I think that it might be worthwhile to be a bit easier on Howard, here. Admittedly, the comments about alcoholism and risk-taking are suspect, and the comment on Kelly was off-base. But the Russian Roulette was not an argument - just a loose metaphor (I hope).

Even if it was not so loose, it is worth understanding that people can react to alchohol and reject its use entirely because of the history of its involvement in the ruining of real human lives. Alcohol no more forces people to make bad choices than a glass of Coke does, but innocent people die every year because of the choices of people who enjoy alcohol too much. My overeating never killed, nor will it ever kill, a family of four in an oncoming vehicle. It is worth recognizing that alcohol abuse is much more serious in that respect.

> Like anything, there are some people that will have an inclination to overindulge to the point that it becomes destructive to them. But the key word is inclination. Even those prone to alcoholism certainly have the chance to recognize destructive behavior and modify it.
>
> It's sort of like eating. There are certain people who are more prone to being overweight: they have poor self-control when it comes to eating, their metabolisms aren't that great, don't like to exercise, etc. I'm one of those people, and I used to be pretty overweight. I have, however, been able to recognize the tendencies in myself and control them. I can't simply eat whatever I want whenever the urge strikes me like some of my friends seem to be able to, but I manage to exercise self-control. Likewise, those prone to alcohol abuse have the same opportunity.
>
> That many alcoholics don't control themselves is their fault, not the fault of the chemicals they're ingesting. Something like 60 percent of the country describes themselves as current drinkers, but only 7 percent describe themselves as heavy drinkers. Clearly most people are able to drink without it ruining their lives.

Because they say so? How many of those people are even honest about their habits, and what exactly is the definition of "heavy drinker"? Even if all of the people in the survey were honest and objective, it only accounts for those who willingly engage in surveys.

I think that a far more telling statistic is this: in the United States in 2001, 1.4 million drivers were arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol or narcotics, that number being about 1% of the 120 million self-reported! episodes of alcohol-impaired driving. Those are a good number of bad choices regarding the use of alcohol.

I thought that it would be worthwhile to note how serious this issue really is. It simply isn't enough to say "people can make better choices", because although they can, they very often don't. The fact is that alcohol is involved in a great number of terrible choices people make; I say that as a person who has made many such terrible choices. I, unfortunately, do not lack the experience that Howard does.

That is not to say that there is anything inherently wrong with drinking alcohol; there isn't. If I enjoyed it, I would. My dad does; many of my friends do; and none of those people make bad choices (in general) about alcohol or because of its influence. Some of them are models of good behaviour, and I admire them greatly. But I think that for all the people I can point to and say "they are doing the right thing" regarding alcohol, there are so many more that I know and have known of whom I can say no such thing.

Otherwise, you make some valid and telling points, worth noting.

> Anyway, you're more than welcome to choose from refraining from drinking. But I suggest you not pass uneducated, unreasonable and unilateral judgements on those who do in public forums unless you want to come off as a sanctimonious kook, preaching against that which you don't understand.

That's some nice alliteration there:)
>
> Stephen

frum