I don't mean this to be flippant in any way, so please understand what I'm going to say:
As a devout Jew, Jesus drank wine ("real" wine, not just pure grape juice) - but he also abstained from things we eat regularly now. Personally, I think those who struggle to accept the Word of Wisdom because Jesus and Joseph Smith drank in their time make WAY too much out of the fact that the Word of Wisdom went from a suggestion to a command and that former prophets (and Jesus) didn't follow it. Lots of things go from suggestions or cultural practices to commands - but lots of things also go from commands to suggestions, cultural practices or even rejected absurdities.
This is going to sound paradoxical, I'm sure, but I am totally fine with the Word of Wisdom primarily because I see it as such a little thing for most but such a HUGE thing for some - not as a health code, but as an addiction avoider and debt controller. It goes back to the benefits of following versus the benefits of indulging argument - focused on the weakest of the weak.
If I'm strong enough to indulge without disaster, I should be strong enough to abstain without disaster. Therefore, for the strong, it simply isn't worth making it an issue, in my opinion. (and I use the word "worth" carefully and intentionally) However, if I'm NOT strong enough to indulge without disaster (and that applies to SO many people, even if a minority), I need an environment in which I can abstain without pressure or stigma or negative consequence. I'm willing to give up my "right to drink" (really, with no negative consequences of high value) if it contributes to even one person not becoming a drunk or raped at a party or a weapon behind the steering wheel . . . - and I know it contributes to that end for far more than one person.
At heart, it's a simple cost/benefit analysis for me - and I actually see the revelation itself as framed in that way. (not the individual ideal, but adapted for the weak to be a substitute communal ideal) I think the problem is that too many members interpret and treat it as a health code or individual ideal it never was intended or revealed to be.
Cries and Dolls
4 weeks ago
8 comments:
Your conclusion ignores the health benefits of moderate alcohol use.
I think if you charted the use of tobacco in the U.S., charted the ailments caused by tobacco use and then correlated that with the Word of Wisdom, particularly the "New Interpretation" of the early 20th century, you would see very clearly that the Word of Wisdom was an enormous blessing for 20th century Mormons. The Word of Wisdom can be looked at in many different ways. We might even find new applications for it today because we face challengs today that no one faced at the time of Jesus or Joseph Smith.
Howard, actually, this post addresses that quite directly. However, even directly to your statement, there are NO health benefits of moderate alcohol use that can't be gained by use of other natural foods and the liquids made from them. Health benefits of moderate alcohol use, therefore, are flat-out irrelevant - especially in terms of the actual argument I am making in this post.
Anonymous, I understand the health benefits of following the Word of Wisdom and didn't meant to say it doesn't contribute to greater health among those who accept it. I just don't see its most beneficial aspect in our modern time as being related to physical health. I see its most beneficial aspect as protection of the "weak" - even (or especially) by the "strong".
A new study reveals moderate beer consumption can also reduce the risk of heart disease by 31%. Moderate beer drinking could have the same health benefits as wine. Where exactly is this health benefit coming from? Wine and beer have largely different chemical compositions, with the rather obvious exception of alcohol itself. These results might well indicate that alcohol itself actually plays a part in reducing the risk of heart disease.
http://io9.com/5859827/moderate-beer-drinking-could-have-the-same-health-benefits-as-wine
Again, Howard, for the purposes of this post (and, really, at the most fundamental level), I don't care about the effects of moderate consumption. It doesn't matter in the slightest to me, since I don't see the Word of Wisdom as primarily concerned about any benefits of moderation. In the case of moderate alcohol consumption of any kind, I see D&C 89 as focused on those whom moderate consumption won't hurt (or even help) sacrificing their own moderation for the sake of those who aren't able to consume moderately - and it's impossible to make a solid case that such people aren't numerous.
The "moderate consumption" argument, in isolation for a hermit, is reasonable; **within the context of community, however, it is a selfish one, imo, and is directly counter to the spirit of D&C 89.**
I dunno Papa D a lot of people die of heart disease every day! A 31% reduction has no impact within the context of community? I think you're mistaken, potentially it has a huge impact and it should be factored into your conclusion. You may be laying down your life earlier than necessary for your LDS alcoholic support group sacrifice. Think of the impact your early death might have on your family! This is what God wants and wants he wants it?
why he wants it?
I don't believe there is anything about moderate consumption of alcohol that is inherently wrong or evil - which explains the post title. I don't think Jesus or Joseph Smith sinned in ANY way by drinking wine - so, "So what if Jesus drank wine?" Having said that . . .
Yes, I think that the majority giving up potential benefits (possible, potential, not-guaranteed-in-combination-with-other-health-factors benefits) to provide a HUGE, critical benefit for the minority (the strong sacrificing for the weak) is exactly what God would want - especially in a community that already outlives other communities of its time.
As I said, I see the potential benefits for individuals juxtaposed against the well-known and documented catastrophic consequences of non-moderate alcohol consumption and believe arguments that the potential benefits of moderate usage for those individuals outweighs the enormous effect of non-moderate use on communities as a whole to be selfish arguments at the most fundamental level - especially when the potential benefits of moderate alcohol consumption can be gained through other, non-alcoholic sources.
Post a Comment