Parents And Drinking

[Alycin]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1562360' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:02 AM']Drunkenness is the habit of being drunk. Don't bother with dictionary definitions. You'll find they vary. My usage is proper.[/quote]


I don't believe I said anything to you about your drinking habits. And I'm sorry, but I'm not so prideful as to adopt the definition of a word that fits my liking and dismiss all the others... so you saying the above doesn't make it so. There have been discussions on this board before about the definition of the word "drunkenness" using the catechism, and in the end I'm always going to listen to the catechism/the Church as the final say.

[CatherineM]

Alcoholism runs in my family, and I could definitely have gone down that path with my drinking in college. My opinion of alcohol in the house is influenced by my experiences of taking in my 15 year old nephew. He was always in it. I still have guilt that my alcohol contributed to his alcoholism and addiction and eventual death on the streets. I also know that if I've had a hard day, I could easily come in and start drinking. So I don't keep it in the house. Most families/people don't have those issues, so for them it's not a problem.

Edited June 7, 2008 by CatherineM

[Alycin]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1562366' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:05 AM']

I think I clarified what I meant in that topic. Thanks for spinning my words to make me sound like an alcoholic.[/quote]


Oh please. Don't kid yourself. If I was trying to spin your words I certainly wouldn't have linked to the thread where everyone could go and see for themselves what you said, now would I? That would just be silly on my part.

[quote name='Justin86' post='1562366' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:05 AM']Why are the Charity Police so uncharitable?[/quote]

Funny, you keep saying that, but both times it has really just been a lame excuse to shift attention. Neither time that you've ranted about charity police has it been a valid argument.

*edited for grammar

Edited June 7, 2008 by Alycin

[prose]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1562229' date='Jun 7 2008, 09:10 AM']Why? There is nothing wrong with having a glass of wine at Christmas or Thanksgiving. Jesus drank wine.[/quote]

Jesus MADE wine. And then served it to people who were already drunk.

So either:

A. Jesus encouraged sin by providing more alcohol to drunk people even though drinking is a sin.

OR

B. Drinking is not a sin.

I am putting my bets on B.

Anyways, my answers:

I voted unsure because I do not think it is responsible to get drunk around children, but I don't think a glass of wine with dinner is innappropriate.

I voted that my parents modelled responsible behavior. My mother never had a single drink, ever to my memory, and my father only had an occasional beer.

And I got very drunk in highschool several times.

[Alycin]

[quote name='CatherineM' post='1562378' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:09 AM']Alcoholism runs in my family, and I could definitely have gone down that path with my drinking in college. My opinion of alcohol in the house is influenced by my experiences of taking in my 15 year old nephew. He was always in it. I still have guilt that my alcohol contributed to his alcoholism and addiction and eventual death on the streets. I also know that if I've had a hard day, I could easily come in and start drinking. So I don't keep it in the house. Most families/people don't have those issues, so for them it's not a problem.[/quote]


*hugs*

[Winchester]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1562372' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:08 AM']I don't believe I said anything to you about your drinking habits. And I'm sorry, but I'm not so prideful as to adopt the definition of a word that fits my liking and dismiss all the others... so you saying the above doesn't make it so. There have been discussions on this board before about the definition of the word "drunkenness" using the catechism, and in the end I'm always going to listen to the catechism/the Church as the final say.[/quote]
I didn't say you did, did I?

I didn't adopt the definition out of the blue. It's the proper usage. That doesn't touch upon whether getting slobbering drunk can be sinful. I'd wager that it's rather mitigated by the fact that you must progress through pleasantly inebriated, which lowers your judgement.

There are several approved moral theology books out there. They are more suited than the CCC to making your argument. Does the Bible say that everyone at the Wedding of Cana was drunk? I can't remember and I'm going potty, so I don't have access to any of my Bibles.

[Justin86]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1562372' date='Jun 8 2008, 01:08 AM']I don't believe I said anything to you about your drinking habits.[/quote]
Yeah, that's you. As soon as someone calls you out on what you infer you deny ever saying it. Why did you even bring back a dead topic anyway? It's called passive-aggression. Work on it.

[quote]And I'm sorry, but I'm not so prideful as to adopt the definition of a word that fits my liking and dismiss all the others... so you saying the above doesn't make it so.[/quote]
Oh please, everybody has a different vocabulary on the matter.

[quote]There have been discussions on this board before about the definition of the word "drunkenness" using the catechism, and in the end I'm always going to listen to the catechism/the Church as the final say.[/quote]
Gee, I'm sorry I don't always have the same vocabulary as the catechism! Last time I checked what you called a sin wasn't important, it was whether or not you were actually doing it that mattered. I believe the catechism draws the line at blacking out. Do I ever drink that much? No. This is a non-issue.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. It's gone over into ridiculousness.

[Winchester]

[quote]It's gone over into ridiculousness.[/quote]I thought it was just starting to get fun, too.

[Alycin]

[quote name='prose' post='1562389' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:14 AM']Jesus MADE wine. And then served it to people who were already drunk.

So either:

A. Jesus encouraged sin by providing more alcohol to drunk people even though drinking is a sin.

OR

B. Drinking is not a sin.

I am putting my bets on B.[/quote]

Doesn't that depend on if they were actually "already drunk" in the first place? The thread where you brought this up before was actually the only place I've ever heard that they were already DRUNK.

And I don't think anyone is arguing that drinking in and of itself is a sin.



And for reference, [url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=78302&hl=drunkenness"]here is a thread[/url] that gives good arguments for both sides. I tend to lean towards what Aloy was saying, thought I would be extremely careful. I think a lot of people might kid themselves when trying to use his model of "when is it too much?"

[Alycin]

[quote name='Justin86' post='1562399' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:17 AM']Yeah, that's you. As soon as someone calls you out on what you infer you deny ever saying it.[color="#FF0000"]Actually, dear Justin, when I want to respond to someone I use the quote function. Nice try, but no cigar. You're really good at this red herring stuff.[/color] Why did you even bring back a dead topic anyway?[color="#FF0000"]No, it's actually called linking to a relevant topic. See, Justin, I guess I'm screwed either way with you because if I hadn't linked, you'd have been closer in your assessment of me "spinning your words", but to be fair to you, I did link. And what's interesting is that you posted very often in that thread, bumping it to keep it alive quite a bit, right up until that little discussion was had in it, and then you let it die.[/color] It's called passive-aggression. Work on it. [color="#FF0000"]Already explained above, but you can stay in denial if you'd like. What was there to be aggressive about in that thread? I certainly wasn't aggressive in word or in mind at all in that thread. If you were, maybe that's something you need to work on yourself. The whole practice-what-you-preach thing.[/color]
Oh please, everybody has a different vocabulary on the matter.[color="#FF0000"]And the only definitions I care about in the end are the ones the Church gives. I will not put mine or anyone else's above that.[/color]
Gee, I'm sorry I don't always have the same vocabulary as the catechism![color="#FF0000"]It's okay, we all make mistakes.[/color] Last time I checked what you called a sin wasn't important, it was whether or not you were actually doing it that mattered.[color="#FF0000"]Err, are you serious? Definitions of sins are very much important. That's how we know what not to do.[/color] I believe the catechism draws the line at blacking out.[color="#FF0000"]If you think that drinking to the point of right before blacking out is okay by the Catechism, you need to take another look. Most people puke before they black out.[/color] Do I ever drink that much? No.[color="#FF0000"]That's good.[/color] This is a non-issue.[color="#FF0000"]It's between you and God.[/color][/quote]

Edited for grammar.

Edited June 7, 2008 by Alycin

[Alycin]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1562392' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:14 AM']I didn't say you did, did I?

I didn't adopt the definition out of the blue. It's the proper usage. That doesn't touch upon whether getting slobbering drunk can be sinful. I'd wager that it's rather mitigated by the fact that you must progress through pleasantly inebriated, which lowers your judgement.

There are several approved moral theology books out there. They are more suited than the CCC to making your argument. Does the Bible say that everyone at the Wedding of Cana was drunk? I can't remember and I'm going potty, so I don't have access to any of my Bibles.[/quote]


You don't keep good reading material by your toilet? I don't want to hijack this thread anymore than has already been done, but I did link to a different thread that had an extensive range of opinion on the topic, if you want to check it out. If not, that's fine too. I just think it's important to be careful about wording and definitions.

[Winchester]

[quote]Yeah, that's you. As soon as someone calls you out on what you infer you deny ever saying it.Actually, dear Justin, when I want to respond to someone I use the quote function. Nice try, but no cigar. You're really good at this red herring stuff. Why did you even bring back a dead topic anyway?No, it's actually called linking to a relevant topic. See, Justin, I guess I'm screwed either way with you because if I hadn't linked, you'd have been closer in your assessment of me "spinning your words", but to be fair to you, I did link. And what's interesting is that you posted very often in that thread, bumping it to keep it alive quite a bit, right up until that little discussion was had in it, and then you let it die. It's called passive-aggression. Work on it. Already explained above, but you can stay in denial if you'd like. What was there to be aggressive about in that thread? I certainly wasn't aggressive in word or in mind at all in that thread. If you were, maybe that's something you need to work on yourself. The whole practice-what-you-preach thing.
Oh please, everybody has a different vocabulary on the matter.And the only definitions I care about in the end are the one the Church gives. I will not put mine or anyone else's above that.
Gee, I'm sorry I don't always have the same vocabulary as the catechism!It's okay, we all make mistakes. Last time I checked what you called a sin wasn't important, it was whether or not you were actually doing it that mattered.Err, are you serious? Definitions of sins are very much important. That's how we know what not to do. I believe the catechism draws the line at blacking out.If you think that drinking to the point of right before blacking out is okay by the Catechism, you need to take another look. Most people puke before they black out. Do I ever drink that much? No.That's good. This is a non-issue.It's between you and God.[/quote]Dude, she is totally into you.

[Alycin]

[quote name='Winchester' post='1562442' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:37 AM']Dude, she is totally into you.[/quote]

Darn, you caught me. Is it that obvious?

[Winchester]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1562440' date='Jun 7 2008, 11:35 AM']You don't keep good reading material by your toilet? I don't want to hijack this thread anymore than has already been done, but I did link to a different thread that had an extensive range of opinion on the topic, if you want to check it out. If not, that's fine too. I just think it's important to be careful about wording and definitions.[/quote]
My wife keeps taking stuff out of there.

I think it's important, too, which is why I don't rely upon just any dictionary.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='Alycin' post='1562349' date='Jun 7 2008, 03:58 PM']IMO it could go either way with teens... if there is not a drop of alcohol in the house it may create a curiosity about it and an eagerness to try it. If a child grows up witnessing their mother or father drink on a regular basis, the child could use that excuse as a reason why they should be able to drink. If a child grows up watching their parents drink to a point where their demeanor changes, even in the slightest, it can be damaging and confusing to them.

So pretty much... it could all go wrong.[/quote]
Yes, it can go either way. A lot has to do with the attitude of the parents. My dad's parents were vehemently anti-alcohol, as my great-uncle was an alcoholic. My dad & uncle both started drinking somewhat as a rebellion, once they got to college, and my uncle became an alcoholic. My mom's parents drank responsibly, so it wasn't seen as a big deal to have a drink at dinner. My parents were the same way. I grew up with my dad having a beer after dinner, but I've never seen him tipsy or drunk. My mother rarely drinks. The alcohol was never hidden, but we never tried to get into it without parental permission. From the age of around 12 or so we were allowed to have a glass of wine at dinner. My siblings and I all drink responsibly. My husband & I have already decided that our children will be allowed to taste our drinks from around the age 10-12 or so, and we will model responsible drinking, as well as talking to them about it.