Is It Time To Lower The Drinking Age?

[Marie-Therese]

Post 6:

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 12:21 AM' timestamp='1272082901' post='2099043']
i didn't quote it because i figured you made a mistake since you were supporting my arguement with 2291. cause it fully supports what ihave been saying.
[/quote]

Where do you get that Canon 2291 supports your position? Because it doesn't. Nothing in that, or in 2290, relate on any level to the prudent use of alcohol being a moral evil.


And after my previous post, you fire back with this:

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1272083605' post='2099051']
do you really want to go down the route that alcohol is good self medication for people with out any insurance? that is the most assanine argument in this debate. using alcohol as self medication for a chronic problem is never, NEVER a good idea. no doctor will tell you its a good idea. now your just grasping at straws in this argument. just like you say illegal drugs can be used as self medication. last i checked the catholic church has a specific stance on illegal drug and your going against that stance. this is the biggest joke of an argument. using alcohol or illegal drugs as self medication. its almost not worth arguing about, since its so far out there in left field. i mean seriously, do you honestly support the idea for people without medical insuarance to self medicate with alcohol and illegal drug? do you really support that?

so your taking one comment out of context. fantastic, great job. the comment you took was my very first generalized basic statement on this topic. as the debate continued on, i got more specific. in numerous posts i clarified my points. so you either did NOT read all my posts or you read them and ignored them. which was it? before responding to my post, had you read all of my previous posts on the subject? if you did, then you know what my thoughts were, so why bring up my first post. or if you did not, why jump into the thread without reading all the other posts to get caught up?

i addressed your post about criminization in another post. go read it. its the same thing i would have posted to respond to you, so there was no point in just doing a copy and paste.

oh and just for clarification, not i but the church says not to illegal drugs. they say to follow the laws. they don't give approvals to break the laws because of your income. so again, are you going against catholic teaching, because it seems like it with your stance?
[/quote]

Hence. my reply. I think it pretty much says it all.

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='24 April 2010 - 01:20 AM' timestamp='1272086448' post='2099080']
Where, oh where, to begin.



Never said I supported any of those things. I said they were possibilities. Your entire argument is based on conjecture, predicated on the idea that a substance which in some fashion alters a person's sensory perceptions is inherently bad. My "[b]asinine[/b]" argument (please note spelling) was not that alcohol or drugs were good self medication. I said they could be used as such. Don't try to make my statements into something that they aren't.



As I stated previously, I read the entire thread before posting. That includes all posts made before and after your first post, and before my first post...hence, the entire thread. I have also read all responses since my first post. I think that pretty much covers it.

I did not, in fact, take your quote out of context. As a matter of fact, I copied the entire quote, time stamp and all. Taking something "out of context" means to remove a statement from its surrounding, clarifying statements, thereby rendering it to mean something which its original intent did not mean at all. I took nothing out of context. I simply reminded you of what you said, context and all. If you have decided, since making that statement, that it was an unfortunate blanket statement which did not reflect the totality of your viewpoint, all well and good. Then say that. Don't accuse me of trying to misrepresent you in some way. That is an accusation you're not going to get by on me. You said alcohol should be totally illegal outside worship services. That is an unequivocal, frank statement of belief. If that is what you think, back it up. Otherwise, back off. Don't try and squirm out of an uncomfortable position by claiming that I somehow misrepresented you and that your further statements clarified your position. Nope, sorry. You haven't wavered from that position. All you've managed to do is say if a doctor prescribes something it's generally OK and then argue with Nihil about how much alcohol constitutes being mentally impaired by it.




I apologize that I missed that paragraph in your response to Jesus_lol. However, your statement is just "drugs are bad m'kay and they make people do crime." Do you have statistics or any kind of data that would give credence to your position? All I can tell you is to read any decent history book about the Prohibition period in the United States, and my point is adequately proved. If you have conflicting data, I'd love to see it. I am willing in any case to be proven wrong, if you have the means to do so outside what seems to be simply your opinion.



Uh...ok? I never advocated illegal drugs. As a matter of fact, in one of my previous posts (post 109 for your reference) I said this:



Where in that do I advocate illegal drug use? Nowhere. NOWHERE.

What I do advocate is the following from the CCC, which Nihil kindly referenced:



Notice the bolded portion. This was the basis of my position in people using a substance for therapeutic reasons.



I never advocated breaking laws. However, if a law exists which in some fashion inhibits a suffering person from obtaining proper care, refer kindly to the following, CCC paragraph 1902:



Please read that carefully and ponder what it means. I, or any other Catholic, am not permitted to break laws simply because I do not like them or do not agree with them. However, if a law perpetrated by a government to which we are subject in the natural order "falls short of right reason, it is said to be an unjust law" and to obey would be acting in accord with violence.

If you'd like to formulate a counter to me that has some sort of reference material, or facts, super. Otherwise your argument is your opinion. That's fine, too. Just don't try to paint me, or anyone else who disagrees with your position, as some kind of lush or drug-sympathizer or, even worse, a disobedient Catholic. I can tolerate a lot of things. That last one gets my Irish up. I take that flag under my name very, very seriously. Impugning my character is not a way to get your point across.
[/quote]

I meant that last part. Seriously.


[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 12:06 PM' timestamp='1272125215' post='2099210']
dude, other than that one passage, i never once stated their was scriptural evidence for my thoughts. i said it was my feelings on the subject. where did i ever say other than that one comment, that the ccc aggree'd with my decision?
[/quote]

Well, at least this post is honest. Finally we come to the realization that your argument is an opinion and that, while people have represented their positions with facts, you have not relented and continue to claim that others are basically pro-intoxicant apologists.

Again, the CCC does not in any way elaborate the position you hold.

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 01:05 PM' timestamp='1272128730' post='2099231']
the church supports whatever idea's you want her to support for you. as evidence by the way you debate. so whatever.

fact is, i think a certain way and last i checked its not a sin or goes against the catholic church to think the way i think. no matter what you would have people believe.
[/quote]

Here, you are correct. Your viewpoint is in no way evil, nor does it conflict with Church teaching...if, and only if, you hold that alcohol is not permissible for you as an individual. However, the Church does not condemn alcohol, and to promote laws doing so would violate the spirit of the Church's catechesis on this topic.


[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 01:10 PM' timestamp='1272129036' post='2099233']
i am not even going to bother responding when your still trying to ignore evertything i posted and use my first post, a generalized post to try and make yourself look like your winning the debate. you obviously did not read any of my previous posts because you fail to recognize what i said in those posts. you completely ignore it so to make your arguement seem like its right. when you take the time to actually read my posts after my first one, then get back to me and i will answer your posts. until then, i am not going to bother responding to a person who ignores what i wrote in numerous posts.
[/quote]

I don't need to look like I am winning the debate. I AM winning the debate. I spent over an hour typing out this thread just to show you that your continued accusations of my ignoring your argument were baseless, and that you are in no way as misunderstood as you try to make it seem. Your argument never changed. You just realized you were coming out on the short end of the stick and got defensive.

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 02:17 PM' timestamp='1272133076' post='2099267']
judge the soul of another person? last i checked telling someone something is wrong is not judging their soul. i never stated if you drink you go to hell or you will not make it to heaven. saying something is irresponsible is not judging one's soul. its it wrong to tell someone thier dressed immodestly, or it that considered juding ones soul.

the church does not disgaree with me. show me where the church says one must not only drink alcohol but must disagree with any law that outlaws drinking. that you must be in favor of alcohol consuption. once again your twisting things to make your argument. its the same with people in the ww2 thread. they are twisting chruch teaching to fit their argument.

do you honestly think i have ever cared if my sentances are grammactically correct? its a weak argument to attack grammer in an internt debate board. oh and here we are again insnuating i have problesm with the church and her teaching. this is an example of what i mean by the way you debate. turning something i said into a round about way to attack me or to fit your point.

at the end of the day the church never states that i must approve of alcohol. that i must never agree for it to me made illegal and that i am going against its teachings if i think so. so until you can show me evidence, my stance will not change.
[/quote]

The Church does not state that you must approve of alcohol. However, as it has in no way condemned alcohol as a moral evil, to promote making something criminal which is in no way immoral would very much violate the spirit of the Church's teaching.

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 03:33 PM' timestamp='1272137638' post='2099315']
how about your first address how my thoughts on the subject of drinking being illegal goes against church teaching. show me where the church says i have to support legalized alcohol consumption. i'll be waiting.
[/quote]

Asked and answered.

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 04:53 PM' timestamp='1272142425' post='2099358']
if a government were to outlaw alcohol, that would not me immoral and tyrannical. is not tyrannical and immoral for them to outlaw pot, meth, lsd and so on. unless i missed something and the church has come out and said its immoral for america to outlaw these drugs?

you have yet to post scriptures that say one must support alcohol use and making it legal and it is wrong to want alcohol illegal. still waiting for scriptural info on this.
[/quote]

There is no requirement for you to support alcohol if you don't like it. As for the Scriptures, do as Nihil advised and read the account of the Wedding at Cana. If Jesus not only drank prudently, but promoted social drinking by providing alcohol as His first public miracle, and then went on to institute the Eucharist with using alcoholic beverage as a requirement for the sacrament, then I would say you've got a preponderance of Scriptural evidence supporting the use of alcohol.

[quote name='havok579257' date='24 April 2010 - 04:58 PM' timestamp='1272142702' post='2099360']
i guess i missed this. i said, if you incease access to the general public to a mind altering drug you increasing the crime rate. fact is, people drive while under the influence of pot. altough right now, that is limited to people who are willing to break the law and buy pot illegally. making it legal to everyone would increaser the number of people who have access to the drug and access to using the drug while driving.

your arguement is flawed. your argument is one that people have put forth a million times. because accoridng to said logic, if everything that was illegal was made legal, then crime would decrease. which doesn't work. anarchy does not work.
[/quote]

*sigh*
No one has ever said that nothing should be illegal. The question, which conveniently has gotten lost, is whether alcohol should be illegal (according to you). There has been plenty of evidence presented for you to refute your position. Whether you accept it is up to you.

Don't try to argue with me that I haven't fully answered you, or tried to misrepresent you. Here is every post you made, fully quoted and unedited. All responded to. At the end of this, I could care less whether you think alcohol should be legal or not. The beauty of this country is that anyone can have whatever deluded opinion they choose to have. However, promoting forcing your opinions onto others is where we draw the line.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='25 April 2010 - 06:01 PM' timestamp='1272232869' post='2099900']
I've found here an excerpt from the Rituale Romanum. It's a blessing for beer.

5. BLESSING OF BEER
P: Our help is in the name of the Lord.
All: Who made heaven and earth.
P: The Lord be with you.
All: May He also be with you.
Let us pray.
Lord, bless this creature, beer, which by your kindness and power has been produced from kernels of grain, and let it be a healthful drink for mankind. Grant that whoever drinks it with thanksgiving to your holy name may find it a help in body and in soul; through Christ our Lord. All: Amen.
It is sprinkled with holy water.
[/quote]

That's kinda awesome. Ok, it's really awesome.

[Resurrexi]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='26 April 2010 - 12:05 AM' timestamp='1272258319' post='2100188']
That's kinda awesome. Ok, it's really awesome.
[/quote]

It's even more awesome in Latin.


V. Adjutorium nostrum in nomine Domini.
R. Qui fecit caelum et terram.

V. Dominus vobiscum.
R. Et cum spiritu tuo.

Oremus.

Bene+dic, Domine, creaturam istam cerevisiae, quam ex adipe frumenti producere dignatus es: ut sit remedium salutare humano generi, et praesta per invocationem nominis tui sancti; ut, quicumque ex ea biberint, sanitatem corpus et animae tutelam percipiant. Per Christum Dominum nostrum.

R. Amen.

Et aspergatur aqua benedicta.

[Winchester]

[quote name='havok579257' date='25 April 2010 - 12:11 AM' timestamp='1272168683' post='2099571']
what i am saying is it will drastically reduce the number of guns in the hands of criminals[/quote]
And disarm the citizens at a much higher rate.


[quote]
and the crime rate will decrease and so will criminals on the street.
[/quote]
So guns cause crime.

Numbers say otherwise. Less gun control means lower crime rates. Chicago and DC. Look them up.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 April 2010 - 09:08 AM' timestamp='1272287280' post='2100273']




So guns cause crime.

Numbers say otherwise. Less gun control means lower crime rates. Chicago and DC. Look them up.
[/quote]


Not to mention London, Paris, etc.

[Nihil Obstat]

I propose a parade in Peyton's honour.
[img]http://news.getaroom.com/wp-content/uploads/macys-thanksgiving-day-parade.jpg[/img]
[img]http://www.lakotawestbands.org/photos/RoseParadeSpinazzola.jpg[/img]

[Winchester]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='26 April 2010 - 10:13 AM' timestamp='1272291204' post='2100287']
Not to mention London, Paris, etc.
[/quote]
The UK believes it has the right to tell citizens they cannot show weapons to deter criminals even when threatened in their own home. I don't want to live in a society like that.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 April 2010 - 12:39 PM' timestamp='1272299966' post='2100359']
The UK believes it has the right to tell citizens they cannot show weapons to deter criminals even when threatened in their own home. I don't want to live in a society like that.
[/quote]

Me neither. London is one scary town, man.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='aalpha1989' date='26 April 2010 - 11:43 AM' timestamp='1272300181' post='2100365']
Me neither. London is one scary town, man.
[/quote]
It is pretty though- they've got that going for them.

[Winchester]

They're considering outlawing knives, now. Because de-gunning citizens has worked so well.

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='26 April 2010 - 12:53 PM' timestamp='1272300828' post='2100382']
It is pretty though- they've got that going for them.
[/quote]

That's true... I tend to prefer the country, though. Northern England/Scotland ftw... well sorta. Ireland always wins.

[IMG]http://i907.photobucket.com/albums/ac278/jshoulta/Ireland_flag.gif[/IMG]

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 April 2010 - 12:56 PM' timestamp='1272301019' post='2100385']
They're considering outlawing knives, now. Because de-gunning citizens has worked so well.
[/quote]

Yeah. When I was in London there were posters everyone trying to dissuade citizens from carrying knives.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 April 2010 - 11:56 AM' timestamp='1272301019' post='2100385']
They're considering outlawing knives, now. Because de-gunning citizens has worked so well.
[/quote]
I thought they already had.

[Winchester]

In the US, they limit certain types and lengths.

Stupid.

Stupid.

Stupid.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Winchester' date='26 April 2010 - 12:01 PM' timestamp='1272301319' post='2100392']
In the US, they limit certain types and lengths.

Stupid.

Stupid.

Stupid.
[/quote]
Same here. Specifically we've outlawed butterfly knives, and knives that open by a spring from a switch. Basically knives that are too easy to open, or butterfly knives because they look scary.