Comment by bart_spoon
4 years ago
You say that as if there is no other reason to ban alcohol than religious belief, and not like alcohol being one of the most negative societal influences in the areas of human health, crime, public safety, and poverty. Just because humans are so cripplingly addicted to alcohol that banning was untenable doesn’t mean it was a bad idea.
Everytime you need to use any type of force (e.g., a ban) to impose your idea, you should really think if this is really a good idea.
there are many reasons to reduce harm.
there are absolutely no reason to ban it, because that only causes more harm.
somehow many people on Earth have a remarkable resistance to nuance.
Prohibition didn’t work. Everyone who wanted to kept drinking. Religious guilt is an ineffective motivator of change.
Source: human history.
It’s time to move on.
>Religious guilt is an ineffective motivator of change.
>Source: human history.
The alcohol consumption statistics of certain ME states strongly disprove your thesis.
What are you talking about? Which "certain" states? Iran, my old country, may be the 9th largest consumer of alcohol per capita [1,2]. There are hundreds of deaths due to wood-alcohol poisoning every year [3], mostly from people making moonshine from raisins and not being diligent enough to remove the stems, in lieu of access to safe drinking alcohol. I personally know many people who abuse alcohol just to be able to tolerate living under an oppressive theocracy, especially worsened in the last few years due to US sanctions which have made many everyday and essential goods inaccessible.
But it's very hard to find any data (let alone official data) on any of this, because nobody wants to suffer 72 lashes with 0-gague electrical cable at the hands of Iranian police for having admitted to have had a glass of wine or whatever one night.
Alcohol is an aspect of human civilization since per-historic times (as old as farming if not older) and always will be, regardless of what puritan Christians or foaming-at-the-mouth Mullahs might think of it.
Across the board (addiction, alcohol, abuse) any type of "zero-tolerance" "bring the hammer down" policy e.g. a blanket ban on alcohol has always been at best orthogonal and usually antithetical to harm reduction. As someone mentioned in the above comments, nuance is everything in providing support to the vulnerable --- ask any social worker. Religious guilt enjoys no such effectiveness.
(Sorry, two of the citations are in Persian, I couldn't find English sources. Google translate could be a workaround.)
Edit: spelling.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/persian/iran-features-49967036
[2] https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241565639
[3] https://ir.voanews.com/a/iran-alcohol/5362942.html
3 replies →
Ah yes, a bunch of rather totalitarian societies as the model to strive for, great jumping off point.
1 reply →
Let the human decide? If you're religious, God created everything - enjoy it all, or not...as you wish! Just don't force your ideas on others.
You are blaming alcohol for people's actions. That's disgusting and horrifying. I wonder what makes you say that. Religious?