility if used by a boy who is going through puberty.

74 posted on 03/04/2002 11:56:04 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

Donate Here By Secure Server

Or mail checks to:
FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794

Send PayPal direct to JimRob@psnw.com

75 posted on 03/04/2002 11:56:16 AM PST by theophilusscribe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: LibertyGirl77
You agree with legalizing for ALL ages?
76 posted on 03/04/2002 11:56:53 AM PST by Texaggie79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I don't know if that was some kind of lame joke or not. But your whole scenerio is ridiculous, it is called the 1rst Amendment.

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

77 posted on 03/04/2002 11:57:07 AM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
Just make it one age or the other as a determination of adulthood. Be consistent. It's become damned difficult to look my 19 year old son in the eye and re-explain to him that it's illegal for him to drink alcohol but it is legal for the same government who dictates that law to claim he is of age to be drafted and be allowed to vote. Make either every right available at 18 or 21 but not a mixture of both. Frankly, I don't see a dimes worth of difference between the two ages in terms of maturity.
78 posted on 03/04/2002 11:57:09 AM PST by TADSLOS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FreeTally
I am 100% against gun-control. But I find it hard to compare underage drinking laws with gun-control. Underage drinking laws are just a temporary moratoriuem on drinking. So what do you think about DUI laws? Shouldn't people be able to drive intoxicated with their own car if they wish? My point is, is that I don't have any problem with common-sense safety laws.
79 posted on 03/04/2002 11:57:23 AM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
But your whole scenerio is ridiculous, it is called the 1rst Amendment.

I wouldn't start feeling too safe if that's your sole protection.

The rest of the Bill of Rights hasn't done too well you know.

80 posted on 03/04/2002 11:57:48 AM PST by freeeee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

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

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

81 posted on 03/04/2002 11:58:07 AM PST by maxwell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: shaggy eel
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.

82 posted on 03/04/2002 11:58:35 AM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
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?

83 posted on 03/04/2002 11:59:18 AM PST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 1L
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".
84 posted on 03/04/2002 12:01:28 PM PST by truenospinzone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
"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.

85 posted on 03/04/2002 12:01:31 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I think your screen name is pretty ironic.

"Freedom for me but not for thee?"

86 posted on 03/04/2002 12:02:29 PM PST by LibertyGirl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
"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. ;^)

87 posted on 03/04/2002 12:04:44 PM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
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.
88 posted on 03/04/2002 12:05:03 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
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?

89 posted on 03/04/2002 12:06:02 PM PST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LibertyGirl77
Freedom in Jesus Christ, spiritual freedom, means freedom from the slavery of sin. I am not referring to political freedom here.
90 posted on 03/04/2002 12:06:18 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
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.
91 posted on 03/04/2002 12:06:39 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
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.

92 posted on 03/04/2002 12:07:44 PM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage
If you recall, one has to be a certain age before they can buy cigarettes and lottery tickets.
93 posted on 03/04/2002 12:07:55 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: truenospinzone
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.

94 posted on 03/04/2002 12:09:29 PM PST by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
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?
95 posted on 03/04/2002 12:09:58 PM PST by LibertyGirl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: southern rock
"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.
96 posted on 03/04/2002 12:11:30 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
1st amendment? I think you need to reread the part of the constitution that talks about states' rights.
97 posted on 03/04/2002 12:12:50 PM PST by LibertyGirl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
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.

98 posted on 03/04/2002 12:13:13 PM PST by southern rock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: A.J.Armitage;OrthodoxPresbyterian;WardSmythe;Jerry_M
Interesting post AA..I have never approved of the 21 law....
99 posted on 03/04/2002 12:13:35 PM PST by RnMomof7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Texaggie79
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.

100 posted on 03/04/2002 12:13:37 PM PST by A.J.Armitage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-288 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson