Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Tom Sawyer · 05-29-2003, 01:11 PM

I think that the argument that the drinking age should be the same as the age when one can fight and die for his country is a good one. Regardless of what one thinks of the actual age those two are now, I think they should be the same.

If you are able to join the army, then government regulation states that you are mature enough to make the decision whether or not you are willing to risk your life for your country. The question of whether there is a draft or not or whether the country is presently at war is a moot one. The possibility of war is there (as an example, think of Americans who joined the army in August, 2001) and the young man or woman is making an adult choice that they are willing to take that risk and are considered mature enough by the government to make that choice on their own.

At the same time, the government is saying that they are not mature enough to be able to make the adult choice of how much they are able to drink. The decision to risk one's life for one's country is a much more serious one and if they are legally mature enough to make the first decision, then they should be legally mature enough to make the second. Granted, many more people die from alcohol-related issues than from military-related issues, but in terms of the government recognizing the seriousness of the decision being made by the young man or woman and their maturity level in being able to make that choice, I feel they should be at least considered equally.

Also, as lunachick mentioned, when NZ lowered the drinking age, younger and younger people started drinking, getting STDs, etc. However, from everything I've read that seems to be a general trend across Western societies regardless of any changes in the drinking ages of the various societies. Younger kids have been doing more stuff everywhere in places where the drinking age went down, where it went up and where it stayed the same. It's a change in society that's the issue there, not a change in the drinking age within a society.

BioBeing · 05-29-2003, 01:29 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by keyser_soze
1. We got into the danger of young people driving in the other thread.
2. Different cultures....and driving area. Remember the old adage, "Americans think 100 years is a long time, and the Brits think 100 miles is a long way."

Link to that thread?
And do you mean that young drivers are better here than in the UK? The insurance/rental thing is the same.

Quote:

There are really only two viable options for maximum safety. Move the driving age up 1 year, move the drinking age up 2. Screw "old enough for the service"...we haven't had a draft in 30 years, and I doubt we'll have another. It never should have happened in the first place. We don't BELONG in foreign wars like Vietnam, unless our position is critical, and we have more than enough VOLUNTARY servicemen to do the job. The second option is to totally remove drinking restrictions, a la "Germany and Sweden, etc..." and try to get americans to grow up earlier. Americans don't mature until they're nearly 40...it's freaking obnoxious. WTF?

Everyone forgets option 3....Leave it as is. It would take such a monumental effort (which americans aren't willing to do) to move this thing around that it will never happen. Meantime, get three years older and do it legally. No one obeys the blue laws here anyway.

For SAFETY, yes banning cars and alcohol might be the way to go... ooops I mean increasing the legal age.

For consistency, I do not think that it is. Once a person becomes an adult, they should be treated like an adult. If it is banned, ban it. If it is legal, allow it. Having one age when they can do this and another when they could do that is applying a double standard.

Lets suggest that girls mature quicker than boys. So maybe girls should be allowed to drink when they are 18.5 years old, and boys must wait until they are 22.5. Or maybe we should have a test? Each individual has to show they are socially aware and competent enough to drink before they are allowed in the bar.

Americans mature at the same rate as the rest of the world. Some might say quicker. Or are you, at 32, not mature enough to have a say in this matter? Or did you merely mean "the OTHER Americans"

yelyos · 06-01-2003, 10:03 PM

In Canada, we do have a drinking age (18 or 19, depending on the province) but it's merely a restriction, not a prohibition. People of any age may legally drink alcoholic drinks in their own home under parental supervision. As a 13 year old, I have legally drunk wine and beer, but I personally found it bitter and disgusting, so I haven't drank any in quite some time.

That being said, excessive drinking and alcoholism is far less of a problem here than in the USA. My hypothesis for this is that in the USA, alcohol becomes somewhat of a "forbidden fruit" and a temptation, so people consume large quantities of it in the years surrounding 21.

This leads to addiction and underage drinking problems. In Canada, people don't get such a thrill from "flaunting authority", simply because it is easy to legally enjoy such things.

So I believe that the best way to deal with your alcoholism problems is to add conditions that allow children to drink in certain limited circumstances.

Any comments on this?

(edited to add: trust me, beer and wine are not what they're cut out to be. think really sour tasting medication.)

keyser_soze · 06-02-2003, 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BioBeing
Link to that thread?
And do you mean that young drivers are better here than in the UK? The insurance/rental thing is the same.

No, the drivers are certainly NOT better here. Of course their not as bad as the italians and the french.....And I'd link to the previous thread(now locked) but it would force you to read through some stuff than NOBODY should be forced to read.

For SAFETY, yes banning cars and alcohol might be the way to go... ooops I mean increasing the legal age.

No one is talking about banning either one. And as to consistency, the ridiculous draft legislation should NEVER have existed, and should be removed. It was stupid and duplicitous then, and it still is today.

For consistency, I do not think that it is. Once a person becomes an adult, they should be treated like an adult. If it is banned, ban it. If it is legal, allow it. Having one age when they can do this and another when they could do that is applying a double standard.

Lets suggest that girls mature quicker than boys. So maybe girls should be allowed to drink when they are 18.5 years old, and boys must wait until they are 22.5. Or maybe we should have a test? Each individual has to show they are socially aware and competent enough to drink before they are allowed in the bar.

Americans mature at the same rate as the rest of the world. Some might say quicker.
I haven't met anyone that has traveled and would say that...To me, americans are still young and immature at 40. That is a personal feeling, but it is one that has been shared by many.

Or are you, at 32, not mature enough to have a say in this matter?I am old enough, and mature enough(but I've lived a lot more than most people. I would consider my own father too immature to make a lot of choices, but he has passed the age of majority, so it is no business of mine.). Personally, I think the drinking age should be abolished altogether, but then we would have to be prepared for much carnage during the learning phase as our society restructures to fit. I'm not sure that I am willing to see that carnage, even though I want america to be....well...more european I guess. Or did you merely mean "the OTHER Americans"

[/B]

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-29-2003, 01:11 PM	#61
Tom Sawyer Talk Freethought Staff Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Toronto, eh Posts: 42,293	I think that the argument that the drinking age should be the same as the age when one can fight and die for his country is a good one. Regardless of what one thinks of the actual age those two are now, I think they should be the same. If you are able to join the army, then government regulation states that you are mature enough to make the decision whether or not you are willing to risk your life for your country. The question of whether there is a draft or not or whether the country is presently at war is a moot one. The possibility of war is there (as an example, think of Americans who joined the army in August, 2001) and the young man or woman is making an adult choice that they are willing to take that risk and are considered mature enough by the government to make that choice on their own. At the same time, the government is saying that they are not mature enough to be able to make the adult choice of how much they are able to drink. The decision to risk one's life for one's country is a much more serious one and if they are legally mature enough to make the first decision, then they should be legally mature enough to make the second. Granted, many more people die from alcohol-related issues than from military-related issues, but in terms of the government recognizing the seriousness of the decision being made by the young man or woman and their maturity level in being able to make that choice, I feel they should be at least considered equally. Also, as lunachick mentioned, when NZ lowered the drinking age, younger and younger people started drinking, getting STDs, etc. However, from everything I've read that seems to be a general trend across Western societies regardless of any changes in the drinking ages of the various societies. Younger kids have been doing more stuff everywhere in places where the drinking age went down, where it went up and where it stayed the same. It's a change in society that's the issue there, not a change in the drinking age within a society.

06-01-2003, 10:03 PM	#63
yelyos Regular Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: northern suburbs of Toronto, Canada Posts: 401	In Canada, we do have a drinking age (18 or 19, depending on the province) but it's merely a restriction, not a prohibition. People of any age may legally drink alcoholic drinks in their own home under parental supervision. As a 13 year old, I have legally drunk wine and beer, but I personally found it bitter and disgusting, so I haven't drank any in quite some time. That being said, excessive drinking and alcoholism is far less of a problem here than in the USA. My hypothesis for this is that in the USA, alcohol becomes somewhat of a "forbidden fruit" and a temptation, so people consume large quantities of it in the years surrounding 21. This leads to addiction and underage drinking problems. In Canada, people don't get such a thrill from "flaunting authority", simply because it is easy to legally enjoy such things. So I believe that the best way to deal with your alcoholism problems is to add conditions that allow children to drink in certain limited circumstances. Any comments on this? (edited to add: trust me, beer and wine are not what they're cut out to be. think really sour tasting medication.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.