R
rlg94086
Guest
Of course there is always…“I would rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.”
Not sure who that was…Steve Martin? Anonymous?
- Status
Not sure who that was…Steve Martin? Anonymous?
E
emeraldisle
Guest
The report in the op is stating the fact that in the UK more people die from taking alcohol than from taking heroin. To me it’s a terrible tragedy that people die from taking either heroin or alcohol. But sadly more people die in the UK from taking alcohol.But since far more than 12 times as many people consume alcohol than use heroine why is this a story?
It is a meaningless statistic
The death rate per user (if that is even an appropriate term here) is obviously much lower.
To be honest i find the following comment from you an insult to people who have lost loved ones who died from taking alcohol, “It is a meaningless statistic”. The BMA report is a factual report about a very serious problem affecting real people who are not meaningless statistics.
M
mschrank
Guest
He’s right though, the comparison with heroin is a logical fallacy- a non sequitur (Latin for “does not follow”) because far more people drink than do heroin.
If, there was a 1:1 ratio, then it would have “meaning” it would infer alcohol was more dangerous than heroin. For example, more people are savaged by their pet dog on a given year than by bengal tigers. Does that mean dogs are more dangerous than bengal tigers? No, it doesn’t- the reason why more dogs attack people is because it is far more common to own a dog than a bengal tiger.
If, there was a 1:1 ratio, then it would have “meaning” it would infer alcohol was more dangerous than heroin. For example, more people are savaged by their pet dog on a given year than by bengal tigers. Does that mean dogs are more dangerous than bengal tigers? No, it doesn’t- the reason why more dogs attack people is because it is far more common to own a dog than a bengal tiger.
E
emeraldisle
Guest
I’ve already addressed the “logics” reasoning in this tread. Yesterday I met someone who said to me that in his experience non-Christians were more concerned about other people who need help and to be honest when I read some of the posts in this tread about the “logic’s” & “statistics” of many people dying through taking alcohol I think he’s right.
R
rlg94086
Guest
Really? Do you believe that non-Christians are going to give up alcohol in order to help someone else from becoming addicted to alcohol (and Muslims don’t count, since they aren’t allowed by their religion to drink)? I truly doubt it.
Neither Christians nor non-Christians have a corner on the compassion market, but I think the person you met is incorrect. Christians have a lot of compassion for the issue of alcoholism, but what you are proposing is not necessary. You are free to do it and to encourage others to do it, but judging others for not doing it is rude IMHO.
I
IsaacSheen
Guest
Not trying to nitpick, but something is either intrinsically evil or it isn’t, for all. When something is intrinsically evil, it is evil in and of itself. Example is abortion, it is always evil under any circumstance. Thus, intrinsically evil. Alcohol is not intrinsically evil, under any circumstance, because it isn’t evil for everyone.
Also, although I don’t personally have a drinking problem, my entire life has been influenced VERY significantly by people who did. The thing is, none of these people only had a drinking problem. There are a bunch of other things that come with it. The reason I say this is because, if it was solely the fault of alcohol, and the only problem they had, then I would see a little bit stronger of an argument by people who call it “demon drink”. The thing is, these people (and we all do to some extent) had a package of problems and alcoholism and abuse was one of them. Thing is, at that time in their life, or their entire life until they died, they abused alcohol, alcohol didn’t abuse them. It’s hard to call something a demon drink when it was the people who were acting more like demons (not making any statement on their soul, just their actions).
EDIT: To everyone who has posted in this thread, regardless of opinion, I just want to say this is a great discussion and I appreciate everyone’s view on this.
S
steveandersen
Guest
Because far more people use alcohol
And by a lot more than 12 times I would guess.
Far more people die in car accidents than in parachute accidents but that has no bearing on the relative safety of either activity.
I don’t mean to offend but it is a meaningless statistic.
Raw numbers by themselves mean nothing
There was no context.
How do they define and “alcohol related” death?
What is the population of the UK?
How many die each year from any causes?
What percentage of the population uses alcohol or how many use heroine?
How does the alcohol related death rate compare to the over all death rate?
M
mschrank
Guest
Yes, they’re call liberals. They don’t adhere to logic and their minds are so open their brains fall out.
D
Digitonomy
Guest
It could make an impact on others - how likely is that? Meanwhile, we can say with near certainty that it will have some negative impact: besides the health benefits of drinking mentioned earlier, there are social benefits. If I am with friends, coworkers, or loved ones at a gathering, I am sometimes a bit introverted or even morose, especially at the end of a long day. A single drink tends to alleviate this, thus helping in a small way to strengthen friendships and family bonds.
L
Lance
Guest
If you are so against alcohol, don’t drink it, don’t hang out with people who, work within your community to get tougher DUI and teen drinking enforcement but don’t take us back to Prohibition. Look at the problems that caused. You can not legislate morality. Don’t try to force your views of alcohol on the rest of us.
D
dprewett
Guest
God gave people free will. I like to watch people try and take it away simply because they are against something. If you lead your life as a drunkard then one must face the ramifications of that. Where do suppose we draw the line. What bussiness is it of yours if I have a glass of wine with dinner or a beer after work. Do I think it ok to drive drunk, no but we already have laws against that in our society. Making alchohol illegal would fall under the same catagory as making guns illegal. There would be no control, crime would raise, prison overcrowding would expand, and the same people you want to stop drinking would still be doing it only now you have made them into criminals and the liquer would most likely become unsafe. IE bath tub Gin.
Also I do not wish for people like the Kennedy’s to become more wealthy by creating illegal alchohol bussinesses and then buying the white house. 
Also I do not wish for people like the Kennedy’s to become more wealthy by creating illegal alchohol bussinesses and then buying the white house.
D
deb1
Guest
Just because people don’'t agree with your solution doesn’t mean that we don’t care about the problem. Several people have given you reasons that they don’t think that your solution will work.
Showing compassion is not doing something just for the sake of doing it. Showing compassion is examing the problem and finding real solutions. If you do something just for the sake of doing it then you are only trying to make yourself feel better about the problem. That isn’t compassion, that is a warped sense of selfishness disguised as compassion.
I am sure that you are very concerned for the problem and want to take a stand. Just make certain that the stand you take is one that will work.
If you feel that this is your misson-and God could well be placing this on your heart-then why not get a degree in psychology and actually work in a field that will do some good for addicts.
E
emeraldisle
Guest
People aren’t posting reasons why going the extra mile in love won’t work but they are posting hair-splitting comments about “logics” & “statistics”. Imo this is the sort of mindset that prevails in people who say that it’s ok to abort a baby when it’s only a number of weeks old. When people are talked about in terms of “logics” & “statistics” it denies that fact that every human life is precious and we should do all we possibly can to save peoples lives.Just because people don’'t agree with your solution doesn’t mean that we don’t care about the problem. Several people have given you reasons that they don’t think that your solution will work.
Showing compassion is not doing something just for the sake of doing it. Showing compassion is examing the problem and finding real solutions. If you do something just for the sake of doing it then you are only trying to make yourself feel better about the problem. That isn’t compassion, that is a warped sense of selfishness disguised as compassion.
I am sure that you are very concerned for the problem and want to take a stand. Just make certain that the stand you take is one that will work.
If you feel that this is your misson-and God could well be placing this on your heart-then why not get a degree in psychology and actually work in a field that will do some good for addicts.
Remember the man on the road to Jericho and religious people passed him by. Maybe these people were thinking about the logics and statistics of people being beaten up and left for dead?
My main point in this tread is what can Christians do “to go the extra mile” in helping to stop the very serious problem of real people dying from taking alcohol.
M
mschrank
Guest
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Pass the hooch.
Pass the hooch.
D
deb1
Guest
But you have to approach a problem logically or your solution won’t work. I will say again that there are people here in the Southeastern USA who refuse to drink and it has ZERO influence on anyone else except people who belong to their church.
Reflecting a more moderate approach to drinking, in my opinion, would be a more effective approach, as would not viewing drunkeness as a rite of passage for young adults.
E
emeraldisle
Guest
God becoming man and dying for man on the cross isn’t “logical”, its God demonstrating His love for people. Christians are supposed to love people like God loves them, it’s not “logics” it’s “love”.
Your “zero influence” statement is just your opinion because you have no factual evidence to support this sweeping statement. I think that by not taking alcohol you won’t influence everyone not to take alcohol but you can influence some people not to take alcohol. Also it’s worth remembering that there are many very good examples of people in the Bible who “went the extra mile” out of love for people and their actions didn’t influence everyone. Indeed the greatest Man who ever lived, Jesus Christ went the extra mile more than anyone else and He was rejected by most people and crucified on the cross.
So if by not taking alcohol you influence one person not to take alcohol and thereby prevent this person from becoming an alcoholic, or a drunk driver who kills someone and/or himself, or a drunken person who assaults someone(a wife or children), a person who has sex while drunk and then gets pregnant and has an abortion. Well then I think this is a very worthy thing to do and what does it cost someone to not take alcohol, which kills people and destroys lives and instead take any number of very nice non-alcoholic drinks which don’t kill people and destroy lives.
Imo there’s no valid reason for taking alcohol but there is a very good reason for not taking alcohol and that is “love for your neighbor”.
L
Lance
Guest
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy! Just my opinion.
J
johnnykins
Guest
Actually I can think of some very good reasons to “take” alcohol - most especially the conviviality it engenders. Why the Marriage Feast at Cana would have been a drag without it. Also, without wine - which does retain all the appearances of wine including alcohol - we could not have the Eucharist.
Frankly, the neo-puritanical prohibition position has proven to be unworkable, creates crime, promotes disrespect for the law and makes those proposing it laughing stocks (maybe that last one is OK). Lots of things lead to death, and problems when abused. Overeating leads to heart disease. One can certainly abuse sex. I can’t think of any good and wonderful thing made by God for our pleasure than cannot be abused. However, that is no reason to try to ban it in some sort of misplaced effort to control people while exercising an untoward and joyless tyranny over humanity.
Since Jesus drank, I’ll lift a glass, too.
D
dprewett
Guest
So is wine
E
emeraldisle
Guest
To my knowledge no-one is suggesting that alcohol be banned.
In the UK people have more freedom to take alcohol than they ever had and as a result of having more freedom to take alcohol more people are dying from alcohol use and more lives are being destroyed from alcohol use. As for your food & sex argument, well if people stopped eating they would starve to death and if people stopped having sex well were will the next generation come from?? But if Christians stopped taking taking alcohol would they die or would there not be another generation??
The issue is simple are Christians willing to go the extra mile by not taking alcohol in order to influence people not to take alcohol, which kills people and destroys lives.
- Status