TempleofVesarius Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 ahhhhhhh hyper that is what i thought take alook at this site tho http://www.winstonchurchill.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullnaChinaShop Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 I have seen a lot of things that stupid teenagers do. But if these same teenagers all had to work to earn the right to drive they would take that right and the responsibilities that go along with it more seriously. Anytime someone has to work for something it becomes more valuable to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 Bull, It is not morally acceptable to obey or disobey a law based soley on our opinion of it's a good law or bad law. We are obliged to disobey a law that would force us to act immorally. All other laws are to be respected as legitimate because the nature of humans is societal creatures and we require social order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp15 Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 I dont disagree with you.... I just ask that you observe how mature I am on your own and not label me because of my age. I am not like many 18 year olds. My friends arent like many 18 year olds. But we have experienced much more of the world than most 18 year olds. This attitude is not surprising. As I have already said, I thought the same way at your age. I'm sure all your friends feel the same way too. This attitude coming from 18 year old's hasn't changed for eons. It matters little how mature you think you are, because I guarantee you'll feel differently about life in about 20 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 i'm starting to think it's sad that alcohol is this important to this many people. I agree. Why break the law and risk the consequences just to drink a few beers? How sad do you have to bee to require alcohol to have a good time and socialize or to relax? It's amazing that some people think alcohol is so important that they thing it's a 'fundamental right'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp15 Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 I have seen a lot of things that stupid teenagers do. But if these same teenagers all had to work to earn the right to drive they would take that right and the responsibilities that go along with it more seriously. Anytime someone has to work for something it becomes more valuable to them. Bull, I agree with that, but the biggest problem is that teenagers (and some adults I might add) seem to think they are entitled to a drivers license. I'm with you, it must be earned. If they get caught doing something stupid, well then it get's revoked for some period of time. After that time expires then they must take the test all over again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullnaChinaShop Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 My gripe is not with alcohol in particular. I can only think of a couple of times that I had alcohol when I was under 21 and not with family. My problem as I have stated before is that if one is considered an adult then they should have all adult rights and responsibilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BullnaChinaShop Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 mp15, It appears we agree after all. I like the idea of having to retake the test to get their licenses back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marielapin Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 Bull, It is not morally acceptable to obey or disobey a law based soley on our opinion of it's a good law or bad law. We are obliged to disobey a law that would force us to act immorally. All other laws are to be respected as legitimate because the nature of humans is societal creatures and we require social order. Jas, I would like to point something out about my husbands posts: he never once said it was morally acceptable to pick and choose which laws he follows or not. He likes to voice his opinion and that is all he is doing. Please don't read things into his posts that are not there. We don't pick and choose which laws we follow. But we do like to talk about how we don't like the laws or how we would change them. They aren't the same thing!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 (edited) Jas, I would like to point something out about my husbands posts: he never once said it was morally acceptable to pick and choose which laws he follows or not. He likes to voice his opinion and that is all he is doing. Please don't read things into his posts that are not there. We don't pick and choose which laws we follow. But we do like to talk about how we don't like the laws or how we would change them. They aren't the same thing!!!! marielapin, Given that the context of this thread is discussing the morallity of underage college student's drinking beer, I understood Bull's posts regarding opinion of the law as being reason to disregard, especially since they are subsequent to ToV proposing that the law is not a good law and does not require obedience. The response may be directed to his comments, but there are other people who are reading this thread as well. Edited July 29, 2003 by jasJis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 You know, it's really not funny making jokes as it it is no big deal about underage drinking. How many people do you know were killed by drunk drivers? How many women do you personally know were date raped when they were at a party were drinking got a little out of hand? How many people do you know did things they normally wouldn't have because of a few drinks? How many people have STD's because of a being a little too drunk? How many women do you know have gotten pregnant when they've had a couple of beers and their natural maturity failed them? It's asnine to claim that you are responsible enough to drink, but you fail to realize your responsibility to obey the law. It's also irresponsible to believe that drinking has no negative effects. It's irresponsible to belive that there are no culmulative effects from irresponsible behavior. It's irresponsible to foster the idea that it's only a personal choice and that there aren't risks involved with it. Underage drinking is not morally okay, so it's scandolous to cause other's to believe it is okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp15 Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 Drunk driving and underaged drinking arent the same thing Being Drunk and drinking arent the same thing All the behaviors you mentioned and drinking arent the same People use being drunk for an excuse for their actions and more of that stuff happen with people over 21....so why is it not immoral for them to drink????? It is immoral if they are getting drunk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TempleofVesarius Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 Being Drunk and drinking arent the same thing ahhh we agree on something!!! sort of... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
logos Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 jasjis- you are very courageous in your defense of your position. I want to commend you for your logic. You have cited the Catechism and you are referring to the moral implications of underage drinking. Good job. It is okay to think that it is stupid to allow people to vote and be taxed and die for their country without being able to drink. There could seem to be a discrepency there. As Catholics we are allowed to question that and to legally push for means to change that fact, either by raising the voting/draft age or lowering the drinking age. We are not however allowed to break the law because we disagree with it, unless the law is forcing us to do something against our conscience. To all of the people that think it is okay and morally acceptable to break the law in order to drink underage: do you also think that it is morally acceptable to drive a car down the street if you're 8 years old (given proper driving instruction)? We can't pick and choose which laws we will obey. We can only pick and choose which laws we agree with. Obedience is a Catholic virtue. All the saints will tell you of it's importance. If you think it's okay to drink underage, do it, and/or condone others to do it, then you are lying every time you say the pledge. You have pledged allegiance to the flag AND to the Republic. We should all hope that we can say, as St. Thomas More did, "I die the kings (countries) good servant, but God's first." Please re-read Jasjis's posts, they contain wisdom. Peace of Christ- logos Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted July 29, 2003 Share Posted July 29, 2003 Why 21? Printer-friendly version Email to a friend What's Magic About the Number 21? Are you wondering what the deal is with the 21 minimum drinking age law? Sure, it's a law but it doesn't always feel like it. It's in all 50 states but do people pay attention to it? You might question why the laws were written with 21 as the minimum drinking age, what's so special about that age, and how the law came to be. Here's a lowdown on the most relevant information. A Walk Down Memory Lane Some folks think 21 was pulled out of the air. But despite what you may think, there are some pretty good reasons that age 21 was selected. Back in the late 1960's and early 70's a number of states lowered their drinking age from 21 to 18. In many of these states, research documented a significant increase in highway deaths of the teens affected by these laws. So, in the early 1980's a movement began to raise the drinking age back to 21. After the law changed back to 21, many of the states were monitored to check the difference in highway fatalities. Researchers found that teenage deaths in fatal car crashes dropped considerable - in some cases up to 28% - when the laws were moved back to 21. Like it or not, it is clear that more young people were killed on the highways when the drinking age was 18. Back in 1982 when the many of the states had minimum drinking ages of 18, 55% of all fatal crashes involving youth drivers involved alcohol. Since then, the alcohol-related traffic fatality rate has been cut in half! Research estimates that from 1975-1997 more than 17,000 lives have been saved. Hard to argue with that! A Strain in the Brain According to the book Buzzed, the use of alcohol by young people is especially frightening. We all hear about the dangers and consequences of underage drinking, but most of us know very little about how alcohol affects on the brains of young people. Buzzed says we should look at what we do know about young brains like the fact that they don't finish developing until a person is around twenty years old. And one of the last regions to mature is intimately involved with the ability to plan and make complex judgments. Young brains are built to acquire new memories and are "built to learn." Buzzed reports that, "It is no accident that people are educated in our society during their early years, when they have more capacity for memory and learning. However, with this added memory capacity may come additional risks associated with the use of alcohol." Apparently on studies using animals, young brains are vulnerable to dangerous effects of alcohol, especially on learning and memory function. If this is true of people, then young people who drink may be "powerfully impairing the brain functions on which they rely so heavily for learning." So, in case there wasn't enough pressure to perform at school, at your job, or just in life, alcohol can prevent your use of your own brain. So in answer to the question "Why?" the 21 minimum age drinking laws were established to save your brain and your life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts