Lowering the drinking age any further will prove that our law

makers are on drugs.By all means let's encourage our youth

the ability to aquire and consume alcohol ; I'm shure our

healthcare and law-enforcement officials feel that's a terrific

idea. My guess anyone with children(under age 18) would

not be in favor of this stupid proposal.

If children are allowed to control their own reproductive processes why can't they also control what they eat, drink or consume into their bodies.

NOW, I don't support the notions that minors should be allowed the same freedoms as adults. I'm only pointing out to those people that feel minors should be given additional rights (rights that have be denied them historically), then how does one define what rights the minors have verses what rights the parents have over these minors (call it parent veto power if you will).

PS: While I'm a social liberal I believe parents should retain this veto power over their children. I only clairy this since I've been told that MOST people who are for parental rights are 'red-necks' (e.g. Christian right, Cons, anti-abortion, etc...).

here's what lowering the drinking age can do:

-reduce binge drinking. part of this is making alcohol consumption a part of regular life, like having a glass of wine with dinner so it is no longer a ritualistic rite of passage where kids get together and get hammered on cheap beer whenever they find an opportunity. raising kids with the mentality that alcohol is something to be used in moderation (as opposed to something they can never have until some arbitrary age, regardless of their behavior or ability to be responsible) takes away a lot of the desire to consume in ridiculous amounts.

-bridge the gap between the fact 18 year olds can sign contracts, be sued, go to jail as an adult, serve in the military, get married, go into debt, vote and other major acts of responsibility and yet can not have a sip of liquor.

-force parents to actually have to talk to their kids about drinking. instead of the panacea of "don't do it" "just say no" and other conversation-stoppers, moms and dads will have to convey their values to children. it does no good for parents to have a mistaken notion that "my kids don't drink" when a real open dialogue about being a responsible user of alcohol could save the kid's life. knowing your dad will whoop your ass for being at a party with alcohol encourages some kids to drive home drunk when they ought to call home and say "i've had too much. i need to stay here tonight. i'll see you in the morning."

and for those of us who don't have a knee jerk reaction to things that involve "our kids", only too true. if you talk to people from other cultures/countries, the amount of binge drinking that occurs in our country is not endemic to teenagers. it's endemic to people who are immature and have poor reasoning skills- which can be attributed to "babying" kids instead of teaching them responsibility and misleading them about the truth which causes them to believe nothing that comes from an adult. (my generation felt the backlash of 'just say no'...)

whenever people say things like "if you had kids, you'd understand...", i shake my head and sigh knowing that usually these people are so 'concerned' about their kids they can't think straight anymore. these are the people who think stupid things like "i can't tell my kids i tried pot or drank when i was their age because that'll encourage them". when i know many non smokers who are adamant about it because they were forced to grow up with second hand smoke. or teetotalers who saw firsthand from family members what alcoholism can do. (seriously, if your kid is the "follower" type, i'd worry more about who else they are following, because chances are it's not YOU!!! ) This idea of "protecting" children tends to backfire every time and yet people never learn...

This idea of "protecting" children tends to backfire every time and yet people never learn...

I'm not sure what you mean by that last sentence. Are you saying the idea of SOCIETY protecting children etc.. OR the idea of PARENTS protecting children etc...????

My guess is you meant parents.

It appears you believe that the general public should take over child care. Yes, there are a lot of dumbass parents. You give valid examples. I feel the same about any parent that would teach their child about some so called other being (that would be this bogus concept called 'god').

BUT what right do I have to stop someone from passing on that crap to their kids?

i don't think we should have to worry about over censoring our airwaves, for example, out of fear over what our children are watching. i don't think we should have to make cough syrups, marijuana, etc.. illegal to protect our kids. i don't think we need to keep condoms out of school to protect our kids.

Now, i'm not trying to stop anyone from having the right to raise their children however they choose. But i was trying to raise the theory that by coddling your children, you do them a disservice by leaving them exposed to the dangers of the real world with no tools to cope with it other than "just say no", etc... Each kid is different, though, and so is each parenting situation and i acknowledge that you have to treat it as such. But i always go back to elizabeth smart and wondering how many kids her age would've been caught in a similar situation and what makes the difference between kids who end up victims (of others OR themselves) and those who have survival skills, et.al.

Now i'm completely off topic, but you asked... :D