Prohibition

Only hedonist fucktards would argue for keeping booze in civilization.

Yeah, but I don't want to give up my post-lawn-mowing beer though. Or hot buttered rum in the colder months.

The prohibition of any (initially) victimless act will always fail because they are enacted not for the good of the people bit to curry favor with whatever influential party has the most campaign cash or to bleed money from the people while keeping them polarized with false fears.

The very thought that a person would believe it possible to remove booze from civilization....

It hurts.

See, this is a great example of why Veeky Forums is shit in general. Someone has a well thought out post with multiple points supporting their position, and then someone else replies with some shitty one liner, completely ignoring the content of what they're replying to.

I'm probably just taking bait, but I see this shit all the time. The amount of bullshit on this site far outweighs anything that could be considered quality, and that bullshit seems to be informing the mainstream opinion of every board.

I wish it were different, but I guess I'll always keep coming here for the dank memes.

It's why I stopped doing long posts on here trying to discuss a topic. It's usually ignored or someone just replies with edgy one liners.

t. redditors

Thank you for proving my point.

>only hedonist fucktards would argue for keeping strong spices like tumeric and garlic or bright primary colors in civilization!

...

The negatives of alcohol (domestic abuse, car crash victims, property damage, FAS babies, generally becoming a loose-minded asshole) far outweigh the positives (gettin' a buzz), though. The world would be better off if it replaced alcohol with caffeine or even sugar to achieve similar dopamine highs.

To be fair, garlic is terrible

While you are right, user, there is nothing to be felt but pity for someone who approaches a board dealing with sensitive topics such as Veeky Forums with the presumption that every thread will be primarily populated with thoughtful discussion. And to give attention to low-quality posting does little but engender even more low quality posting.

You can't really replace depressant like alcohol with stimulators like sugar and caffeine.

The Mormons did it. Say what you will about their weird faith practices, but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.

>but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.

Then why didn't they win the election in 2012?

Genetically modify humans to find the taste of beer beyond revolting if you want to end alchohol consumption as long as we can enjoy something our hedonistic instincts will never make us quit them.

t. mormon

>but their families are highly stable and they're basically a model for Western civilization.
Haha look at the rate at which young adult mormons leave the church.
The missionaries are necessary to keep the church alive with new converts like blood transfusions to an anemic and lacerated man.

Because Mitt didn't have the same charm as our boy Barry. And now see what's happened: Mitt looks like a cherub compared to what the GOP fished out from the Hudson River this year.

t. liberal secularism is the answer, I know because I'm a liberal secularist

sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2500019-155/christianity-shrinking-in-us-mormon-numbers

Mormonism is in the same situation as other religions in the US (total freefall) because of materialist secular values being prioritized over religious values. Mormonism, however, like all successful religions, evangelizes in a way that allows it to be sensitive to social and political change. This is not the case (ironically) for most mainstream "Evangelical" denominations. And of course, this is not to say that one religion is more "virtuous" than another, but it does highlight the fact that Mormonism is more enduring and sustainable.

Enabling it with women suffrage while all the men that would have voted against their landslide were off dying in WWI

>banny thing make people wanty thing more

Beer already tastes awful though. People just get used to it.

t. abduhl

>Mitt looks like a cherub compared to what the GOP fished out from the Hudson River this year.

That happens every election though. Dems spend the entire election claiming that the current candidate is some combination of a theocrat, a fascist, and a robber baron - until the next election when they wistfully yearn for a "REAL, decent, human" Republican.

You might be too young to remember the MSM relentlessly mocking/criticising Romney for his Mormonism ("magic underwear! XD") and his time at Bain Capital

That doesn't counter anything I said about them not being stable families and the guy quoted with the article agrees that they rely on their high rates of converts.

Ya, your right. I'll hold my tounge

Alcohol is a fundamental part of Western culture. You can't suppress a fundamental of culture through force unless you're willing to be extremely brutal, or you have a completely different and competing culture that people have powerful incentive to defect to.

Mitt may be a theocrat and a robber baron (fascist is excessive), but at least he's not a fucking asshole. Same thing with Dubya; he may have been a retard and chronic bad decision-maker, but I'd vote for Dubya in a heartbeat over Donald "if I restrain myself that means my enemies win" Trump. Why is the GOP so willing to allow its own party to be hijacked by its worst elements?

It was only a matter of time until they lost control of the hype machine.

If you spend decades indoctrinating your followers to believe that the mainstream media is nothing but godless liberals, they're eventually going to start to view you as part of the same establishment, when the next opportunist comes along.

>Same thing with Dubya; he may have been a retard and chronic bad decision-maker, but I'd vote for Dubya in a heartbeat over Donald "if I restrain myself that means my enemies win" Trump

Yes, and in 2020 you'll be telling yourself that you'd vote for Dubya, McCain or Romney "in a heartbeat" over Marco "[insert-gaffe-blown-out-of-all-proportion]" Rubio, and you'll do the same again in 2024, except this time Marco Rubio (or whoever the 2020 nominee is) will be the saint to which the current nominee is held towards an impossibly high standard

Never could have gone right. Nobody likes restrictions like that, and nobody was willing to change, either.

Arbitrarily denying liberty based on the whims of bitter disgruntled women is indeed a terridle idea

Let's make sure that we never repeat those mistakes

*looks at the left*