• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Drinking age and the military?

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
18 year olds are trusted to kill when given the order.
But they can't be trusted not to kill when given booze.
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Apples and oranges.
The qualities that make a good soldier are not those that make a responsible drinker.
The chances of a drinker being responsible are often inversely proportional to age.

Young people have less driving experience. Their responses are less automatic or reflexive than those of experienced drivers. They get into more accidents. Alcohol diminishes response time and coördination, further slowing response times -- and accident rates.
That's my point, though. It's NOT apples and oranges.
You're looking at it in terms of the skills required to be a driver, and the impulsiveness required to be a soldier. That's what's not apples and oranges.

The ability to follow rules, to take major decisions with life impacting consequences, and to own those are the same in both situations.

Ban drinking for young drivers. Simples.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
The problem is that the recklessness, audacity and impulsiveness of eighteen year olds, make good fighters, but poor voters -- and drinkers.
The necessary qualities are not comparable.
So their elders are quite happy to use that reckless audacity to send them out and get themselves killed if there's something in it for those elders -- keeping them safe at home.

Nice. :oops:
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
So this is just pure curiosity on my part.
As I understand it, you can enlist in the military at age 18 in the United States, regardless of the state. Correct?
But there are some (not all) states that stipulate the legal drinking age to be at minimum 21.
I’m under no delusions that people actually wait that long. I mean I’m Australian for crying out loud lol
But how is this seen in the states?
By that I mean is this a rule that is accepted by folks as reasonable? Generally speaking
Or is this a case where people might be inclined to look the other way if an underaged soldier snuck a beer or two?
Since they are, well, in the military.

I want to know your thoughts on this rule and what your observations have been.
Do you think the age should be lowered? Raised? Exceptions made for those serving?

Whatever you reckon, let me know!

Different country, I know, but how it works here in Canada:

You can enlist at 18 and the drinking age varies from 18 to 19, depending on province.

At the pubs on base, soldiers can drink regardless of the drinking age in that province. Off base, local rules apply.
 

esmith

Veteran Member
On June 1st, 1985 all military installations were required to follow state laws in regard to drinking age .
The Navy Dept has required its bases to conform to local drinking age laws since 1973, but it made an exception for 3.2 beer, which has a lower alcohol content.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
Not a good argument. I know of 76 year olds who are immature and impulsive.
Agreed. But I wasn’t making an argument against allowing teenagers to drink.
I’m Australian. Our legal age is 18. Which I’m pretty sure was lowered due to the argument “old enough to kill. Old enough to drink.”
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
On June 1st, 1985 all military installations were required to follow state laws in regard to drinking age .
The Navy Dept has required its bases to conform to local drinking age laws since 1973, but it made an exception for 3.2 beer, which has a lower alcohol content.
Interesting
 

lewisnotmiller

Grand Hat
Staff member
Premium Member
Agreed. But I wasn’t making an argument against allowing teenagers to drink.
I’m Australian. Our legal age is 18. Which I’m pretty sure was lowered due to the argument “old enough to kill. Old enough to drink.”
You think Uni students shouldn't be able to drink? Good luck enforcing that...lol

What age did you start drinking at?
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
You think Uni students shouldn't be able to drink? Good luck enforcing that...lol

What age did you start drinking at?
I was about to say Uni students are already 18. Then I realised I was talking about the States in this thread. Duh! I’m silly

I started drinking at a fairly young age. Mostly sips taken from dad’s drink. Since it was supervised no one minded.
I started “drinking drinking” at around maybe 15. Again mostly supervised.

I have no delusions about enforcing the age restriction on kids lol.
My philosophy is the same as my parents’ and their friends. Supervising them is better than having them sneakily drink. Safer, imo
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So their elders are quite happy to use that reckless audacity to send them out and get themselves killed if there's something in it for those elders -- keeping them safe at home.

Nice. :oops:
Thus be it ever. The young are duped into fighting to benefit the rich and powerful.
 
Top