Alcohol laws by state

[myboynoah]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

5% sounds high to me, but again just anecdotal evidence is on my side. I don't doubt your numbers. I'm just trying to highlight that we all take risks that we think will never culminate in a tragedy. It is human nature to do this. Mormons just do it in other venues. I'm in no way shape or form trying to minimize the negative impact of alcohol. Just trying to answer the question of why a person woudl do something that to we LDS seems irrational. In other words, they aren't that different than we are. We make the same sorts of choices, just as to other risky behaviors.

Originally Posted by creekster

My father was an alcoholic. I had several roomates in college (not at BYU) who abused alcohol regularly. Alcoholism is not the same as abuse of alcohol, I assure you. Thus, I am somewhat suspicious of the menaing of that 5%.

Numbers were being thrown out so I wanted to find something that could at least be pinned to an authoritative source.

I'm basically live and let live. If people want to engage in risky behavior, then I'm OK, as long as it doesn't affect me. You want to drink at a party because it puts you at ease, I don't care. You want to drink wine for dinner because it enhances the culinary experience, I don't care. You want to drink because people have been doing it for ages, I don't care. You need to drink because OU lost to Boise; I've been there and can understand.

But the problem is, alcoholism, alcohol abuse, and DUI affect us all. My grandfather abused alcohol to the point that it almost destroyed his family. Thankfully he found religion and quit. The father of my wife's best friend growing up was a full-on SOB drunk. The pain continues to be felt years later (probably "the" reason my wife doesn't drink). Gratefully I've never had to face the pain of losing someone due to DUI. As a remedy, do I advocate a return to prohibition? No. I just think a pretty good argument can be made for restricting it's use without appealing to religious belief, even though that may be the initial driver. The numbers are not as low as some would want to believe.

As for the health benefits of alcohol, I doubt anybody imbibes for that reason. Certainly, responsible doctors wouldn't suggest it as part of a "heart healthy" diet. In fact, recent studies show that one can get exactly the same benefit from drinking grape juice. Turns out, its the grape not the alcohol.

[UtahDan]

Originally Posted by myboynoah

Numbers were being thrown out so I wanted to find something that could at least be pinned to an authoritative source.

I'm basically live and let live. If people want to engage in risky behavior, then I'm OK, as long as it doesn't affect me. You want to drink at a party because it puts you at ease, I don't care. You want to drink wine for dinner because it enhances the culinary experience, I don't care. You want to drink because people have been doing it for ages, I don't care. You need to drink because OU lost to Boise; I've been there and can understand.

But the problem is, alcoholism, alcohol abuse, and DUI affect us all. My grandfather abused alcohol to the point that it almost destroyed his family. Thankfully he found religion and quit. The father of my wife's best friend growing up was a full-on SOB drunk. The pain continues to be felt years later (probably "the" reason my wife doesn't drink). Gratefully I've never had to face the pain of losing someone due to DUI. As a remedy, do I advocate a return to prohibition? No. I just think a pretty good argument can be made for restricting it's use without appealing to religious belief, even though that may be the initial driver. The numbers are not as low as some would want to believe.

As for the health benefits of alcohol, I doubt anybody imbibes for that reason. Certainly, responsible doctors wouldn't suggest it as part of a "heart healthy" diet. In fact, recent studies show that one can get exactly the same benefit from drinking grape juice. Turns out, its the grape not the alcohol.

I'm hijacking now, but I had heard that same thing about grape juice having the same affects but wasn't sure where I heard it. Then a a week or two ago I watching something on Discovery or National Geographic where the scientists were saying that the beneficial chemical was found in the skin of red grapes and released during the firmentation process. Hence, white wine and grape juice had none of the same benficial affect.

I was just curious if you knew what your source was or if you probably heard it in the hall during church like I did. Can you or anyone link something on the article you are talking about? I would like to read it.

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by UtahDan

I'm hijacking now, but I had heard that same thing about grape juice having the same affects but wasn't sure where I heard it. Then a a week or two ago I watching something on Discovery or National Geographic where the scientists were saying that the beneficial chemical was found in the skin of red grapes and released during the firmentation process. Hence, white wine and grape juice had none of the same benficial affect.

I was just curious if you knew what your source was or if you probably heard it in the hall during church like I did. Can you or anyone link something on the article you are talking about? I would like to read it.

Here you go:

CNN Article 2000

January 2007 Study

[All-American]

I accept the notion that an occasional drink is probably as harmless as an ocassional chocolate cake. It may even be somewhat healthy-- though, I might add, every study I'VE seen on the health benefits of drinking also include a caveat stating that the health benefits are not sufficient reason to start drinking.

I also assert the idea that it is easier and much more dangerous to overdo alcohol than to overdo chocolate cake. I believe it is for those two reason, suceptibility and peril of excess, that the LDS church calls for tee-totalism.

[All-American]

Ok, now THIS is just funny.

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=2493718

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by All-American

Ok, now THIS is just funny.

http://www.cougarboard.com/noframes/...tml?id=2493718

What I think is most funny is the source: "Mormon Bathroom Reader".

[BarbaraGordon]

Originally Posted by All-American

I also assert the idea that it is easier ... to overdo alcohol than to overdo chocolate cake.

Um, no. In 2003, the CDC cited obesity as the #1 health problem in the U.S.. Fully 65% of Americans are now either overweight or obese.

Are you going to lose control of your vehicle after "one too many" slices of chocolate cake? No. But the long-term personal health costs and societal economic costs are well-documented.

Note to interested parties: According to the CDC, alcohol abuse is the 3rd leading lifestyle-related cause of death in the U.S., behind obesity and tobacco.

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by All-American

I accept the notion that an occasional drink is probably as harmless as an ocassional chocolate cake. It may even be somewhat healthy-- though, I might add, every study I'VE seen on the health benefits of drinking also include a caveat stating that the health benefits are not sufficient reason to start drinking.

I also assert the idea that it is easier and much more dangerous to overdo alcohol than to overdo chocolate cake. I believe it is for those two reason, suceptibility and peril of excess, that the LDS church calls for tee-totalism.

MayoClinic on Grape Juice and Red Wine

Noted caveats:

The American Heart Association doesn't recommend that anyone start drinking alcohol just to prevent heart disease. If you already drink alcohol, do so in moderation. Keep in mind that drinking too much alcohol can increase the risk of:

* High blood pressure
* Obesity
* Stroke
* Cancer

In addition, even light drinking can lead to alcohol addiction.

[il Padrino Ute]

I knew that obesity was #1 and tobacco was #2, but I didn't know that alcohol was #3.

You make a really good point about not losing control of your vehicle after eating too much chocolate cake. By saying this, you did understand AA's point about the difference between alcohol and cake; however, your comment also is the reason why I believe alcohol to be a worse problem than cake, as it's abuse can lead to causing more collateral damage than obesity. Well, unless a really fat guy falls off a building and squashes innocent bystanders; that would be awful as well, but I digress.

I have no problem with folks that imbibe, as it is a legal substance. As I stated earlier, I'd rather see a much more severe penalty for DUI.

[Surfah]

Originally Posted by BarbaraGordon

Um, no. In 2003, the CDC cited obesity as the #1 health problem in the U.S.. Fully 65% of Americans are now either overweight or obese.

Are you going to lose control of your vehicle after "one too many" slices of chocolate cake? No. But the long-term personal health costs and societal economic costs are well-documented.

Note to interested parties: According to the CDC, alcohol abuse is the 3rd leading lifestyle-related cause of death in the U.S., behind obesity and tobacco.

Worth noting that #2 Tobacco and #3 Alcohol have been shown to contribute to #1 Obesity. Whereas eating chocolate cake doesn't necessarily lend itself to smoking or drinking unless it's one hell of a cake I guess.