Message 9593 of 22774 in Behind the Bar

Share on Facebook |  Save to del.icio.us

(I had to log off... sorry)


> there's no reason for somebody to make a 
> fuss (besides the fact you're spitting the sip back out in front of 
> customers).

I see no reason to make a fuss should one choose to not drink.

Now, can you please, typing slowly, tell me, in plain english, why one SHOULD 
make a fuss about someone choosing to not drink? Because your (and .Dan.'s) 
point hasn't come through to me yet other than, 'it's no big deal if you 
drink'.

I say 'it's no big deal if you don't.'

I don't see how either argument is stronger than the other.
 
> No they aren't, but they are the only ones that can be attributed to 
> blind obedience towards the tennent of not drinking (OK, maybe add 
> watching somebody succumb to alcohol, but then you really shouldn't 
> be in a bar or anywhere around alcohol if that fear is so 
> overwhelming).  There is a HUGE difference between blindly avoiding 
> alcohol and having a rational(-ized) reason for not comsuming it.

How about 'I don't like the taste of booze'? Is that acceptable? If that's my 
reason, am I permitted to pass through the gates?

Hmm... maybe YOU (and .Dan.) are the ones with hang ups if you think that the 
ONLY reasons any one could have for not drinking are religion, alcoholism, or 
seeing some one else's demise due to Fire Water. Is that it?

Can't you see that there is more in this world that the consumption of alcohol?

And can't you see that not every one MUST drink?

> Those who blindly avoid it probably shouldn't be behind a bar (come 
> on, their beliefs should preclude them from tending bar in the first 
> place). 

Believe it or not, I agree. But then, I don't think that every one that 
chooses to not drink does so 'blindly'. Just like I don't think that every one 
that does choose to drink does so 'blindly'.

> If you can't at least take 30 seconds somewhere in your life 
> to think/consider the pro's and con's before you adamantly insist 
> you'll never do something, then don't waste anybody's 
> time...

..... and every one that chooses to not drink, and this choice is not based on 
religion or alcoholism, hasn't? Where do you get your information?
 
> Those who have a rational reason (kicking alcoholism for example), 
> while rare, should be able to reason that "tasting" doesn't mean 
> "consuming", and find a solution that suits the situation (perhaps 
> what I mentioned above).

...again.. if a person has moved to the road to recovery from 
B-double-Oh-Zee-Eeee, then, and ONLY then, it's ok to not indulge?

Do, tell!
 
> Those who have rationalized (yes, there is a difference) that they 
> must not let in alcohol...ok, honestly, I find these people to be 
> weak minded and easily swayed from one high-gloss issue to the next 
> and are just as likely to start drinking next week as possibly follow 
> Kate Moss into Scientology if the right person sways them either way 
> (only to change their focus to something else 7-30 days later)

Now, is this more applicable to YOU, or to me?

Be honest, now.
 
> While I support somebody not drinking, I believe that there should 
> still be room to understand the product that you're putting out.

And I support that the ONLY way to understand the product isn't limited to 
consumption.
-- 
Struggle is the proof you have not yet been conquered
- Author unknown