Anti-alcohol campaigners should either put up or shut up

I would like to extend my thanks to Valtarov for his comprehensive and informed response. I should just make it clear at the outset that it is the anti-alcohol movement's attempt to impose their set of moral values on the rest of society that I object to and I fully support the principle of free speech, even if I do not agree with what is being said. That is why I am opposed to the anti-alcohol movement's attempt to close free discussion about alcohol down. To illustrate this point, in the United States an organisation known as The Amethyst Initiative, which is made up of chancellors and presidents of universities and colleges across the United States, is supporting informed and unimpeded debate on the 21 year-old drinking age. http://www.amethystinitiative.org... However, anti-alcohol extremists such as the Woman's Christian Temperance Union (WCTU) are fiercely opposed to students having the freedom to discuss this issue. Confronting John McCardell of the Amethyst Institute, WCTU's Bunny S. Galladora screeched "We do not work extra hours, take second jobs, scrimp and save, or mortgage our homes to send our children to college to learn to drink alcohol." http://www.wctu.org... These malicious matriarchs' slogan is "Agitate - Educate – Legislate". This goes well beyond free speech. These malevolent meddlers are not content with abstaining from alcohol themselves; they want to force, by law, everyone else to abstain as well. With this in mind I should like to respond to my opponents' rebuttals as follows: 1. Teetotalers {sic} actually have no public health concern, but are merely envious of the better social lives enjoyed by drinkers. The anti-alcohol movement's professed "concerns" for public health is indeed a cover for their real agenda: that is; to create an ultra-conservative, far-right, authoritarian state where fun and frivolity are banished and are replaced with stern austerity and total abstinence from hedonistic pursuits. Why else would an anti-alcohol organisation supposedly concerned with public health headline the following quote: "American citizens from all around our country are beginning to wake-up to the fact that the greatest country in the world, the United States of America, has, in less than one year's time, slipped down the slope of Red Socialism under the regime of President Barack Hussein Obama. Our president, with help from his czars, has imposed national healthcare leading us down the road to national economic decay and destroying the best medical system in the world. He has split this country to its core with racial discord and eliminating decades of progress. He has created a welfare country with open borders to anyone…taking jobs away from citizens and creating a financial drain to everyone." Why would an organisation supposedly concerned with alcohol abuse be so angry about the cost to the taxpayer of providing free healthcare to the needy or worried about how many foreigners there are in the country? What have they got to do with the adverse health affects of alcohol? http://www.wctu.org... 2. Prohibitionists want everyone to sew and make model airplanes rather than have fun. My assertion was tongue-in-cheek, of course, what I meant was that anti-alcohol campaigners demand that everybody joins in their "wholesome" activities rather than go to bars and clubs where mood-enhancing drinks are served. It is a myth, by the way, that the consumption of alcohol is unhealthy. Indeed, the human body produces it's own supply of alcohol called endogenous ethanol. http://www.dui.com... Indeed, alcohol consumed in moderation is thought to help reduce the risk of heart disease. http://www.bbc.co.uk... 3) There are many laws that restrict alcohol consumption. I disagree that existing legislation is not too strict in the US. For example, the minimum drinking age is 21 in most states. Although Sri Lanka, Fiji and Palau also set the minimum age for drinking at 21, every other country in the world sets the minimum at a lower age or has no minimum at all. http://www2.potsdam.edu... Furthermore, America is famously known as the "Land of the Free" but her people are not free to drink alcohol in authoritarian states and counties that have introduced draconian and repressive laws at the behest of the anti-alcohol movement. Let's put this in perspective: can you imagine being allowed to buy a beer at a McDonalds drive-thru in Utah? No? Well you can in Europe! Of course, if a motorist orders a Big Mac and two-dozen beers, consumes them and then drives off he will be prosecuted for DUI if caught. But that's all about free societies allowing adults to make responsible choices and paying the consequences if they make mistakes. 4 Prohibition is a restriction of freedom of choice. The freedom of choice should apply to all citizens, no matter where they live. However, freedom of choice is universally denied in authoritarian regimes such as North Korea and Saudi Arabia. Conversely, it is universally applied in liberal regimes such as the European Union and Japan. However, in certain countries such as Pakistan and the United States the freedom of choice is selective. In Pakistan you can't drink alcohol if you are a Muslim but you can if you aren't, and in America you can have a drink in Red River County, Texas but not next door in Bowie County, Texas. http://www.txdirectory.com... It is not about constitutional law – it's about liberty, and with respect to the freedom to drink alcohol, many Americans are denied that liberty. 5) Anti-alcohol campaigners should move to societies where others agree with them The age of consent for sex in Britain is 16. In the most of the US it's 18. However, in the Philippines the age of consent is 12. http://www.avert.org... That's why so many Western paedophiles move to the Philippines - that's the sort of society they want to live in. If the anti-alcohol extremists want to live in a society free of alcohol they can go and live in a country where it is banned. It's a matter of choice, not coercion. In conclusion, it is fine to abstain from alcohol if you choose. It's also fine to highlight the dangers of alcohol abuse. However, it's not fine to impose your views and lifestyle on other law-abiding citizens. Thank you.