Selective morality used in alcohol debate
A lot of discussion has occurred over if allowing alcohol sales at restaurants with a meal is a “moral” issue or not. Quite simply, it is not. Unfortunately, many of those that are against this issue are trying to make it into a moral issue. There is nothing either moral or immoral about having a glass of wine with your dinner. To suggest that allowing alcohol at a restaurant will be the beginning of a downward moral spiral in our community, as has been suggested, is ludicrous. I have read references in these letters to the editor and elsewhere to Sodom and Gomorrah, strip clubs, dive bars, rampant alcoholism and all of the other seedy, grim images those that claim moral superiority paint. It seems to me that Bowling Green, as a local example, has not only been moist but completely wet for some time. I don’t know of any strip clubs, adult bookstores or dive bars in Bowling Green. Last I knew there was one questionable “strip club” near the river several years ago and it was eventually closed down by pressure from the community and the city. The package liquor stores I have purchased from in BG have been clean and safe. No vagrants or drunks lingering in front of the store. I don’t see rampant crime in BG for a city their size. What I do see is a booming downtown redevelopment, a major airport, rapidly expanding retail and industry, symphonies, art galleries, and lots of employment. Pretty good for a place that lets you have a glass of wine with dinner.
There is no “cause and effect” between alcohol sales and the bleak picture painted by some. Glasgow doesn’t have alcohol — yet we already have meth labs, DUIs, bank robberies, murder, and other assorted crimes — and alcoholics.
Horse Cave doesn’t have alcohol. Yet they have an adult bookstore and other problems — and alcoholics. Voting YES in November won’t create package liquor stores in Glasgow — that would take a whole other set of law changing. So there must be something other than alcohol in restaurants that causes these things. And I would put forward that this “something” is a general lack of teaching of consistent overall moral values in our world today. But teaching moral values is not the same as legislating them AND it is not based on a single issue, such as alcohol by the drink. And teaching selective morality is even worse than not teaching morality at all. If we teach our children right from wrong and how to make the right choices our individual faiths dictate, then we won’t have to try and force everyone to align with a single minority viewpoint when compared to the rest of the country and the world. Teach your children not to drink — but don’t make it illegal for me to have a glass of wine with dinner. Just as you can either teach your kids the danger of smoking to help them avoid that deadly habit or teach them that it’s an “OK” vice because we grow that here and it’s part of our economy and pays your bills. Where’s the law to completely outlaw and ban smoking?
We have PROOF that smoking kills. Yet it’s legal. If drinking brings on all of this evil and we want it to be illegal, why don’t we also push through a total ban on tobacco products since they kill?
The reason why we don’t? Because morality today is selective.
People are moral about what will advance their personal or professional agendas and have no problem ignoring other things that we know are not good for society if they will damage their moral high ground, social position or financial standing.
Let ME teach my children. I don’t need you to do it for me or legislate how I should do it. In return, I won’t try to teach your children and force my values on them. I have taught my children that drinking alcohol responsibly by someone of legal age is fine. On occasion, I have drunk beer, wine and liquor in front of my children and will continue to do so. And I have also taught them right from wrong, good from bad. They know that drinking under age, drinking and driving, and drinking irresponsibly are wrong. And one day I am sure they will have a glass of wine with their dinner while dining out. And I am fine with that. I just hope it can be in the town they call home.
Glasgow / Barren County
Yes vote will not help Glasgow
Let’s see what happened during the mid-1930s when Glasgow voted to go wet. It did not bring in the fabulous restaurants, nor did it increase the city budget. So a few years later Glasgow voted to go dry.
So voting to go wet did not help Glasgow at all.
If voted wet, where are those fabulous eateries that are going to come to Glasgow? How is whiskey going to enhance our economy?
No, voting yes will not bring in those wonderful eating places as promised, nor will it add to our economy. A wet vote will not help our town to grow.
All along Glasgow has grown without the aid of going wet and it will continue to grow. Think positive. We still need a good Glasgow as we have had for so many years without the aid of whiskey.