A Drink In Seattle Vs. A Drink In Salt Lake City

[Johnnie Cake]

You obviously don't get around much. It is not just Mormon areas that have these laws.

ERayR, Have I ever made a comment on this board that you haven’t taken the contrary position on?

Don’t you find it a bit silly that Utah finds it necessary to hide bottles of liquor from the public? Take two examples...the Fashion Place Mall Cheesecake Factory and the City Creek Cheesecake Factory...one built before and the other after the law to create the Zion Wall...can you in all honestly tell me that it has had some impact on controlling the sale of alcohol in Utah or prevented some child from becoming an alcoholic?

From my perspective all it has done is reinforce Utah’s image as a weird place to buy a drink (a legal endeavor)

[ERayR]

ERayR, Have I ever made a comment on this board that you haven’t taken the contrary position on?

Don’t you find it a bit silly that Utah finds it necessary to hide bottles of liquor from the public? Take two examples...the Fashion Place Mall Cheesecake Factory and the City Creek Cheesecake Factory...one built before and the other after the law to create the Zion Wall...can you in all honestly tell me that it has had some impact on controlling the sale of alcohol in Utah or prevented some child from becoming an alcoholic?

From my perspective all it has done is reinforce Utah’s image as a weird place to buy a drink (a legal endeavor)

I don't know. I don't keep track. I just call em as I see em and when I perceive to be an undeserved cut I am just compelled to comment. It is common for the prevailing religion of the area to have an influence on what happens in their community. Try going to the Southeast. Southern Baptist influence is all over.

Bottles out of sight may or may not have some impact on controlling drinking. I personally doubt that it will have much impact either way on that one. What it does do is portray the image of a family centered environment that Utah legislators want to portray. Are the legislators church members? A lot of them are. Does it influence what they do? I'm sure it does. Does the LDS Church General Authorities dictate to these legislators what to do. I really can't see that. As for the Church Authorities being directly responsible. I think that the responsibilities of running a world wide church far outweigh whether some bottles are on a shelf or in a cabinet..

Your perspective is duly noted and I wouldn't worry too much about Utah's image. Except maybe the worst drivers in the world image.

[sheilauk]

Don’t you find it a bit silly that Utah finds it necessary to hide bottles of liquor from the public? Take two examples...the Fashion Place Mall Cheesecake Factory and the City Creek Cheesecake Factory...one built before and the other after the law to create the Zion Wall...can you in all honestly tell me that it has had some impact on controlling the sale of alcohol in Utah or prevented some child from becoming an alcoholic?

From my perspective all it has done is reinforce Utah’s image as a weird place to buy a drink (a legal endeavor)

I imagine that the Board believes it will have an effect. In the UK, over the years, alcohol has become increasingly available and visible and the laws relaxed and there has been a significant increase in drinking, drink connected offences and drunken people in the streets especially at the weekends. The police have had to increase their presence to deal with it. The health services are, in places, overloaded at weekends due to people who have drunk too much and become sick or injured themselves or been in a fight. Are the two connected? Seems likely. Then, on the other hand, smoking is increasingly frowned upon and laws tightened. Shops cannot now display cigarettes except in plain packaging, carefully hidden from most and the reasoning seems to be that it will prevent people, especially children, from wanting to smoke! The number of smokers has steadily fallen over the years. Will hiding cigarette packets from view have an impact on some children not smoking? The UK Government seems to think so. So perhaps Utah is right. Perception counts for a lot. Someone do the research and produce a paper on it!

[Johnnie Cake]

I don't know. I don't keep track. I just call em as I see em and when I perceive to be an undeserved cut I am just compelled to comment. It is common for the prevailing religion of the area to have an influence on what happens in their community. Try going to the Southeast. Southern Baptist influence is all over.

Bottles out of sight may or may not have some impact on controlling drinking. I personally doubt that it will have much impact either way on that one. What it does do is portray the image of a family centered environment that Utah legislators want to portray. Are the legislators church members? A lot of them are. Does it influence what they do? I'm sure it does. Does the LDS Church General Authorities dictate to these legislators what to do. I really can't see that. As for the Church Authorities being directly responsible. I think that the responsibilities of running a world wide church far outweigh whether some bottles are on a shelf or in a cabinet..

Your perspective is duly noted and I wouldn't worry too much about Utah's image. Except maybe the worst drivers in the world image.

I always get a kick out of LDS faithful using the term "World Wide Church"...its common use suggests something far different than reality would support. While I concede that the church has expanded far afield from its central Utah base and is found in many countries through the the world and would thus qualify to be called a world wide church...so does the 100,000 member world wide church of god...who claims to have members throughout the world...both are World Wide churches and I suppose that any church with membership in more than one country say a membership of 3-4 could qualify to be called world wide...guess it could also make them seem larger than they really are...

Edited May 21, 2013 by Johnnie Cake

[wenglund]

I always get a kick out of LDS faithful using the term "World Wide Church"...its common use suggests something far different than reality would support. While I concede that the church has expanded far afiend from its central Utah base and is found in many countries through the the world and would thus qualify to be called a world wide church...so does the 100,000 member world wide church of god...who claims to have members throughout the world...both are World Wide churches.

What, to your unfaithful mind, is supposedly "suggested" by the term "world-wide church" that is allegedly "far different than reality"? I ask because I wish to test your grasp on reality.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[ERayR]

I always get a kick out of LDS faithful using the term "World Wide Church"...its common use suggests something far different than reality would support. While I concede that the church has expanded far afield from its central Utah base and is found in many countries through the the world and would thus qualify to be called a world wide church...so does the 100,000 member world wide church of god...who claims to have members throughout the world...both are World Wide churches and I suppose that any church with membership in more than one country say a membership of 3-4 could qualify to be called world wide...guess it could also make them seem larger than they really are...

And this is pertinent to the topic at hand how? Why do you persist in attempting to turn every discussion into a criticism of the Church?

[Johnnie Cake]

What, to your unfaithful mind, is supposedly "suggested" by the term "world-wide church" that is allegedly "far different than reality"? I ask because I wish to test your grasp on reality.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Wade in my post I conceded that the church qualifies to use the term world wide church...just as the 100,000 member world wide church of god qualifies to use the term and just as a 3 member multi-country church qualifies to use the term...I guess its not as bad as the catholic church who doesn't referr to themselves as a world wide church...but instead uses the term Universal...I guess that makes them bigger...

[Johnnie Cake]

And this is pertinent to the topic at hand how? Why do you persist in attempting to turn every discussion into a criticism of the Church?

Its not at all pertinent...it was a total sidetrack, diversionary trick...My apologies if the comment was perceived as a criticism of the church...it was inteded as a fun little jab...

[Scott Lloyd]

I certainly intended to include the 'a' between the 'h' and the 'n' typing the word "Utahan." It was a very simply an "oops" on my part. Hey, but thanks for the correction Incidentally ... you omitted the closing parenthetic character in that sentence. Can we now move on?

Not quite yet. You took the opposite meaning from what I expressed. I'm saying the word Utahn should not have the extra a in it. You did put it in there, and I'm saying you should not have done so. Are we clear on that?

agency vs. free agency vs. moral agency? Really?

I see little to no difference in definition.

Regardless of any official (or personally adopted) term, it's about individual choice.

I think the point President Packer intended to make — and the reason the Church subsequently dropped the descriptor "free" from agency — is that people were getting the wrong idea (many still do have the wrong idea). Agency is the liberty to choose between right and wrong, but it does not entail exemption from consequences if one does choose the wrong. Survey official Church literature from the past 20 years or so, and you will rarely, if ever, see an occurrence of the expression "free agency," unless an earlier writing is being quoted from the period before President Packer gave that talk.

At any rate, I don't see the relevance of Church teachings on moral agency to regulation by the government of Utah on the distribution of alcohol within the state or the makeup of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. But then, it was you, not I, who raised it in the first place.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Scott.. you've worn me out...I concede defeat...you win...the sole and only purpose of the DEPARTMENT OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE CONTROL is to control the sale of alcohol in the State of Utah. T

I'm so glad when we can arrive at resolution on these things.

How very silly of me to think that they cared what drinkers want...thanks for setting me straight. This board is so fortunate to have you...I know I feel that way.

Aw shucks. I'm only doing what I can.

[ERayR]

Its not at all pertinent...it was a total sidetrack, diversionary trick...My apologies if the comment was perceived as a criticism of the church...it was inteded as a fun little jab...

Fun little jabs coming from one whose posting record suggests an animus toward the Church should be accompanied by a hint that it is not one of your regular jabs.

[thesometimesaint]

Like the previous comment from Johnnie Cake, this analogy ignores the essential purpose of the Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission. It is not an advocacy group for drinkers. It exists to help the state government protect the public from the abuse of alcohol.

I agree. The question I am raising is that control really in the best interests of the state, or is it a moral imposition from a dominate religion? IE; You can't buy alcohol in Moore county; Tennessee that has the production plant that produces Jack Daniels whiskey.

[Johnnie Cake]

Fun little jabs coming from one whose posting record suggests an animus toward the Church should be accompanied by a hint that it is not one of your regular jabs.

May I kindly suggest you walk over to your windows and lift up the shades, let in some light, open the door, let in some fresh air...maybe, if you dare, take a few steps outside and feel the warmth of the sun...Life is good ERayR...don't take it so serious...try to laugh at yourself once in a while... I know that I certainly don't take myself serious at all...nor should you...after all…I'm a figment of your imagination

[ERayR]

May I kindly suggest you walk over to your windows and lift up the shades, let in some light, open the door, let in some fresh air...maybe, if you dare, take a few steps outside and feel the warmth of the sun...Life is good ERayR...don't take it so serious...try to laugh at yourself once in a while... I know that I certainly don't take myself serious at all...nor should you...after all…I'm a figment of your imagination

Thanks for the psychoanalysis. But were I you I wouldn't quit my day job. Your not good as a psychoanalyst. But then you knew that. This is only a tactic isn't it? When in trouble attack and change the focus.

Oh by the way I am getting plenty of sunshine and fresh air. I'm on my front steps with my laptop in my underwear. My neighbors call me eccentric.

[cursor]

You took the opposite meaning from what I expressed. I'm saying the word Utahn should not have the extra a in it. You did put it in there, and I'm saying you should not have done so. Are we clear on that?

According to Merriam-Webster "Utahan" is a perfectly fine alternative: [ link ]

UTAH

state W United States ∗ Salt Lake City area 84,899 square miles (219,888 square kilometers), pop 2,763,885

— Utah-an

adjective or noun

— Utahn

noun

As it turns out, however, 83% of Deseret News readers who responded to an online poll voted for "Utahn." [ link ]

[Scott Lloyd]

According to Merriam-Webster "Utahan" is a perfectly fine alternative:

It's not perfectly fine, as local residents, institutions and media have it as Utahn, as shown by your link to the KSL article. I maintain that on such things as this local usage does and ought to determine what is normative.

For the most part, it seems to be outsiders who, whether through ignorance or not, put in that extraneous a. And for someone born and reared here, as I have been, it really does mark them as outsiders.

By the way, the writer of that KSL piece was guity of her own improper usage when she wrote: "It begs the question: If a man says he's a Utahn, but nobody listens, was he ever anything but a Utahan?"

What she should have said instead was, "It prompts the question ...." or "It raises the question...."

The expression to beg the question does not mean what she intends it to mean. Begging the question is a logical fallacy in which a conclusion is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement of the conclusion itself. It is similar to circular reasoning.

I try to educate my colleagues in the media on this point, but it seems to be a never-ending struggle.

Edited May 21, 2013 by Scott Lloyd

[Johnnie Cake]

Thanks for the psychoanalysis. But were I you I wouldn't quit my day job. Your not good as a psychoanalyst. But then you knew that. This is only a tactic isn't it? When in trouble attack and change the focus.

Oh by the way I am getting plenty of sunshine and fresh air. I'm on my front steps with my laptop in my underwear. My neighbors call me eccentric.

Well I applaud your independent nature then...my bishop would always scold me when I sat on my front porch in garments...see we do have something in common...there is still hope for a friendship...

And as Dr. "Bones" McCoy used to say...Damn it Jim, I'm a Doctor not a pshychoanalyst

[Scott Lloyd]

Well I applaud your independent nature then...my bishop would always scold me when I sat on my front porch in garments...see we do have something in common...there is still hope for a friendship...

I took ERay's comment as having been made in jest. I do hope that's the case.

[Calm]

ERayR, Have I ever made a comment on this board that you haven’t taken the contrary position on?

You have made 40 posts so far, how many on this thread alone?....not given him a lot to choose from.

[Calm]

From my perspective all it has done is reinforce Utah’s image as a weird place to buy a drink (a legal endeavor)

http://www.alcoholal...stics-2010.html

Utah 236 49 21%

Next lowest is Iowa with 25%.

National 32,885 11,948 36%

For 2008 in comparison to 2010 above:

Utah 244 40 16%

I'd like to see a map of where the DUIs are found across the state.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/20/driving-drunk-highway-forbeslife-cx_sw_1120drunk.html

Edited May 21, 2013 by calmoriah

[Calm]

It's not perfectly fine, as local residents, institutions and media have it as Utahn, as shown by your link to the KSL article. I maintain that on such things as this local usage does and ought to determine what is normative.

what is annoying is when spellcheck argues with you about it or autocorrects it

[Nathair/|\]

Scotland is holding a referendum on independence next year. Despite my strong feelings (I've sworn my sword to their aid against England if it comes down to a violent revolution), I would never try to influence the vote either way. Likewise, I would never try to tell another state, even one I visited regularly, how they should manage their alcohol laws. It's simply not my place to do so.

[teddyaware]

In Seattle, you can buy an ice cold IPA (that’s India Pale Ale, for the uninitiated), bring it home, pop it open, and drink it on your deck. In SLC, you can drive to a state liquor store, and IF it happens to be open, buy a warm IPA, bring it home, put it in the fridge for a while, and then you can drink it (assuming it’s actually drinkable—IPA’s are supposed to be kept cool or they can go bad quickly).

In Seattle, you order a gin & tonic at any bar, and you get a tasty mix of gin & tonic water (I typically go with Bombay Sapphire). In SLC, you get tonic water w/ a splash of gin. And should you have the audacity in SLC to order a “double”—you get a “sidecar” the size of a thimble to add to your drink. And here’s the worst part—you pay just as much in SLC as you do in Seattle for a whole lot less!

I’m just going to put it out there: Should I (or anyone) blame this state of affairs in SLC on the LDS? Should I feel annoyed at Mormons every time I visit my folks who live in Utah? Or should I feel grateful that they’re giving me an opportunity to repent & change my ways while I wait for that warm beer to cool in the fridge?

For a non-LDS visitor to Utah, what’s the proper way to feel about the local culture as reflected by its liquor laws?

--Erik

Put the beer in the freezer, it'll cool down 3 times faster! But don't forget it, otherwise it will explode all over the freezer and its contents.

[ERayR]

I took ERay's comment as having been made in jest. I do hope that's the case.

I don't even own a laptop.

Edited May 22, 2013 by ERayR

[Five Solas]

It might be petty to come to an LDS discussion forum to complain about governmental actions that the LDS church does not sponsor. Wouldn't it make more sense to complain to the entities making the rules (i.e. the state legislature/governor)? Being annoyed with legislation is the price we pay to live in society. We cannot ensure that every law/rule/regulation will comport with our own personal preferences. If the liquor laws in Utah (or any law for that matter) are so awful, you are not required to live/visit the state. Freedom of interstate travel is a constitutionally protected right - freedom from personally annoying rules is not.

Well, the thread has pretty well agreed the Utah legislature is overwhelmingly LDS (and all out of proportion to the actual LDS population, I might add). And further, only one member of the "Utah Alcohol Commission Board" will publically admit to enjoying an adult beverage (talk about Profiles in Courage!). And yet you suggest there's no connection to be had between the laws of Utah and the LDS Church. And that it is senseless & inappropriate for me to bring my concerns to an LDS internet forum...

That, my friend, beggars belief. If 7 pages of this thread has established nothing else, it's at least overcome your objection.

;0)

--Erik

PS. No, I'm not "required" to visit Utah. But my folks live there & I love them and want to spend time when I can. You appreciate that, right?