Thanks for information.
Well, alcohol cannot ban. You can make it with just a piece of bread and juice. But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it.
Printable View
Thanks for information.
Well, alcohol cannot ban. You can make it with just a piece of bread and juice. But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it.
good one ,Turk:thumbs_up
"But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it."
I'm healthy and well-educated and I am perfectly happy to drink alcohol.
Wine can be a pleasant drink, and can definitely enhance a meal. On a hot day, or after work, or in good company, beer is an excellent beverage. A fine whisky can satisfy the palate, just as a beautiful woman can satisfy the eye.
Alcohol should be thought of as one of God's gifts, to help mankind cope with a hostile world. The fact that humans are capable of abusing any good thing should not lead us to condemn those good things, or to feel any shame in enjoying them.
"But with a good education and healthy society people wouldn't want to drink it to excess," maybe.
.
Yeah, but too many women has never caused me to say extremely stupid things and then pass out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whiff
Oh wait, nevermind.
Very well said, Whiff. I feel the same, but with the qualification that we must understand that some people are disposed biologically (I believe) to alcoholism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whifflingpin
:lol: :lol: Great.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
I think you drank 2 bottles of whiskey and 1 bottle of vodka before writing this. That's why you think it's a God's gift.Quote:
Originally Posted by Whifflingpin
A good point, Joe. I going to say something here that is going to sound crazy at first, but bear with me. It is perfectly legal to purchace alcohol, and people misusing it harm and even kill people every year. Yet it also may have beneficial value, and be harmless if used in moderation.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
Now take marjuania. It is illeagal to purchace or possess. People "hopped up" on it cause many of the same problems as those who abuse alcohol. But Pot has it's own benefical value. It helps with glacoma, mirgrianes, and other illnesses. Why is one frowned upon while the other allowed?
I think doctors say there are other drugs more effective than marijuana for those ailments, and it's just an excuse for the pro-legal people to get pot legalized. So there really is no reason to proscribe marijuana.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
Just a note, Virgil. I am NOT PRO-LEGAL. I just wonder why a person can get drunk out of their mind legally, but then other things that are equally self-destructive are illegal. Excuse the spelling in my first post, I've tried to edit it three times without success! :crash:Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
I've also wondered that. You can't OD on marijuana. Marijuana is the safest mind altering drug. If you vaporize marijuana that even lowers the chance of lung cancer from using it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
I don't understand why a person would like to get drunken or mind altered by drugs unless he have serious problems?
I don't endorse the use of alcohol or any drug (I don't even use aspirin).Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
I just wonder why the law of my country allows me to retard my brain with alcohol but not with marijuana.
It makes sense to legalize marijuana, but there isn't a lot of pressure to because a) we have been lead to believe that it is somehow worse than alcohol (it isn't) and b) nobody will make any money by its legalization, because you can grow it in your basement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
For fun, maybe?Quote:
Originally Posted by Turk
Logic is not how society runs. Logic is for robots and vulcans, not humans. The question remains, do you want to add to the vices within our culture or are we trying to minimize, if not subtract? Society has been striving to minimize and even subtract, not add vices.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
Clearly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
ClearlyQuote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Granted, I'd be opposed to smoking marijuana if it was manditory. However, I'd rather not have you deciding which of my habits are vices (and, admittedly, that one is) and which are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Well, it's not me. You're country is a democracy/republic I take it. Its society through the democratic process that determines it. Hey there are many laws I don't agree with here, but I chose to be an American.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
And again we're getting into the whole 'tyranny of the majority' bit. I wonder what happened to the principle that every individual can act as he wants so long as he does not harm others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
Where was that priciple enacted? It seems like you're saying that it was in effect at one point and isn't anymore, and if it was, I'd like to study that. I'm deficient as far as history is concerned.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
It's the harm principle, one of John Stuart Mill's major theses, and one of the main principles of liberalism (both the US and Canada are, technically, liberal democracies, no matter which party is in power). It's intended to be a guide for legislation, although there is nothing in any constitution to enforce it that I'm aware of, and it seems to have been forgotten almost as soon as it was written down.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harm_principle
I was aware of the harm priciple, what I wasn't aware of is that John Mill was a politician. Why is the United States of America under any obligation to take his views into consideration? Or any government for that matter? The fact that Canada's and America's governments don't adhere to this individual's philosophy doesn't strike me as particularly earth shattering.
It's not, I know. What upsets me is the fact that both are supposed to be liberal democracies, and both seem to think that it's their business to legislate the living arangements, vices and personal habits of their citizens.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Just so we're clear: the reason I'm bemoaning this is not that I think that the current situation runs contrary to any ingrained principle of the government of said countries or any sort of objective morality (which I don't believe in), but simply because I, personally, like the harm principle.
As an aside: marijuana is at least as effect as the pain-killer that is currently most commonly prescribed to AIDS patients, and has fewer side effects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
That is a sensible question Virgil. Now let me give you a true story. The small town I grew up in had three bars on Main Street and one just a block off of Main. Then there was one on the outskirts of town, just outside the corporation limits. They drew the usual crowd of rowdy people. A cousin of mind was picked up regularly as he came out of the "Klub Kafe", very drunk, for public intoxication. Asked by the Judge why he was again in court for the same old charge, he boldly told the Judge, "Because I can't afford to go to the Lounge at the Holiday Inn and get drunk like your Honor!"Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
We moved forward, and got rid of all the bars. Now we have restaurants that sell liquor-by-the-drink, and we have the same problem with public intoxication. Changing the atmosphere doesn't change the effect of too much to drink! I used to drink myself. I drank because there were certain types of liquor I liked the taste of. But I couldn't control it, it controlled me. So it had to go.
I know it's a problem. It seems that some people are biologically predisposed to being alcoholics. The problems from it are serious. That's what drove the passion for prohibition. I enjoy a drink in moderation, but I'm lucky I guess I'm not predisposed. Despite my enjoyment of a drink of wine, I fully understand why we tried prohibition. I don't think it's prudent to open another pandora's box and legalize drugs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
It's open, we're just pretending that we can put everything back in it through legislation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
No it's not. It's not egal and it's not sanctioned by society.Quote:
Originally Posted by cuppajoe_9
Talking about prohibitions and drinks, i was in South Carolina and it was Sunday and one good friend of mine wanted to drink a beer and he drove miles in order to go in Charleston ( if i am not wrong) as this was the only near city in which alcoholic drinks were allowed on Sunday ( which is the day of God) Finally he drunk this bottle of beer. Is he alcooholic?Just a question. Are the laws of South Carolina good? Another question.
Evi
It sure is popular, though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil
To the first: if he only drank one bottle of beer, it's unlikely. To the second: no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Evi
:yawnb:
That is a good question for any believers.
But what is with drinking alcohol? Does it relly taste good? Nope.
If you are moderate it's all right. I don't mean it's wrong. And I'm sure some may like it. God said if we are ever to drink, we should be moderate. But I don't like alcohol and I will never touch it.
Friend, you are entirely missing the point. Drinking alcohol because you like the taste is like shooting heroin because you like the feeling of having a needle in your arm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hwin
"And be not drunk with wine, wherein is excess." Ephesians 5:18
I don't believe that light consummtion of alcohol is wrong, but it carries the risk of addiction which is why I never plan on having alcohol.
Wine is also "fruit of the vine", because it is grapes fermented. Grapejuice is double fermented.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shea
Mon ami, I agree that moderation is what is best, and not at all is better for many. But when quoting scripture, beware lest it be thrown back into your own lap. Consider this one, for example:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bookworm89
PROVERBS 31:6-7
Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.
Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.
When Carrie Nation went on her famous "bar bashing spree" with Bible in hand, hatchet in the other, at war with the "demon rum", bartenders everywhere were in a pickle. This fearless woman and her backers would wreck a saloon, and bust the barrels of drink. What could they do? They read their Bibles. When her and her followers swooped down on the next helpless saloon, they came to a halt. Scriptures were posted in frames on the wall. They searched their Bibles. Yes, the scriptures were there. So, they left.
It has been said "The Devil himself can quote scripture for his own ends." :)
I agree with you, but just wanted to warn you that people will challange you, and use the Bible to do so. :nod:
I agree with not drinking the wine.....because the main precious thing that a human being can have is his awarness....and his mind..
.... so why a sensible man would like to lose the only thing that can make him different from an animal "sorry for using this term"by drinking the alcohol???
....it's very stupid to try it .... while you have the choice of keeping it..
you may say that you do drink the spiritual drinks..to forget your pain.....or to feel free......., well !! what you are doing is losing your freedom....cuz u'll be soon or later an addicted on alcohol.....whether u like it or not
all what i have said....was only about logice ..
....so it has nothing to do with religion..!!!
and you may find out that the religion does not say something just for the sake of saying it...., everything was said becoz of a purpose....
all the best
zvix
Don't worry, mon ami. You're still on firm soil.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Correct also. They were first called Christians at Antioch, where Paul preached. Paul did not contridict Christ, so that is a moot question!Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
The problem is that Judaism does not accept that the Messiah has ever came. Jesus may be reluctantly accepted as a prophet, but not the Messiah. I do not think they hate his teachings, just cannot accept Him as Messiah.Quote:
Originally Posted by ShoutGrace
Everything I've ever said is moderation in all things, or don't drink at all. I had an acoholic for a dad, and it wasn't pretty. But if you preach it, any of us, then we are bound to practice what we preach! :)
Posts have been deleted because they were either insulting to some or they were quoting said insults and for me to go in and edit out all the insults they would end up not making sense.
If you are insulted by a post or topic it is best to just ignore it, or, if you wish you can report it by clicking this icon on said post: http://www.online-literature.com/for...ons/report.gif
I don't know Logos, sometimes leaving insults in shows the character or lack thereof of a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
Well, I didn't think he did either ;), which is why I was interested in hearing what that member would say in defence of his assertion . . . :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pendragon
I agree here too, which is why it might have been interesting to see the justification of that sentiment.
This is an interesting quote I've come across on this subject, namely, that of the disbelief that the world has had a Messiah.
We know more deeply, more truly, that world history has not been turned upside down to its very foundations — that the world is not yet redeemed. We sense its unredeemedness.
--- Jurgen Moltmann, Judaic Theologian/Historian