utah’s alcohol laws have pretty much established zion. hands off legislators.
Last week the Mormon Newsroom published a news release regarding the LDS church’s support of Utah’s alcohol laws. It lists some impressive statistics as reasons to support the current alcohol laws, such as “Utah has the lowest number of alcohol-related traffic deaths per capita of all 50 states.” Thus Mormon Newsroom concludes that Utah’s alcohol laws are the reason why Utah has these favorable alcohol statistics. It doesn’t matter that over 60 percent of the Utah population identify as Mormon and Mormons tend to be sober. It’s the liquor laws we have to thank.
Get the hell out of Utah, alcohol culture!
Utah’s liquor laws are our only hope to keep Utah from the hell known as ‘alcohol culture’. Can you imagine a restaurant that prepares alcoholic drinks in plain sight? Might as well turn that restaurant into a strip club. And Jesus wouldn’t be down with restaurant booze in plain sight either. When he turned water into wine, he probably did it in a back room where no one could see. He didn’t turn it into a spectacle.
Also, imagine seeing this at any Super Target or Smiths..
.
.
.
Do you feel the urge to binge drink too? How do the 12 million Mormons living outside of Utah keep the Word of Wisdom without Utah’s liquor laws to protect them from seeing wine in a grocery store?
A ‘pants-day’ critic who said that he opposes women in pants because of its political nature was asked his opinion on the recent church news release. He responded, “I love this news release! Sure, I’ve previously said that I don’t want politics in my church. I still don’t want politics at church. I want facts. And fact: without Utah’s alcohol laws, there’d be about a million more drunk drivers. Another fact: all women in the church are happy with gender roles. A woman that tells you otherwise is only trying to be political.”
So thank-you Mormon Newsroom for taking a supportive stand for Utah’s liquor laws. As Joseph Smith once meant to say, “I teach them correct principles and then pressure legislators to vote for my opinions.”
Young Mormon Feminists 
6 Responses to “utah’s alcohol laws have pretty much established zion. hands off legislators.”
How does this relate to feminism?
It’s relating to the Mormon part of Young Mormon Feminists. So yes, it doesn’t relate much to feminism aside from in Mormon culture it’s not okay to be political about inequality in church, but it’s okay to be political on supposed moral issues. So it relates more to Mormon feminism, but probably not to general feminism.
Well, to me, it seems that feminism encompasses a wide variety of topics/issues, including what we as women and men feminists feel strongly about. Politics can be feminist, and vice versa. And pretty much anything relating Mormon culture and practices seems to automatically qualify for feminist philosophizing.
So it seems from your article that you believe the Mormon Newsroom feels that the reason Utah has the fewest per-capita alcohol related deaths out of all 50 states is secondary to the alcohol laws the state has adopted? That is the impression I get when you say “Thus Mormon Newsroom concludes that Utah’s alcohol laws are the reason why Utah has these favorable alcohol statistics.” I guess you did not read the entire press release because they clearly state otherwise:
“Despite these and other benefits, Utah’s alcohol laws have continually been challenged. While many other states are trying to curb alcohol consumption because of the significant public costs and the many problems associated with it, some in Utah are trying to undo laws and regulations that have contributed to these desirable outcomes sought after by other communities.”
At least you did post a link to the release so that curious individuals could read it for themselves and see that your representation of it was incomplete.
Additionally, just because the Pants-day critic is ridiculous does not mean that the news release or the motivations of the newsroom are ridiculous. You are trying to associate the two to make them both look ridiculous and I don’t see how that supports your point. It feels like one of the negative political ads that try to tear down a candidate by showing that ridiculous people support them, little bit of a cheap shot.
a “pants day critic”? That whole paragraph seems fishy to me, almost like you just made it up. If you can post a link with the quote I’ll believe that part, but seems bogus.
This is a ridiculous post…