GoldTrader
Active Member
- Joined
- May 11, 2011
- Sythe Gold
- 0
- Messages
- 124
Well, why don't we ban RuneScape also? It doesn't do anything "good". And let's ban Coca Cola also, it doesn't do anything "good".Yes, it does not do anything good.
Well, why don't we ban RuneScape also? It doesn't do anything "good". And let's ban Coca Cola also, it doesn't do anything "good".Yes, it does not do anything good.
So we should not prohibit that which leads to undesirables? Is that what you're saying? And peer pressure/social desires are really pathetic reasons, because at any party, you can say, "I don't/won't drink." You have the WILL to refuse. DESIRES can be SUPPRESSED.Peer pressure, social desirability are valid reasons.
Banning alcohol is breaching ones civil liberties. You have enforce rules onto others about what they can, or cannot do.
Then we'll leave it at that.This would be a different debate.
I care because I don't want one of you drunkheads to get someone innocent killed with you. Even if that doesn't happen all the time, it's a potential risk, and if I can stop it, I will, so that a few families out there might be saved from the loss of a relative.Why don't you just worry about yourself, and let others take care of themselves?
Society is merely a term referring to the collective body of people. Freedom of such magnitude is not a bad thing. Why do you honestly care what other people do? How about just letting people choose what they want to do? Isn't that fair?
Those are the main issues. It would take some serious persuasion to ban alcohol in the West.Alcohol is an intricate part to Western Society. It has been instilled into billions of people. One might think in a perfect society, alcohol may be prohibited. This disregards the pragmatic nature of the present. Criminalizing the billions in society will ultimately lead to more chaos. The US tried this in the 1920's. It was a complete disaster. Organized crime increased.
Revoking the right for one to drink is taking away their civil liberties by a large magnitude. Why can't you let people do what they want? Why would you claim to knows whats best for them? Most people don't even know what's best for themselves.
Alcohol is a billion dollar revenue raiser for the Government. It employs 1000's of people and is intertwined harmoniously with almost all industries. Banning alcohol would result in consequences of catastrophic proportions. Unemployment would rise; Government revenue would decrease; Civil revolt would increase; Organized crime would increase and so on.
Ultimately, alcohol is a biological and social problem. Alcohol has been drunken for generations, well into the times of Christ. Alcohol itself only slightly worsens natural human tendencies to have sex and instigate violence. Banning alcohol won't stop people drinking, just like making murder illegal stopping people murdering.
And yet those 30,000 still have the potential to affect the other 970,000's lives.If 970,000 people can drink in moderation, yet only 30,000 lose self-control, not all to a major degree, I think it would make more sense in dealing with those 30,000. Many lives are lost due to smoking also.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_causes_of_death_by_rate
0.16 people perish due to alcohol use disorder. 4x more people die from drowning. Perhaps we should ban people from setting foot in the water.
Natural rights. Let me drink what I want. Isn't this fair enough?
Well, why don't we ban RuneScape also? It doesn't do anything "good". And let's ban Coca Cola also, it doesn't do anything "good".
So, peer pressure does influence ones decision?So we should not prohibit that which leads to undesirables? Is that what you're saying? And peer pressure/social desires are really pathetic reasons, because at any party, you can say, "I don't/won't drink." You have the WILL to refuse. DESIRES can be SUPPRESSED.
How about dealing with those drunkards directly. Isn't that a better solution then relinquishing everyones rights?I care because I don't want one of you drunkheads to get someone innocent killed with you. Even if that doesn't happen all the time, it's a potential risk, and if I can stop it, I will, so that a few families out there might be saved from the loss of a relative.
McDonalds can make you fat, obese, cause you to break out, bad breath.Alcohol can also make you gain weight, make you feel sick or dizzy, give you bad breath, make you clumsy, slur your speech, make your skin break out and make you feel out of control.
So, your argument is that humans do not have the right to drink whatever they want? Your arguing the end-cause. The ends do not justify the means.You tell me. What is so good about that? By reducing your freedom, I am saving drinkers and non-drinkers alike. Some drinkers "complain" about their weight, and despite knowing the cause, they don't stop. Can't we lead a more healthy lifestyle?
That's their problem. You decide not to, they decide to.Those are the main issues. It would take some serious persuasion to ban alcohol in the West.
As I said, your society has become too reliant on alcohol, but is it really worth destroying your body over? Your people are ignorant. Despite knowing the risks, they take it, and lead themselves to harm's way.
I fail to see how taking someones freedom away is good. Also, actually, it led to an increase in crime and alcohol ultimately.Now to address your 1920 example.
Yes, at first, there will be many protests. The best we can do is educate the newer generations about why it was illegalized. You may say this is like "brainwashing" them, but we all know this is for their own good. With its banning, it would become more expensive. Less people would be able to get their hands on it. In like perhaps 50 years (not necessarily saying that it's gonna be 50), the newer generation would take over, with the mindset that "alcohol is bad for the body", which is true.
You know whats right, how omniscient of you. I never said good times without alcohol is impossible. Alcohol is instilled in your genetics, it has been consumed for generations. Your also saying drink alcohol = addiction. That is incorrect. Most people drink alcohol responsibly, it's only the few that run-a-muck with it.I know what's right because I haven't been "Westernized" yet. You are led by the belief that good times without alcohol is impossible. At school, you hear about how other people got wasted and had a great time. This makes you want to drink and try it out for yourself as soon as you reach the right age. This then leads to addiction, and this is also how alcohol was instilled into your lives. This was your initial mistake.
How about dealing with them accordingly without reducing liberty.In time, they will decrease. Only the addicts would do anything serious, and they would be dealt with accordingly.
Humans are not caged animals.I will, however, say that I do not want to completely ban alcohol. This would lead to too much revolt. In times like Christmas, for example, it could be allowed, and that would probably reduce protests by a considerable amount. But rules would still be put in to drink responsibly.
Yet you still seek to virtually ban all of it.Banning it won't stop it, but persuading people NOT TO DRINK IT will.
The ends don't justify the means.And yet those 30,000 still have the potential to affect the other 970,000's lives.
Your missing the point.That's ridiculous. People can be taught to swim. Swimming does not harm your body. If you're irresponsible, you'll gain zero sympathy from me.
We all know alcohol is bad for you.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_effects_of_alcohol#Alcohol-related_deaths
"One study links alcohol to 1 in every 25 deaths worldwide and that 5% of years lived with disability are attributable to alcohol consumption."
Runescape is a business, the benefit it has is that it provides us with entertainment and a past time. It also provides jobs.
Coca Cola is one of the largest companies in the world, and banning that would mean possibly say 100 million out of jobs.
Now lets move onto alcohol, everything done responsibly is fine, taking in too much of any substance, is bad for you.
Consuming under a certain amount of week is fine, infact I remember reading in the paper, that a certain amount of red wine/week is actually healthy for you.
Lastly, without alcohol, I dare to say the amount of people left un-employed would be extreme. There would be mass rioting and violence throughout the globe, this would lead to depression and many businesses would suffer as a result.
reasons to keep it legal
- most societies value freedom
- prohibition did not work well the last time.
- taxation
- a drink every now and then is enjoyable.
- drinking is ingrained in many peoples lifestyles/traditions.
Do humans have the right to drink whatever they want? Yes, or No?
People who think drinking is cool are like people who think smoking is cool. Well these people are a group of fucked up people and will have a fucked up future.
True me, I've experienced it terribly.
Do humans have the right to drink whatever they want? Yes, or No?
My idea is if you ban it, then it will go underground and you will be back to the days of prohabition and then the government will make no money from it. so the only way to stop this is to raise the price of alcohol and tax it more so people will drink less.
Runescape is a business, the benefit it has is that it provides us with entertainment and a past time. It also provides jobs.
Coca Cola is one of the largest companies in the world, and banning that would mean possibly say 100 million out of jobs.
Now lets move onto alcohol, everything done responsibly is fine, taking in too much of any substance, is bad for you.
Consuming under a certain amount of week is fine, infact I remember reading in the paper, that a certain amount of red wine/week is actually healthy for you.
Lastly, without alcohol, I dare to say the amount of people left un-employed would be extreme. There would be mass rioting and violence throughout the globe, this would lead to depression and many businesses would suffer as a result.
You know whats right, how omniscient of you. I never said good times without alcohol is impossible. Alcohol is instilled in your genetics, it has been consumed for generations. Your also saying drink alcohol = addiction. That is incorrect. Most people drink alcohol responsibly, it's only the few that run-a-muck with it.
Imagine if they banned cars because it would cause less automobile accidents.
I agree. Can we also agree that instead of banning alcohol, we should deal with the people instigating violence directly?Yes, they do. but they shouldn't have the right to put people in danger by drinking and wasting hospitals and other peoples time and money.
It's not an argument, yet. I'm simply asking do we as human-beings have the right to drink whatever we want?This is an extremely poor argument; we surrender a portion of our rights so that the rest may be protected.
Alcohol is actually part of our genetics. Our ancestors for generations have used alcohol to celebrate. Some societies such as the Greeks drunk almost all alcohol. Perhaps responsibly isn't the correct word. Most people don't bring harm to others, though.Alcohol is hardly "instilled" in our genetics. In fact, there is nothing in our genetics that would make us crave alcohol. You're also saying most people drink alcohol responsibly. That is incorrect. Most people drink alcohol irresponsibly, except very few actually get caught or are made public, so many have the same illusion as you. There are far more people who drink irresponsibly than responsibly. Simply because they don't kill someone, have sex with a random stranger, rape someone, or pass out doesn't mean they drank "responsibly."
Banning cars follows the same logic as banning alcohol.Banning cars would be illogical and unreasonable. Banning alcohol, not so much. Life without cars is easily possible, however, the efficiency at which we did things would be lowered drastically. Life without alcohol on the other hand is easily doable, without having anywhere close to the negative impact of banning cars.

