Underage Drinking

  • Thread starter Thread starter bobvila
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

bobvila

Guest
What is the Catholic morality concerning underage drinking? The way the argument is being presented is that they are “respecting” the other person’s conscience and that they are breaking an “unjust” law. I have tried the give to Ceasar what is due to Ceasar argument, but so far all we can agree on is that the more virtuous thing would be to not drink underage. Is there anything anybody can add to this? Thank you.
bobvila
 
I can offer my own understanding and thoughts.

I think that drinking is not sinful, but drinking to excess, like any form of gluttony, is. Children will push boundaries and experiment with stuff like this and I have to say I did and I expect my own kids will at some point. When they do, I want them to do so in an environment I can be sure they are safe and I can look after them. For that reason I will let my children drink alcohol when their interest grows to the point were they want to. We have wine with dinner and I will allow them to consume wine if they want to. I do not intend to add to the taboo and therefore the mystique surrounding this as a thing that only ‘adults’ are allowed to do.
 
I’m sure there are more bible quotes on this, it says something like, God gives us authorities and rulers and we should obey them, unless their commands go against God’s commands.

Basically, breaking the law is a sin, unless the law contradicts God’s law. Underage drinking is against the law. Hence it is a sin. If you were in a country where it wasn’t against the law for you to drink at that age, it wouldn’t be a sin.
 
Concur with Flop.

It really isn’t an unjust law since it doesn’t do anything to impede someone’s rights.
 
Isnt there a problem here?

I can have a beer in my country (U.K) but if i commit exactly the same action in a different position in the world (usa) , its a sin?

And where do we determine that the law is against Gods law?

Where is the cut off point?
 
I agree that it is ok with the parents present, and in moderation, especially since that is not against the law here. Thanks for the help,
bobvila
 
I just wrote this in another thread:
I would like to note about the frequent arguments I see about breaking man made laws… Breaking just laws can easily be a sin… no argument there. The reason it is a sin is because it is done out of pride. The person basically exclaims: “I am greater than this just law, and all those who are required to follow it.”… Breaking just laws is a sin of pride. Breaking laws tends to be imperfections or at most venial sins… granted that the action itself is morally “neutral”.
Click to expand...
Also, in the USA, each state has different laws concerning people under the age of 21 drinking. Some states allow under 21 to drink in public… some require parents to be around. Some states require the underage person to drink at home with parental supervision. Some states do not allow it at all.

Here is a current map showing state allowances for under 21 consumption: Click Here for Map
Once you are at the map, you can click on the map to get a better description of the legend.
 
Doesn’t some of this have to do with the culture of the country? For example, even if american children were allowed to drink wine in restaurants (with parental supervision), wouldn’t most just order soda anyway? Doesn’t the consumption of alcohol in America have less to do with dining (other than on holidays) and more to do with “getting a buzz” so to speak?
I can have a beer in my country (U.K) but if i commit exactly the same action in a different position in the world (usa) , its a sin?
Click to expand...
I think some of the laws you have to take culture into effect. For example, the culture of one country may have evolved where driving on the left side of the road made more sense than driving on the right side of the road. Now, driving on either the left or the right side of the road isn’t in itself sinful but driving against traffic would be. So even if the culture you are in drives on the left side of the road doing the same action in america would be sinful because you’d be driving against traffic.

Now, if a state has had certain problems with drunk drivers age 18-20 it would probably make sense to raise the age limit of drinking from 18 to 21.
 
So, are we bound to obey all laws that are legitimately enacted and do not violate God’s law?

This could become quite silly. What if the legitimate govt banned the wearing of red shirts? Would wearing a red shirt be immoral?

In my mind, if you are an adult, enjoy drinking responsibly even if you are under 21. It’s not a sin.
 
But you’re breaking a law, and are the means by which you break that law justified? Also, what justifies breaking the law and drinking underage?
 
That’s what I think this comes down to…is it immoral to break a law that is really rather arbitrary? Is it also a sin to drive 56 MPH in a 55MPH zone? I think not. Some laws are written specifically to accomplish a broad effect. The speed limit is placed to get most cars driving at around the same safe speed. The drinking age is set so that most of those drinking are adults. I know plenty of 20 year olds who are mature adults. I see no more problem with them drinking than going 1 MPH over the speed limit.
 
40.png
mjdonnelly:
It really isn’t an unjust law since it doesn’t do anything to impede someone’s rights.
Click to expand...
Ah, no. I’m pretty sure it does impede someone’s right, namely the right to enjoy alcoholic beverages.
 
It may impede rights, but does that justify breaking the law? The rights impeded don’t seem to be hindering a relationship with God, or an ability to live that out. It seems that the law is there and should be followed out of virtue. I’m not saying that 21 is right, but it is the law, and as Catholics living in the US, should we follow this law, is it a moral issue?
 
40.png
Benedictus:
Ah, no. I’m pretty sure it does impede someone’s right, namely the right to enjoy alcoholic beverages.
Click to expand...
Same thing could be said of marijuana, or other drugs.

People are dumb enough to get into trouble after drinking, so laws are made to regulate it.
 
People are dumb enough to eat McDonald’s too often, and they get fat. People are dumb enough to not exercise enough, and they get fat. Should we outlaw McDonald’s? Should we make exercise mandatory? People are dumb, but adults should be left to make their own decisions in such matters.

Although I’m not 100% convinced marijuana should be illegal, I don’t see cannabis and alcohol as the same thing. People don’t always drink alcohol soley for the intoxicating effects, as they do when they smoke cannabis.

The drinking age laws are unjust because they deny a legal adult the right to consume a pleasing and healthful product. Doesn’t our Declaration of Independence list the “pursuit of happiness” as an inalienable right?

Furthermore, the drinking age laws in the U.S. are the result of the federal government’s unjust actions, twisting the arms of the states to force them to do what the federal government lacks the authority to do. The way these laws came into effect alone makes them unjust.
 
People are dumb enough to eat McDonald’s too often, and they get fat. People are dumb enough to not exercise enough, and they get fat. Should we outlaw McDonald’s? Should we make exercise mandatory? People are dumb, but adults should be left to make their own decisions in such matters.
Click to expand...
How many people are killed in a car crash because the driver had a heart attack as a result of eating too many fatty foods? How many people are killed in a car crash as a result of someone being under the result of an intoxicating substance?
The drinking age laws are unjust because they deny a legal adult the right to consume a pleasing and healthful product. Doesn’t our Declaration of Independence list the “pursuit of happiness” as an inalienable right?
Click to expand...
Doesn’t the protection of citizens lives trump every other right since without it all the other rights would be useless?
 
40.png
Madia:
Doesn’t the protection of citizens lives trump every other right since without it all the other rights would be useless?
Click to expand...
But at what cost to liberty???

All sorts of laws could be passed that would without a doubt save lives. But does it always make sense to do so? Laws could be passed that all occupants of an automobile MUST wear a motorcycle helmet at ALL times. Traffic fatalities would plummet. Therefore, should we enact the law? The answer is no because it infringes too much upon personal liberty. Even thought it may save lives it’s simply not a good or practical idea.

The same can be said of a national drinking age of 21. If under the law, a person is an adult at 18, then they ought to be able to enjoy the freedoms of adulthood which include enjoying alcoholic beverages. I believe it’s tough to make an argument that raising the drinking age to 21 was a justified limitation on personal liberty. After all, how many people die each year SOLELY from drinking alcohol?
 
Obey the law and respect authoritay!!! =)

From the link listed above, I found a helpful chart that lists the specific exceptions for each state:

Chart
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top