Yesterday many of us had turkey, farm-grown, fattened and accompanied by a lot of trimmings – dressing, sweet potatoes, cranberry sauce, mashed potatoes with gravy, and pumpkin and/or mince meat pie.
Often this meal was shared with extended family or friends.
And in houses around our republic, wine was an accompaniment to all of this gustatory bounty.
But if in any of those houses somebody born on or after November 23, 1986 partook of that wine, a law was broken.
That same person could legally have had coffee, and if over 18 enjoyed a nice, postprandial cigar, other things usually done more by adults than children.
The basic fact is that in Minnesota that the legal age for just about anything is 18 except to drink [21] and to consent to sex [16]. In a way it seems funny that one can consent to sex before one can sign a contract and one can sign a contract before one can have a glass of wine with the family on a festive occasion. These are two subjects which have preoccupied America for a long time, sometimes to a very obsessive degree, and, on the surface at least, we would seem to have resolved them differently.
The higher age for drinking was influenced by Mothers Against Due Process [MADD] who managed to convince Congress to coerce states to lower the minimum drinking age or lose highway funds.
One of the reasons given for lowering the age was that too many 18-, 19-, and 20-year old people were legally obtaining beer, wine, or spirits and then illegally making them available to 16-and 17-year olds. Rather then enforce those laws,, they found it easier to take rights away from all the elders.
It seems to have some of the same logic as saying that because illegal Mexican immigrants might hide in the local Chicano community, that we ought to deport the entire Chicano community to make enforcement of immigration laws easier. [I suspect that Paul Harvey, Lou Dobbs and a lot of politicians have thought of that one, but a little technicality called the Fourteenth Amendment got into the way.]
There is no direct correlation between drinking and road construction, but that did not stop them from pushing their idea. So if you are twenty years of age and have never driven a car, are blind and never intend to, and live in a transit-orientated place like Manhattan or Chicago, you still cannot drink because a 17-year old in Nebraska might somehow illegally obtain a beer and get into his big brother's pickup in a vain attempt to impress his girlfriend.
If we abolished the minimum drinking age we could minimize some of our problems. A child could learn to drink the same way he/she learns other things that come with maturation, from family, educational and religious organizations, and friends, just as a child learns other things an adult does [dressing, shaving, eating, consuming other liquids, personal hygiene, thinking, reading, etc.] as one matures. There would be no magic moment at which one could get up just before midnight to imbibe as much as one could before closing time, no “power hour.”
I know that seems too radical a change for many. It won’t happen, I am sure. But I do advocate that people start thinking of it.