Individual Moralities, Social Responsibilities and Controversial Drunkenness

Do you think young ones should drink alcohol? Mostly the percentage the people drinking in America. Can we stop young people from drinking? Yes, because it’s illegal for young age to drink. This topic isn’t everyone agreed of. The enactment of the National Minimum Drinking Age Act of 1984 prompted states to raise their legal age. Purchase or public possession of alcohol to 21 or risk losing millions in federal highway funds (GPO Access). We should stay the high age to drink because it lower MLDA 21 not responsible on medical, reduce the number of underage, and lower the program age of 21 to 18 cause irresponsibility to let in great more crimes.

Vivian Jones, the author of “Underage Drinking”, questions the drinking age limit, and wants to decrease the age limit for consuming alcohol from twenty-one years old to eighteen. Firstly, Jones defines underage drinking as a danger to young adults and teenagers that are developing. Secondly, Jones states that raising the age limit for drinking is a controversial topic in society. Thirdly, Jones acknowledges that drinking underage is banned and as a result the young adolescents are more allured to drink alcohol and rebel. The author also states that more young Americans are drinking in excess with comparison to the UK. Then, Jones also states that raising the drinking age will not stop the violence and crime, it would only help slightly. Finally, Jones states that underage drinking is a major issue in today’s society. I disagree with the author, the drinking age should be twenty-one because it would first reduce crime, it would prevent death, and finally it would decrease medical problems.

The government provides citizens with full rights at the age of drinking. These citizens are allowed to legally purchase cigarettes, vote, join the military, and decide whether or not to complete school. But why is it that alcohol consumption is considered illegal until the age of twenty-one? The powers that control our government decided that when one becomes twenty-one. In this essay, I will first give the affirmative perspective on why the minimum drinking age should be lowered. Then I will talk about the consequences society may face when lowering the minimum drinking age. Lastly, I will provide my perspective and insight.

We live in a nation that prides itself on being free, however a few Americans feel they do not have as much opportunity as they merit, such as the flexibility to drink lawfully at a more youthful age. For a considerable length of time, as far back as the times of Prohibition, truth be told, numerous legislators, scholastics, and guardians alike have occupied with the drinking age dispute regarding whether the lawful drinking age of twenty-one ought to be brought down to eighteen. I believe the lawful drinking age ought to be brought down to eighteen years old in light of the fact that at eight years old adolescent as a grown-up according to the law.

However, as we mature, we are expected to understand morality through the means of reason and not only follow them blindly because of consequential motives. Unfortunately, most people persist in the method of sanctions and never truly evolve to be moral individuals. Morality should be regarded and pursued for its essence, not as a reward

Morals: A person's standards or beliefs concerning what is and what is not acceptable for them to do. On today's society, many appear to have different “variations” on common, widely-believed morals. Usually, these “variations” are designed and believed based on situations that are both good and bad, according to standards set forth by a society and/or a government. For example, some societies believe that the action of abandoning family is morally unacceptable, whereas other societies believe limiting family growth and expelling excess children is within moral boundaries. Another instance of differing morals is what defines a right or wrong action.

One significant social justice issue in contemporary culture is the negative influence social conformity has on the encouragement of civil disobedience. Since the modern world is a multicultural melting pot, being one’s own person can go against traditional norms throughout the community. This is a problem that matters because social conformity is a surprising phenomenon that forces people surrender to it without resistance. By capitulating to the pressure of conformity and refusing to be a free-standing individual, one is fearing punishment and social ostracism. Contemporary society struggles to define itself and its cultural norms resulting from the extreme fear of authority’s punishment and competing values of conformism and individualism.

Second, there is no objective standard that can be used to judge one societal code better than another can. Third, the moral code of our own society has no special status; it is merely one among many. Forth, there is no “universal truth” in which moral truths hold for everyone, in every situation. Fifth, the moral code of a society determines what is right within that society. For example, if the moral code of a society believes that it is acceptable to murder people with blond hair, then that action is right, at least within that society. Sixth, it is arrogant for us to try to judge the conduct of other people. Instead, we should adopt an attitude of tolerance toward the practices of other cultures.

According to my moral vision, I make my own code of conduct. First, don't judge. I shouldn't judge others’ choices because they have their own rights to choose freely. Second, don't do anything that will violate others’ basic rights. Examples are as covering my cough, not making noise when roommates are sleeping, etc. If I choose to do the opposite, it would make no difference to me, but it would put other people’s rights at stake. Third, others have no saying in my decisions. I expect people to respect my rights and not to control or disturb me. Just as the way I respect them, they should respect me.

       Do the current laws involving the age at which adults can start drinking really make sense? There are many reasons why the government changed the legal drinking age to 21, but has this actually caused a decrease in the amount of alcohol consumed by persons between 18 and 21? Alcohol related crime and traffic accidents have gone down in recent years, but the source of this drop may not simply have to do with raising the drinking age, as the government would like you to believe. There is a theory in psychology called the Reactance Theory, which disagrees with the idea that by making more restrictive laws, drinking will slow down.

The quiz of Be Responsible About Drinking added up some more knowledge about alcohol to me, which I didn’t know before attempting this quiz. I excitedly worked on this quiz and some of my answers went wrong. I was very surprised after checking my answers. I lived in Michigan for almost one year. I often purchased beer and Smirnoff vodka from 7-Eleven however, I never noticed the staff’s age. Now, I just came to know that 18 years old may sell or serve alcoholic beverages in Michigan, but may not purchase, consume, possess, or attempt to purchase, consume or possess alcohol. This law doesn’t make any sense to me. I would like to raise my hand to say “bullshit” right now. I mean 18 years is not appropriate to sell the alcoholic beverage.

There is no such thing as social drinking. The ideology behind social drinking, simply put, is drinking every once in a while with friends, but not getting drunk. Christians, especially, ought to steer clear if this idea, as it is contrary to the command to be sober minded and vigilant. If committing sins "socially" is widely accepted amongst the church, it is a double standard to condemn other "social" activities such as socially dressing immodestly; that is dressing in short, tight, or revealing clothing during special events such prom or date night, for example.

The aim of this paper is to clearly depict how John Stuart Mill’s belief to do good for all is more appropriate for our society than Immanuel Kant’s principle that it is better to do what's morally just. I will explain why Mill’s theory served as a better guide to moral behavior and differentiate between the rights and responsibilities of human beings to themselves and society.

The laws concerning the minimum drinking age in this country sometimes seem ridiculous and unnecessary. In this paper, I will discuss why certain laws are unfair and I will provide alternatives to certain problems concerning underage drinking and binge drinking.

Within philosophy, ethics is the division that focuses on morality, which defines behavior as right and wrong. Ethical principles represent standard guidelines for behavior, while also justifying a person’s given course of action. Society defines what moral values and behaviors are held and legislated (DeNisco & Barker, 2016). Further, ethical principles include the concepts of autonomy, freedom, beneficence, fidelity. Autonomy entails a person’s desire to direct themselves, while freedom is the person’s right to do as they please. However, this right is contingent on members of a society agreeing, whether explicitly or not, to abide by behaviors that do not deceive or force others–behaviors that lead to peaceful interpersonal relationships. Beneficence is the person’s motivation to do good, and fidelity is the individual’s