why is alcohol legal: the george best/opening hours thread

I think democracy needs to include some "unalienable rights" for individuals. Not sure if Mod would agree.If so, then only the things outside those rights can be voted upon and established by the people.But regardless, even if "the right to have any religious belief" was "unalienable", in a truly democratic society, if you live with a lot of Christians, you're going to be living in a society with a lot of laws that look Christian.It's all about the "unalienable rights"... and those seem quite arbitrary to me as well. Guess it depends on how you define what it is to be a person.Ben

I don't think it matters. No matter how democracy is established, it can be overturned if the people choose so. No grounding is "safer" or "better" than any other.You could have the establishment of democracy forced upon you externally and establish those rights (hi USA). You could have a select few establish those rights (hi USA). Or you could have the people vote on unalienable rights (has this ever happened?).Any way you look at it, if the people don't like it, they can overthrow the government. Or, if I understood jar's explanation correctly the other days, some goverments give easier means for revisiting such a thing (a Constitutional Convention?).Point is, establishment of a democracy need not require a democracy. I think. Ben

Kind of. The mechanisms for change create a kind of "inertia" that (to me) serves as a "check" for being overly aggressive in how fast or often you change those rights.But I'm giving a slow nod in general agreement.Ben

Mick,First of all, I just wanted to express best wishes in your battle with alcoholism.I think the questions you're asking are really hard, because they lay on the line of two incompatible conceptualizations of what it is to be human--that of having free will, and that of determinism.On the one hand, we see ourselves has having choice. And on the other, we see that we're driven by our bodies, part of which is our brains. We feel we have choice, but sometimes people suggest that we don't. Is alcoholism a disease? In a perspective with free will, what does that even mean?One of my younger brothers is Type I diabetic; his body does not produce enough insulin. To most people, that's a straightforward disease--it has everything to do with the body, and nothing to do with "will" or "mind." Yet he may suffer from early deterioration of his body, or even early death due to diabetes, and it is exasperated by any troubles he has controlling his diet. If he finds it impossible to control his diet, impossible to control a desire for sweets... should sweets be outlawed?I read an article on CNN the other day about gun control, mental illness, and the "right to privacy" we have in the US. Should guns be sold to the mentally ill or not? Some people suggest it's an unfair restriction of rights. If we made it illegal to sell alcohol to alcoholics, would that help? Maybe some, but it's easy to get it otherwise. Should we make all guns illegal in order to avoid the mentally ill from getting their hands on them?I don't mean to spin this topic off-topic by introducing these other ideas. I just wanted to try and give a feel of how I see the complexity.I personally would wish certain things be sold not for profit--products that are potentially dangerous to X% of our population. Even if that includes sugary products (diabetes), tobacco, alcohol... these things shouldn't be pushed just for money. I don't have a problem with them naturally being a part of a social environment, but I do have a problem when that social environment was created or perpetuated artificially via advertising, in order to make money.So I say, make ALL such products--including current illegal ones--legal, but not saleable for profit. Try to eliminate the image being sold that it's "cool" to drink, to smoke, to eat sweets. Because although we think we're "free to choose", the fact is we're not simply free-floating minds. We're embodied minds, driven by the biology of brain and body. We're influenced by advertising, by familiarity, by culture.I'll stop here. I'm almost letting the cat out of the bag--my argument to holmes about why free will is not a useful concept when it comes to law. But seriously, suffice it to say... good luck with the issues you're dealing with, and I wish you all the best. I hope to learn as much as possible from your thoughts and experiences; thank you very much for sharing.Ben