sort by best latest
Charles Dawson says
Are you saying more courageous people should be immune from the law? Why not 18 year old cops then? Or firefighters for that matter? How about emotionally courageous people like teens with disabilities? Your logic is erroneous and biased.
It's not logic. It's an opinion or a belief. Therefore, it is never wrong. It is however biased because I am a veteran. I respect military vets and service members far more than civilians. It also my opinion that you nuked my statement out too far.
Logic was in reference to how you supported your inane belief, which I didn't say was wrong, but rather in error. Your bias indicate this. Similarly, your condescention nukes your ability to be taken seriously. Respect has nothing to do with ethics.
Inane? Stay away from insults while debating, or I won't take YOU seriously. I never insulted you or your opinion. ... Condescension? Yes, you better believe it. Don't like it? Move on, because I won't budge. I can stay firm without insulting anyone.
Thanks for the tip, kid. You're so assertive!
- See all 5 commentsHide extra comments
The consequences are not always theirs alone. Others lives are lost, many children.
Your point is moot, both legally and logically. I don't see a direct correlation between the death toll of children and the legal drinking age reducing to 18. It sounds like you are alluding to DUI incidents, which is not the scope of the question.
- See all 2 commentsHide extra comments
Deb Welch says
There is no correlation between drinking and the war zone except that we expect our 18 year olds to be mature enough to fight and die for our country, but not mature enough to drink an alcoholic beverage. I just believe you cannot have this both ways