I came across an interesting post over at the Boundless blog today referencing a recent Washington Post article in which the author blames excessive binge drinking by college students on the legal drinking age being so high (21). His argument is that we need to lower the drinking age to prevent such activities. I feel like this is extremely faulty logic for two reasons.
- If we lower the age limit of legal drinking, won’t that also lower the age of illegal drinking?
- How will making something more accessible encourage college students to consume it less frequently? Doesn’t this work against the laws of supply and demand?
I think the legal drinking age should be eliminated altogether but not for excessive drinking reasons but because I don’t think there is any biblical sanction for having a “legal” drinking age at all. There was one point in church history that wine (real wine…not grape juice) was served at communion.
I think we’ve gotten used to being Statists (that is we live and move and have our being determined by Federal or local governmental controls) rather than being Biblicists. The Law of God is discarded as something archaic or cruel even though it came from the hand of God. There is no mention of prohibiting drinking by law, only by self control. And that is a major problem many of us moderns have. Where we lack responsibility we expect the government, an outside force, to impose a law to accomplish what God requires of us. It really shows our Darwinian roots (ie. we are creatures of our environement and our behavior is determined by external factors not by a new heart or a wicked heart).
I think that they shouldnt lower the legal drinking age. Because it will increase the chances of younger poeple getting behind the wheel and hurting themselfs or someone else or worse killing themselfs. It is also going to lower the age rate of illegal age for drinking. it is already low and it doesnt need to be lowerd.
Dear Ben,
There was a time when communion was drinking of wine. Although, we have ZERO examples of youth getting a sip. I agree with Brandy, the age is too low already. Common sense tells me that kids will be kid when it comes to drinking. I just dont comprehend your rational for allowing youngsters to drink…
Some colleges disagree with the legal drinking age. If the legal drinking age were lowered to 18, colleges would be able to monitor the alcohol consumption of their students and they wouldn¢t become overly intoxicated. If the drinking age were lowered there would be fewer college campus alcohol related deaths. Here is an excerpt from an article on Teenage drinking from Time Magazine: Often it is college administrators who have to deal directly with the most reckless imbibing. In studies through the 1990s by the Harvard School of Public Health, the percentage of college students who reported binge drinking within the previous two weeks remained steady at 44%. (Binging was defined as five drinks in a row for boys and four for girls.) In an age in which campus officials are increasingly seen as proxy parents, this is worrying to them. Legal liability is of particular concern, especially after M.I.T. last year chose to avoid a lawsuit by paying out $6 million to the parents of a freshman who in 1997 drank himself to death at a fraternity initiation. On the other hand, the brain doesn¢t fully develop in most people until they are in their 20¢s, especially the prefrontal cortex, which is the part that controls compulsive behavior. If this is not fully developed then a person might not be able to control themselves as well, even less so if they are drunk, than a person who has a fully developed prefrontal cortex. To me, it seems that the argument is equally strong on both sides. I think that the law should be gotten rid of and parents should decide whether or not their child should be able to drink or not.
The drinking age should be lowered to 18. Lets face it the number 1 reason for the drinking age getting lowered is becuase we are afraid of the kids getting behind the wheel. If we lower the legal age for alcohol consumption then the teens would have no need to get in the car and leave, they would not be breaking the law. Another reason why it should be lowered is beacuase when teens sneak drinking, they often do very heavy drinking. If the age was lowered then they would not feel to go “hammered”.
i think teenegers should be allowed to drink
at the age of 18 because when you’re 18
you can vote, get married, go to the military
and way more things but mostly you become
an adult at that age so i feel that we should be
able to drink. Also in college campuses there will
be less intoxications due to illegal drinking
I am really shocked by so many of thses responses. Less intoxication “due to illegal drinking” I can hear Homer saying D’OH right now! If it is legal of couse it wouldn’t be illegal intoxication it would then become an open door for legal intoxication… I don’t think one is better than the other! All are going to destroy lives and to tell teens that its ok when they can’t really make that decision on their own is insane! One more to respond to… the thought that we should follow the Bible not the Government. That is an impossible statement, like a true lie. To follow the Bible means to follow the rules that govern us. God Himself invented Church, Marriage, and Government, all of which should be kept sacred.
I am the parent of 3 girls, ages 29, 24, and 20. I am also a yourth bible study teacher. I was in college when the drinking age was 21 and my sister when it was 18. Nothing changed except the need for fake ID’s, telling lies, and making excuses. Let’s face it, it is totally unrealistic to think that a person is not going to drink until they are seniors in college or have graduated. A person can vote, serve in the military, get married, have a baby or an abortion (without parental permission), live on their own, have a job but cannot have a drink. The consequences of having a drink and unprotected sex can both be deadly, but only one is a crime. Llet’s use some common sense here. The real target for underage drinking should be children of high school age. This is a manageable target population. Adults (anyone 18 years or older) should be treated differently. We are treating 13-14 year olds the same as 20 year olds. What are we thinking. As Aamericans, we are generally law abiding citizens, mostly because we understand the reasoning behind the law. This law continues to be blatenly broken, because there is no sound reason for it. It is not a moral issue to have a drink, it is only ones actions and we know you don’t have to be drinking to be immoral! I vote for common sense. We seem to have lost any we once had.
hey i dont get why they changed it because some kids want freedom and a chance to try it and see what it does and they want to see what it will do to them so that they know how it feels to be “drunk” intoxicated or whatever it is they call it but they want a chance to be free.
i think they should eliminate the drinking age all together because if they did than teens would feel less rebellion when they did it and it will loose the risk and adventure that takes place when you do it under age. You could ask any teen and they know how to get it and theirs nothing any one can do. My brother would drink out of control in high school and did for the first few years of college .. now sure he will have a few beers every now and then but he can go to partys and relize he shouldnt drink 2 much because if he does than he might get in an accident, realizing that without having risk … if he was still 18 or under he would get wasted thinking that moms going to kill him any was why not be drunk and make it seem better?