Is the consumption of alcohol a privilege or a right?

[Eli]

Originally posted by: Vic
It is neither. It is a freedom.

Rights are inherent and can neither be granted, decided by, or revoked by government.

At least, supposedly.. lol

 

[Kaervak]

Originally posted by: Malak
You have no rights but what the government decides.

Psychotic dictatorship FTW!

 

[Fenixgoon]

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
privilege.... please tell me where the constitution says you have a right to it

just like driving - it's a privilege, not a right, and it comes with a lot of responsibility

Driving is not a privilege, driving on public roads is a privilege.

which would be every road, basically

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon

Originally posted by: kogase

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
privilege.... please tell me where the constitution says you have a right to it

just like driving - it's a privilege, not a right, and it comes with a lot of responsibility

Driving is not a privilege, driving on public roads is a privilege.

which would be every road, basically

I used to live on a farm, and my dad had a jeep pickup truck from the 40s that was unregistered. You couldn't drive to the store in it, but it was perfectly legal to ride around the farm hauling metal and other junk. Me and my brother had fun riding in the back all around the field.

Point is, your consumption of alcohol does not take capital or labor from the government, and therefore you are free to do it. Like Vic said, it's a freedom.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Vic
It is neither. It is a freedom.

Rights are inherent and can neither be granted, decided by, or revoked by government.

At least, supposedly.. lol

Well, start with the first inherent right, the right to life. The government can't kill everyone. Then the right to free speech. The government can punish you for speaking but they can't stop you from saying what you're going to say.

Government is no where near as powerful as the government-worshippers would have us believe. The reality is that government has no rights but what the people decide.

 

[chrisms]

For every "Privelage" vote I will take one shot of Monarch 100. Should I be on my knees kissing the government's feet, 'Oh thank you glorious government for allowing little me to drink this beer!'

 

[gigapet]

its a right. YOu have the right to the persuit of happiness so long as that doesnt impede on someone elses persuit of the same.

 

[Lonyo]

People have been drinking for thousands of years. It's a right.
And it should be accepted by all religions too, because if it was a bad thing, whatever higher powers wouldn't have allowed us to do it for pretty much as long as we have been farming crops for.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
privilege.... please tell me where the constitution says you have a right to it

just like driving - it's a privilege, not a right, and it comes with a lot of responsibility

driving on public roads is a privelage.

Driving on your own property is a right.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

The right to pursue happiness, even if it ends with a loss of braincells, depression, or suicide.

Originally posted by: gigapet
driving on public roads is a privelage.

It's a privilige to use something that you (in part) paid for?

 

[jagec]

Originally posted by: DOSfan
Such as seatbelt laws, and suicide (which, strangely enough is illegal... How do you prosecute someone who has killed themselves?).

In the UK hundreds of years ago, the penalty was death. Which makes a startling amount of sense...you just DON'T want to attempt it, fail, and decide you'd rather live

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Howard
I'd like to think there's a freedom to consume whatever a thinking adult wants.

^^^

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Malak
You have no rights but what the government decides.

LOL you seem to misunderstand the distinction between right and law.

 

[JDrake]

Who caress:beer::wine::beer::wine::beer::wine::beer::wine::beer::wine:

 

[0roo0roo]

as long as it doesn't affect others in a dangerous way..like driving.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
Your ability to buy, posess and consume alcohol is determined by the community you live in.

We have lots of "dry" and "damp" villages up here. In a dry village it is illegal to buy, sell, import, posess or consume alcohol. In some villages the penalties for alcohol are tougher than pot.

Alcohol consumption is not a right. Just because it is legal does not mean that you have a right to it.

I contend otherwise.

"Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is one of the most famous phrases in the United States Declaration of Independence. It is listed as one of the "unalienable rights" of man. The phrase is based on the writings of John Locke, who expressed a similar concept of "life, liberty, and estate (or property)".

I further contend that consumption of alcohol (I'm confining myself to the discussion at hand, but my contentions can be cross-applied to other substances as well) falls under the "pursuit of happiness" clause and as such I consider it to be an unalienable right.

 

[kogase]

Originally posted by: HamburgerBoy
The right to pursue happiness, even if it ends with a loss of braincells, depression, or suicide.

Originally posted by: gigapet
driving on public roads is a privelage.

It's a privilige to use something that you (in part) paid for?

Yes. Unless you just want the right to drive on one 200 millionth of the road you helped pay for, you are driving on a road payed for by everybody. Once one individual oversteps his bounds the right of the majority kicks in. The right of the majority to not have their roads ruined by one moron.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
It's not a right if the community can pass a law banning it or a judge can force you to abstain as part of a sentence. I don't know that 'privelege' is the right word to describe it, but it's definitely not a right.

Well if this is how you define "right" then you must be of the opinion that man has almost no rights at all. Look at racial/gender/religious oppression. There are laws in place that oppress each of these rights, but under your definition this means that they were not rights to begin with?

a right is so-called because it should not be trampled, not because it can't.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Malak
You have no rights but what the government decides.

In practice, this is correct.
In the abstract, not so cut and dried.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: DOSfan
I would like to believe that a person has the right to do anything to themself.

But, sadly, America does not work like that. Apparently, the only right I have is to live as someone else wants me to.

The problem is, too often people put their right to do stupid sh!t in front of someone elses right to live.

You want to drink fine. Don't get behind the wheel of a car. When the actions of the irresponsible start to infringe on the rights of the innocent, things start getting blurry between rights and privileges.

True, but irrelevant to the discussion. The right to consume does not imply reckless behavior. You have the right to imbibe, but you do not have the right to drive drunk.

 

[AlienCraft]

Originally posted by: Howard
I'd like to think there's a freedom to consume whatever a thinking adult wants.

Too bad the thinking stops when elected to office.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Fenixgoon
privilege.... please tell me where the constitution says you have a right to it

just like driving - it's a privilege, not a right, and it comes with a lot of responsibility

So your argument hinges on the Constitution being an enumerated and complete document of human rights? What about other nations, do they not have the rights enumerated by our Constitution? (after all they are not bound by it as we are) Extremely weak statement.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Vic
It is neither. It is a freedom.

Rights are inherent and can neither be granted, decided by, or revoked by government.

Ah, then you are not of the opinion that man has the right to live? The state does perform executions. If you cannot recognize this most basic right as unalienable I can't do anything for you.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: Vic
It is neither. It is a freedom.

Rights are inherent and can neither be granted, decided by, or revoked by government.

At least, supposedly.. lol

Well, start with the first inherent right, the right to life. The government can't kill everyone. Then the right to free speech. The government can punish you for speaking but they can't stop you from saying what you're going to say.

Government is no where near as powerful as the government-worshippers would have us believe. The reality is that government has no rights but what the people decide.

Hahahah I find it ironic that you just used the right to life argument LOL.

 

[Squisher]

Hmmm

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.