How to Stay: WofW Parahraph suggestions

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

There is an interesting thread on By Common Consent by Norbert entitled “Beer Drinking Mormons” that might be worth reading as you think of how to address this topic. (I recommend it for everyone, actually. It’s really is interesting from a socio-cultural standpoint.) The link is: http://bycommonconsent.com/2010/04/14/beer-drinking-mormons/

Oh yes – “the drunken, sauna, orgy, ward activity in Finland article” I loved it.

[Anonymous]

I didn’t say I would endorse drinking beer. I don’t. I only said I would point out that the standard is different for different substances throughout the world.

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

So, taking a step back, looking at where we are today, we can see so many differences than in previous times — even in the last 20 years! In medical science, we now know that excessive eating leads to obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, strokes, heart disease…all of which are obviously not “healthy.” This is so much more urgent than the petty little details of tea, coffee, wine, etc.,

Rix, I disagree that these are “petty little details”. A lot of people take heart attacks due to too much caffeine, and wine has killed many people too. Including at least one relative of mine. I’ll not go into too many other details, but I think it is worth mentioning this. Wine is not cocaine or heroin, but it can be bad for you if you drink a bottle a day with no food.

Old-Timer wrote:

I didn’t say I would endorse drinking beer. I don’t. I only said I would point out that the standard is different for different substances throughout the world.

Ray, I was thinking more about how this section could be twisted. The last thing you want is someone throwing back your words in your face saying that it got them into trouble, or that you are trying to cause trouble, because that’s nto what this site is about.

I think that the Finnish example is not entirely a good one. I’d suggest that there are more significant variations in early American Mormonism.

[Anonymous]

cwald wrote:

SamBee wrote:

I can see, and even sympathize with where you’re coming from, Ray, but I think alcohol is a very difficult one. I think the rum cake quote is a good one, but if we say beer is alright, we might be taken as endorsing drunkenness.

Not if it is done in moderation.

I know many many many people who consume alcohol and they are not “drunks” and they are not alcoholics. That’s the whole point of the WofW —- ALL THINGS IN MODERATION. I think mormons are a bit naive about alcohol in general (not you Sam ) and have this crazy idea that if one drinks – than one must automatically be an alcoholic. Please.

Quote:

Sure, non-alcoholic beer is disgusting. But beer in general? I think anyone who thinks beer “taste bad” needs to spend some time out here in the North West (the Beer Belt). Beer Brewing (Fermentation) is an ART. Just a side note, Oregon has more microbreweries per-capita than any state in the union as well as any European country. I’m not bragging , just stating that the facts.

Growing up (as a non-Mormon, in case anyone was wondering) it did take me quite a time to get to like beer. It is an acquired taste, that’s probably why when many kids start abusing alcohol, they tend to go for sweeter stuff that adults wouldn’t be seen dead drinking. Cheap forms of cider are popular here amongst youth. I must have had my first taste of beer at seven or eight, and not really touched it again for another seven or eight years! (I did get hold of other alcohol though, but that’s a different matter)

In general, American beer is pretty poor stuff. There’s a joke about it in “Monty Python at the Hollywood Bowl”, which I won’t repeat here (it’s vulgar!), but which is quite close to the truth,With the exception of some microbreweries, as you have mentioned. (Although the one danger with microbreweries is that they don’t always last long, and their output can be uneven, especially if they’re experimenting) I don’t think American bars are particularly good either, probably partly due to the focus on spirits and lager, and a history of prohibition. I have been to a decent one in New York however.

I think the best beer in the world comes out of Northern Europe, England, Belgium and Germany especially, but with some good stuff coming out of Ireland, Scotland, Wales and the Netherlands too… plus the Czech Republic perhaps. This is not always easily available outside these countries. But I was always pretty biased in favor of “brown beer”. Lager usually doesn’t taste that great to me, unless I’m in a hot country/climate. I must have tried at least a hundred beers of one type and another if I think about it.

Moderation hasn’t always been an easy thing for me. Part of my problem is I have such low alcohol tolerance that it would make most Japanese blush. Five large glasses of beer and I’m pretty much into Mr Stupid territory, and I’m at risk of doing something regrettable. On bad days, three glasses can get me tipsy. Even before I started living the WoW again, I was cutting down my beer (and tea and coffee) for one reason and another, but in my culture it is EXTREMELY difficult to socialize if you don’t drink. Beer is becoming too expensive here anyway, especially with the global slump.

My advice to anyone who wishes to wander in to this territory is to check the following before they do it. What is the national driving limit where you are? Don’t drink more than you would allowed to drive with, even if you don’t have a car or drive. That way you won’t get drunk. Also check out percentages on the side of bottles. There are beers that are extremely strong out there – so don’t get caught a cropper. Strong is 5% or more, IMHO.

Disclaimer to all of the above (!) – I haven’t been drinking since i came back to church…

[Anonymous]

Brian Johnston wrote:

…What would you recommend to someone who is questioning the Word of Wisdom as one part of the puzzle in the overall faith crisis experience?…We want to encourage people to be responsible and make good decisions in spite of changing faith…So what do YOU tell someone who is having a faith crisis about the Word of Wisdom, someone you really care about and love, if they came to you and asked your opinion about it?

One thing that should keep the Word of Wisdom in perspective is the fact that it was originally given as more of a suggestion “not by commandment or constraint” and this was all changed to be an expected requirement for baptism and temple recommends much later than that. To me it is clear that these rules have been given much more emphasis and importance in LDS culture than they really deserve at this point especially when the 2 most revered LDS hero figures Jesus and Joseph Smith both drank wine.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

especially when the 2 most revered LDS hero figures Jesus and Joseph Smith both drank wine.

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 also abstained from pork (and other things). Personally, I think those who struggle make WAY too much out of the fact that the WofW 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, based on my previous mention of Pres. McKay and rum cake, but I am totally fine with the WofW 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 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, imo. (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 or individual ideal it never was intended or revealed to be.

[Anonymous]

Thanks Ray, I think that is full of good food for thought in line with my favorite question: “Which decision will ultimately show the greatest love?”

[Anonymous]

SamBee wrote:

Rix wrote:

So, taking a step back, looking at where we are today, we can see so many differences than in previous times — even in the last 20 years! In medical science, we now know that excessive eating leads to obesity, diabetes, high blood pressure, strokes, heart disease…all of which are obviously not “healthy.” This is so much more urgent than the petty little details of tea, coffee, wine, etc.,

Rix, I disagree that these are “petty little details”. A lot of people take heart attacks due to too much caffeine, and wine has killed many people too.

Again, big picture — caffeine, wine, tea…combined have only killed a negligible number of people compared to the diseases from overeating and obesity. Of course, any addiction is harmful, but I’m a firm believer in moderation in all things, and I (personally) feel that the current emphasis of the WoW is not consistent with that principle. Frankly, with what we know today about what is good and not good for the body, the more appropriate emphasis would be on the “eat meat sparingly” part, (and I would also strongly advise against tobacco — too much evidence about that killing people too…) and certainly not on the “never drink tea, coffee, or alcohol” concept.

Another point I should make is the psychological aspect of the WoW. There is significant addiction to substances within the church membership. As a physician and former drug and alcohol counselor, my experience is that when you tell a person they cannot partake of “one drop” of anything, there arises a curiousity/rebellious streak in many…and the risk of over-doing the substance you are trying to restrict increases. There are studies showing this…so if the true purpose of the WoW is for health (rather than obedience…which I think is probably the greater purpose today…), it seems to be failing in that purpose. I’m not saying that obedience to a principle is not a good goal, it’s just that when it is promoted to be a health guideline, it should be consistent with the facts of medical science. The inconsistency gives the organization a bit of a black eye, IMO.

[Anonymous]

I agree with what you you said Rix. Good posts. I think those kind of things should be in the article. “Look at the big picture.”

I also think the stuff that Ray mentioned should be in the article – though I certainly respectfully disagree with the premise. I mean this respectfully Ray, as we have had this discussion before, but I don’t buy into it personally, the whole for “weakest of the weak” – but if that helps other people and if it help some LDS find a way to reconcile the WofW — great.

I don’t get the premise. It like when I heard an English teacher say we had to ban wallet chains at school because they could be used as a weapon and hurt someone. I about came out of my chair. I’m a shop teacher. In my 6000 sq. ft. building I literally have THOUSANDS of potential weapons – if someone want to make them a weapon. Do we shut down the shop? I made the statement that maybe we should ban text books – someone could use those as a weapon and hurt another person too. The whole premise of the weakest of the weak does not make sense to me. It would be like supporting gun control on the premise that some emotionally unstable person is going to harm themselves or others with a gun, so for the strong, “it should be worth giving up” all your guns to protect teh one individual.

Gun control — Hmmmm? Should the church make a new commandment dealing with this issue? maybe I will start a new thread. Don’t want to hijack this one.

Out.

[Anonymous]

apples and oranges, cwald, imo – but you knew that would be my reaction when you wrote your comment. 😆

I really like that we can see this so differently – but other things so similarly. There is a good lesson in that, I believe.

[Anonymous]

Rix wrote:

Again, big picture — caffeine, wine, tea…combined have only killed a negligible number of people compared to the diseases from overeating and obesity.

I’ve got to disagree here very strongly. Alcohol kills hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people. I’ve known dozens of people who have suffered ill health partly because of alcohol, and several who have died directly from the effects of it.

In the Soviet Union, they didn’t exactly have masses of food, but there was little shortage of alcohol, and thousands drank themselves to death there.

We can’t always separate out the obesity thing from these either. Alcohol slows down the metabolism, which increases weight gain, gives you a beer gut etc, and can have bad effects on the heart. Caffeine’s effects on the cardiovascular system, cause thousands of heart attacks every year, which are partly a result of bad eating and partly a result of drinking strong coffee. If you’re obese, or have clogged arteries, giving them caffeine jolts will finish you off.

Caffeine has a probable link to bowel cancer, which is caused by both bad eating and damage caused by stools hardened by tea and coffee.

As for road fatalities, I don’t think any car crash has been caused by obesity (although eating at the wheel may have been a factor). Thousands are caused by drink driving – wine included by the way. I’m sure a good few car crashes have been caused by epileptic fits brought on by over consumption of caffeine too.

[Anonymous]

Sorry to be scatological, but one of the best reasons to avoid large amounts of caffeine, other than epilepsy and heart trouble is the digestive system. I don’t really like the idea of my intestine and backside being ravaged by cancer, hemorrhoids etc.

More on caffeine and bowel complaints –

http://www.southamptonhealth.nhs.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=5100&type=Full&servicetype=Attachment

Quote:

Reduce the caffeine drinks – drinks such as tea, coffee, cola and some popular non-alcoholic

‘bedtime’ drinks contain caffeine, which encourages the fluid we drink to pass quickly via our

waterworks rather then circulate through the colon. Drinking caffeine-free fluids helps maintain a

soft bowel motion and speeds waste products through the colon.

The jury’s out on caffeine and bowel cancer, but it certainly does cause hemorrhoids (Piles)

http://www.thedoctorwillseeyounow.com/content/aging/art2050.html?getPage=3

Quote:

Russell

Our discussion wouldn’t be complete unless we talked about alcohol and caffeine. There is some evidence that these substances can increase your risk of colorectal cancer. With regard to alcohol, do you feel that this may have something to do with folate and the metabolism?

Mason

There is strong evidence that alcohol is an independent risk factor for colorectal cancer. As you mentioned, alcohol is well known to interfere with folate metabolism in a number of ways so that excessive and chronic alcohol might increase cancer risk for this reason.

Regardless of how alcohol exerts its influence, it is worth remembering that following U.S. Dietary Guidelines — no more than one alcoholic drink for women and two drinks a day for men — is wise not only to prevent colorectal cancer but also for your overall health.

In regard to a link between cancer and caffeine or coffee or tea, I think there is not enough evidence at this point to say.

[Anonymous]

SamBee wrote:

Rix wrote:

Again, big picture — caffeine, wine, tea…combined have only killed a negligible number of people compared to the diseases from overeating and obesity.

I’ve got to disagree here very strongly.

Of course that is your prerogative. I try to go by scientific studies, not a person’s personal exposure. The CDC has loads of reports about the dangers of obesity and overeating. Yes, it is more specific to this country where starvation is not as much a concern as in others…and of course, as I said, any addiction can be fatal. But by the sheer numbers of deaths from heart disease, strokes, diabetes — the majority of which are preventable, there is no comparison.

Again, the spirit of my post is that any over-consumption of anything is bad…and I believe there is a better way to address the issue than to simply say “don’t do it.” I think education and more effective guidelines of “moderation” would accomplish the goal of improving health better than absolute abstinence demands. Kinda reminds me of that whole plan from Lucifer!

😆

[Anonymous]

Do I have to spell it out Rix? I have sent you a private message on this subject, about exactly why I’m happy to give up tea and coffee. I didn’t exactly consume them in vast quantities either – one or two cups a day. Suffice to say, they caused me an extremely embarrassing, and actually quite frightening problem.

Quote:

I try to go by scientific studies, not a person’s personal exposure

Is the NHS link not scientific enough for you. Rix?

Can you tell me why I would want the problem I mentioned to you, particularly when I thought it might kill me?

Quote:

But by the sheer numbers of deaths from heart disease, strokes, diabetes — the majority of which are preventable, there is no comparison.

Strokes and heart attacks are EXACERBATED by caffeine, as I told you. That’s scientifically proven. If someone’s fat as well, the combination of the two must be taken into account.

I think the sheer numbers you mention don’t factor in caffeine, which was probably one of the causes in many of these cases.

[Anonymous]

Old-Timer wrote:

apples and oranges, cwald, imo – but you knew that would be my reaction when you wrote your comment. 😆

I really like that we can see this so differently – but other things so similarly. There is a good lesson in that, I believe.

Yeah.

SamBee wrote:

I’ve got to disagree here very strongly.

Sam, I’m going to respectfully disagree with your disagree. I don’t follow some of the logic that I’m hearing here. (where is a d@mn Vulcan when you need one? ) I guess I just can’t see why we would “ban” something just because it has potential harm one or someone else. Beer, coffee and tea (I will exclude tobacco for the time being) are made from god given plants to be used for the benefit of man. Discretion and moderation is the key. They can have GREAT benefits to mankind and society. Yes they sometimes get abused and there is potential for harm. But so what? Yeah, there are risks. There are also risks involved with guns, ATVs, sex, saturated fats, Big Macs etc.

You used an example of someone getting in a car accident from caffeine induced epilepsy. I’m going to guess that more people have died in car accidents from reaching down and picking up a piece of candy off the floor? Should we include candy in the word of wisdom? No.

I just don’t get that arguement at all. It doesn’t make logical sense for government to “ban” substances because of the risk of abuse. And I don’t know why the church does this either.

ATVs – very risky, and one has a good potential to damage the “temple of god” when misused. We set standards, age limits and educate folks on proper use. We don’t ban them.

Sex. The church believes in – but it certainly can be detrimental to ones health. We don’t ban it because of the risk of abuse. We educate and train folks how and when and where and whyit should take place.

I just don’t see a lot of difference between these concepts. The wofw, IMO, is nothing more than a commandment to test one’s obedience to church authority. To argue otherwise just doesn’t hold water.

[Author]

Posts