Here’s the article:
It’s a fact that for many students, the college experience has a lot to do with intoxication, so-called “partying.” I had my share, but I was very fortunate to have the intelligence to stay away from alcohol.
I’m always surprised to see that people consider this a good argument for allowing young people to drink:
“How many times must we relearn the lessons of prohibition?” the statement says. “Adults under 21 are deemed capable of voting, signing contracts, serving on juries and enlisting in the military, but are told they are not mature enough to have a beer.”
I sometimes watched Sesame Street as a child, and I recall their frequent game, “One of these things is not like the other.” Kids too young to read are taught to recognize differences and similarities. The game applies nicely to that argument.
Voting is an act of responsibility, so is signing a contract, serving on a jury, and enlisting in the military. These are things that can help develop a person’s maturity. In general, they contribute to society. (Personally I’m not very fond of the military, but I’m thoroughly impressed by the spiritual strength of the Hare Krishna devotees in the military.)
Drinking alcohol is practically the opposite of what the college presidents have used to justify drinking. It is an act of irresponsibility, it does nothing to develop a person’s maturity, and it makes no contribution to society. It’s known for its impairment of a person’s judgement. I can’t help but wonder how much the college presidents have been drinking. These are the college presidents; what good are they if they can’t even teach the kids the value of sobriety?! Allowing kids (and yes, we’re talking about college kids) to drink will not help.