Probably going camping again this weekend.
then going to the SALES that the CAR DEALERSHIPS have been ADVERTISING me ABOUT
the same way I spend other weekends? I didn't even know it was president's day weekend
wait what is president's day weekend???
Quote from: applesauce on February 15, 2012, 07:50:40 PM
wait what is president's day weekend???
made up weekend duh
Quote from: Snowy on February 15, 2012, 07:50:02 PM
I'll be with all of my college friends and possibly drinking with them bassir;
you're not cool snowy
underage drinking is not cool at all
Well I take online classes & work at a grocery store so holidays like this never effect me. I do have the weekend off though (have my availability set to never work weekends), just not Monday. I'm driving up to Norfolk Friday to see my boyfriend. He might not be able to leave his ship until Saturday morning & he has duty Sunday so it'll probably only be Saturday together (at best it'll be Friday night + Saturday) but I'm sure it'll be worth it.
It's too bad I don't have Monday off though because if I did, I'd have a 6 day weekend (work didn't schedule me Wed-Fri because I wasn't even supposed to be working there anymore past Tuesday, but shit changed).
Quote from: Kefka on February 15, 2012, 07:51:21 PM
made up weekend duh
i MEANT WHEN AND DO I HAVE SCHOOL OFF???
Quote from: applesauce on February 15, 2012, 07:56:04 PM
i MEANT WHEN AND DO I HAVE SCHOOL OFF???
IDK
WE HAVE 3 DAYS OFF SO IDK
Try to take over the world
Pretty sure the school I went to before didn't give President's Day off. We never got anything off except MLK day & spring break during spring semester. It sucked.
I had planned on drinking some German passionfruit schnapps this weekend. Maybe I still will if my boyfriend is home Friday night. But I feel like it'd be weird to get drunk in the house he shares with some other people while he's not there. Even if it is exotic German schnapps.
I can't plan things more than a few hours ahead unless I'm forced to. However, there is an important birthday coming up for a lady friend and I might do something special for her. I have work, but I am trying to block this thought because it is unpleasant.
no president = no president's day
Quote from: Snowy on February 15, 2012, 08:01:29 PM
I'm not drinking to be "edgy and cool" I'm just trying new things. I don't see the problem in having a few drinks.
live above the influence snowy :|
Quote from: Snowy on February 15, 2012, 08:42:20 PM
Don;t you go to the bar every tuesday night? :|
I'm 21 though snowy
you know
I can drink LEGALLY now
idk my folks are not going to be home
Quote from: Snowy on February 15, 2012, 08:59:28 PM
"Don't do this even though I do this"
yes snowy
you're 17
don't do it because you're not of legal age yet.
how hard is that to understand
I mean yeah once you turn 21 have at it, drink yourself into a coma idc.
I dont think you understand the "Live above the influence" campaign is targeted to kids underage
The drinking age is stupid and arbitrary, if you're 17 and drinking responsibly where's the problem in that?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 15, 2012, 07:57:57 PM
Try to take over the world
Same thing we do every night, LiveOnThaEdge. akudood;
Quote from: Ashley on February 15, 2012, 09:04:42 PM
The drinking age is stupid and arbitrary, if you're 17 and drinking responsibly where's the problem in that?
In countries without strong laws or such laws, as the place where I grew up, there is a reliance on a very robust social presence to make sure that one has a chance to learn in the correct manner about how to handle these sort of things.
I find this approach works best, as often you get a 'rush' and make compulsive decision from the very fact that something is 'illegal' or even taboo. But, with these rules and stigmas removed, it would be just another mundane dumb thing to do. And there are many of those which are not so tempting.
Quote from: Zidone on February 15, 2012, 09:05:10 PM
Same thing we do every night, LiveOnThaEdge. akudood;
yes
Quote from: Ashley on February 15, 2012, 09:04:42 PM
The drinking age is stupid and arbitrary, if you're 17 and drinking responsibly where's the problem in that?
But why is drinking alcohol so important anyway?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 15, 2012, 09:30:36 PM
But why is drinking alcohol so important anyway?
Who said it's important? Just another thing I personally enjoy doing every now and then. I may not be old enough to do so according to the US government, but its not like my drinking has ever affected anyone but myself in any real way so I don't think it's a big deal.
I may or may not be attending a friend of mine's reading.
Quote from: Ashley on February 15, 2012, 10:05:44 PM
Who said it's important? Just another thing I personally enjoy doing every now and then. I may not be old enough to do so according to the US government, but its not like my drinking has ever affected anyone but myself in any real way so I don't think it's a big deal.
Well you think it's important enough to do it illegally, right? And that's pretty important.
Also, how can you "drink responsibility" when you're underage? "Cause that's pretty irresponsible behavior in and of itself since it's illegal.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 05:56:19 AM
Well you think it's important enough to do it illegally, right? And that's pretty important.
Also, how can you "drink responsibility" when you're underage? "Cause that's pretty irresponsible behavior in and of itself.
This makes no sense.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 06:52:35 AM
What about it makes no sense?
Your insistence on assumptions and lack of context when the other person is clearly not arguing from the same perspective. It's like being stuck on the road with someone and arguing what speed is best, except one argues from a stand point of personal preference and the other from one of legal limit.
It's absurd.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 07:14:19 AM
Your insistence on assumptions and lack of context when the other person is clearly not arguing from the same perspective. It's like being stuck on the road with someone and arguing what speed is best, except one argues from a stand point of personal preference and the other from one of legal limit.
It's absurd.
Doing something illegal shows you to be an irresponsible person. Which is what my point was. Does this offend you or something?
And what what assumptions and lack of context was there?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 07:51:43 AM
Doing something illegal shows you to be an irresponsible person.
Wow.
And you still asked all of those questions after making this statement?
In case I wasn't clear, it's a terrible point and it doesn't offend me, but I do find it to be simplistic and untrue.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 07:57:19 AM
Wow.
And you still asked all of those questions after making this statement?
In case I wasn't clear, it's a terrible point and it doesn't offend me, but I do find it to be simplistic and untrue.
How is it untrue?
And "what assumptions and lack of context was there? "
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 08:02:16 AM
How is it untrue?
And "what assumptions and lack of context was there? "
It is untrue because the ultimate and absolute authority for deciding if one is being 'responsible' or not lies within the individual and cannot stem from anywhere else, certainly not the State! At the most, such an authority can be 'transferred' and only transferred to governing body, at which point such a body becomes 'empowered', but the right is never theirs. More so, what we deem as a 'responsibility' and the 'responsible thing to do' is fundamentally a matter of context and personal belief, therefore subjective and largely circumstantial. It is only when we chose to recognize and accept other institutions, entities, practices or ideologies that 'responsibility' starts to bear a shared and somewhat common meaning. But until then, and until such influences and factors are understood and accepted unanimously by all, you cannot make such generalizations about what is responsible and what is not, without leaving any other possibilities open. And this was not the case here, where you still talked as if all of us give a shit in the same way that you do.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 08:16:40 AM
It is untrue because the ultimate and absolute authority for deciding if one is being 'responsible' or not lies within the individual and cannot stem from anywhere else. At the most, such an authority can only be 'transferred' to governing body, at which point it becomes 'empowered', but the right is never theirs. More so, what we deem as a 'responsibility' and the 'responsible thing to do' is fundamentally a matter of context and personal belief, therefore subjective. It is only when we chose to recognize other institutions, entities, practices or ideologies that 'responsibility' starts to bear a shared and somewhat common meaning. But until then, and until such influences and factors are understood and accepted unanimously by all, you cannot make such generalizations about what is responsible and what is not, without leaving any other possibilities open. And this was not the case here, where you still talked as if all of us give a shit in the same way that you do.
So to you responsibility and irresponsibility is more or less illusionary and they don't actual exist in any real standard sense? Also, if responsibility is so subject to the extreme you try to portray then, according to you, I am not wrong when I say that it's irresponsible. But does doing something illegal seem at all responsibly to you in any sense? Does that show the mark of a responsible person?
Given all that you're saying there, how can my viewpoint then be somehow less valid, wrong, or "untrue"?
And again, what I'm saying certainly does seem to be affecting you in some way even if it's not "offending" you at least according to what you say.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 08:23:06 AM
So to you responsibility and irresponsibility is more or less illusionary and they don't actual exist in any real standard sense? Also, if responsibility is so subject to the extreme you try to portray then, according to you, I am not wrong when I say that it's irresponsible.
It does exist, but only in your own sense, which even that could change from time to time. Have a lot of these individual senses, and you start to sort of form a general consensus about what is responsible and not, which also therefore changes from time to time. If this seems too uncertain and fragile, it should, everything about a social contract is uncertain and fragile, because it aims specifically to diminish the natural uncertainty and fragility that comes with life. And this exemplifies and explains perfectly why you are not wrong while I am right. Your view is institutional in meaning, and mine is personal in origin. The reason for this depends on which entity we deem to be the greater moral authority, your own conscious, or the collective will.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 08:23:06 AM
But does doing something illegal seem at all responsibly to you in any sense? Does that show the mark of a responsible person?
Come on dude, you can't speak like this. You can't frame or even conceive questions in ways that will limit and influence your response. Imagine an allegory, where prehistoric fish question the responsibility of their friends, who went out of the water and started walking on land. This is what you are essentially doing.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 08:23:06 AM
And again, what I'm saying certainly does seem to be affecting you in some way even if it's not "offending" you at least according to what you say.
Yes it's pissing me off because you refuse to move from your vantage point, instead, you merely alter the surroundings around you.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 07:51:43 AM
Doing something illegal shows you to be an irresponsible person. Which is what my point was. Does this offend you or something?
And what what assumptions and lack of context was there?
Yeah, but since when does legality equal responsibility?
What about civil liberties that are or were considered illegal.
Was MLK irresponsible for sitting in a white's only restaurant when it wasn't legal to?
HOLY FUCK BLACK HISTORY MONTH REFERENCE!
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 08:45:38 AM
It does exist, but only in your own sense, which even that could change from time to time. Have a lot of these individual senses, and you start to sort of form a general consensus about what is responsible and not, which also therefore changes from time to time. If this seems too uncertain and fragile, it should, everything about a social contract is uncertain and fragile, because it aims specifically to diminish the natural uncertainty and fragility that comes with life. And this exemplifies and explains perfectly why you are not wrong while I am right. Your view is institutional in meaning, and mine is personal in origin. The reason for this depends on which entity we deem to be the greater moral authority, your own conscious, or the collective will.
But you said my previous statement was untrue meaning that I was wrong and yet now you're saying that I was actually right while you're right too. So which is it? Was it untrue or not?
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 08:45:38 AM
Come on dude, you can't speak like this. You can't frame or even conceive questions in ways that will limit and influence your response. Imagine an allegory, where prehistoric fish question the responsibility of their friends, who went out of the water and started walking on land. This is what you are essentially doing.
Why is that wrong? And "does doing something illegal seem at all responsibly
to you in any sense? Does that show the mark of a responsible person?" you didn't actually answer these directly. I don't see why you dodged them.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 08:45:38 AM
Yes it's pissing me off because you refuse to move from your vantage point, instead, you merely alter the surroundings around you.
Why do you let it piss you off so much? How am I "altering the surroundings around me"? Aren't you "refusing to move from your vantage point"?
P.S.- The people that honestly believe that "laws are created for a reason" are the first ones to not question them and the first to get trampled by them.
Quote from: Boognish-Redux- on February 16, 2012, 09:03:00 AM
Yeah, but since when does legality equal responsibility?
What about civil liberties that are or were considered illegal.
Was MLK irresponsible for sitting in a white's only restaurant when it wasn't legal to? HOLY FUCK BLACK HISTORY MONTH REFERENCE!
Is that equatable to underage drinking? Something like that is inhumane and is understandable.
Legality doesn't equal responsibility, but failure to comply with laws does generally show irresponsible behavior and is the mark of an irresponsible human. There are exceptions, but in most cases can you trust them to be responsible in other areas of their lives?
Quote from: Boognish-Redux- on February 16, 2012, 09:05:00 AM
P.S.- The people that honestly believe that "laws are created for a reason" are the first ones to not question them and the first to get trampled by them.
But what about people that just go against all laws for no reason at all except that it doesn't mesh with their lifestyle or because they have an authority problem?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:10:01 AM
Is that equatable to underage drinking? Something like that is inhumane and is understandable.
Legality doesn't equal responsibility, but failure to comply with laws does generally show irresponsible behavior and is the mark of an irresponsible human. There are exceptions, but in most cases can you trust them to be responsible in other areas of their lives?
By that rationale, Joe surgeon out there, who went through years of medical school and saves a few lives every week would be considered irresponsible if he has a joint on his day off.
But if, somehow, pot was legal tomorrow, it wouldn't matter if he did it at all right?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:03:02 AM
But you said my previous statement was untrue meaning that I was wrong and yet now you're saying that I was actually right while you're right too. So which is it? Was it untrue or not?
No, I said from a certain perspective you are right to say what you did, but this does not necessarily imply or affirm a truth, which is absolute even if its understanding is relative.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:03:02 AM
Why is that wrong? And "does doing something illegal seem at all responsibly to you in any sense? Does that show the mark of a responsible person?" you didn't actually answer these directly. I don't see why you dodged them.
I didn't dodge them, I answered them fully and in my own view. Only a fool would address a terrible question in the same manner it was asked. It automatically grants a certain power to the perspectives which fostered the question, and I refuse to recognize something I don't consider legitimate, if my response is to be considered valid at all.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:03:02 AM
Why do you let it piss you off so much? How am I "altering the surroundings around me"? Aren't you "refusing to move from your vantage point"?
It's profoundly vexing because this argument has been going on before us and will continue to go on well after us. And it's so bloody obvious why, but I will be polite now and leave it at that.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:12:25 AM
But what about people that just go against all laws for no reason at all except that it doesn't mesh with their lifestyle or because they have an authority problem?
I think that authority problem meshes pretty well with your "exception" statement above.
There's no universal issue here or anything. Conjecture and
weird correlation.
Quote from: Boognish-Redux- on February 16, 2012, 09:17:00 AM
By that rationale, Joe surgeon out there, who went through years of medical school and saves a few lives every week would be considered irresponsible if he has a joint on his day off.
But if, somehow, pot was legal tomorrow, it wouldn't matter if he did it at all right?
I guess. But I don't see how that invalidates what I said since he would no longer be breaking the law. Though actually since I've written it out like that he could still actually be an irresponsible person since he was breaking the law before regardless if the actions all of the sudden become legal. Since it would be very possible that he was irresponsible in other areas of his life too.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:21:52 AM
I guess. But I don't see how that invalidates what I said since he would no longer be breaking the law.
It has to invalidate it otherwise responsibility to you is some technical matter entirely dependent upon the specifics of law, and has no connection to or bearing on the individual's beliefs, circumstances, opinions and views of himself and the world. This is probably one of most irresponsible and dangerous views anyone could ever conceive.
I'm just besides myself reading some of your replies, where you don't realize the implications of what you are actually saying. You are still assuming way too many things and choosing to interpreted arbitrary constructs as fundamentally absolute. This is the only reason that you see a connection between law and responsibility, in this particular case.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 09:18:49 AM
No, I said from a certain perspective you are right to say what you did, but this does not necessarily imply or affirm a truth, which is absolute even if its understanding is relative.
But you said it was subjective so it is true. Right?
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 09:18:49 AM
I didn't dodge them, I answered them fully and in my own view. Only a fool would address a terrible question in the same manner it was asked. It automatically grants a certain power to the perspectives which fostered the question, and I refuse to recognize something I don't consider legitimate, if my response is to be considered valid at all.
I wanted your personal viewpoint to those questions and a direct answer to them not how you "felt" about them and the whole situation of how the questions were asked. That should have been obvious and you still dodge them for some reason. I just wanted a look into your mind as how you really stand on that sort of situation. They were basically yes or no questions and then of course giving the reasoning for answering yes or no. I don't see what's hard about that and why you think it's some big huge trap.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 09:18:49 AM
It's profoundly vexing because this argument has been going on before us and will continue to go on well after us. And it's so bloody obvious why, but I will be polite now and leave it at that.
And "How am I "altering the surroundings around me"?"
You really don't like answering questions or providing reasoning for your statements, do you?
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 09:31:03 AM
It has to invalidate it otherwise responsibility to you is some technical matter entirely dependent upon the specifics of law, and has no connection to or bearing on the individual's beliefs, circumstances, opinions and views of himself and the world. This is probably one of most irresponsible and dangerous views anyone could ever conceive.
I'm just besides myself reading some of your replies, where you don't realize the implications of what you are actually saying. You are still assuming way too many things and choosing to interpreted arbitrary constructs as fundamentally absolute. This is the only reason that you see a connection between law and responsibility, in this particular case.
(Read the rest of that post you quoted too because it shows that it doesn't really invalidate it.)
Well if somebody is breaking the law I think it's pretty safe to assume that they are irresponsible and in other areas of their life too. Obviously you should confirm it before reaching any hard conclusions and writing people off. But it is good for proceeding with caution as to the substance of somebody until you're sure about who they are. (and I guess I should add "in most cases") But I thought that all of this stuff was understood and didn't really need spelling out.
So everybody who drinks underage is automatically irresponsible? That's ridiculous. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean there's a good reason for it or that anyone who breaks that law is automatically irresponsible. It's illegal in some states to have gay sex. Does that make gay people in that state irresponsible?
I'm a very responsible person and even with my "illegal underage drinking" I'm still responsible (i.e., I don't drink and drive or drink excessively). Whether or not I can legally drink has no bearing on that.
Quote from: Ashley on February 16, 2012, 10:23:12 AM
So everybody who drinks underage is automatically irresponsible? That's ridiculous. Just because something is illegal doesn't mean there's a good reason for it or that anyone who breaks that law is automatically irresponsible. It's illegal in some states to have gay sex. Does that make gay people in that state irresponsible?
I'm a very responsible person and even with my "illegal underage drinking" I'm still responsible (i.e., I don't drink and drive or drink excessively). Whether or not I can legally drink has no bearing on that.
You understand those two situations aren't really equatable at all, right?
Quote from: Ashley on February 16, 2012, 10:23:12 AM
So everybody who drinks underage is automatically irresponsible?
And like I said before, in most cases yes, but there are exceptions. And it also doesn't mean that a person is completely irresponsible in all things. But underage drinking does show a level of immaturity and irresponsibility. How can it not?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:33:35 AM
But you said it was subjective so it is true. Right?
I wanted your personal viewpoint to those questions and a direct answer to them not how you "felt" about them and the whole situation of how the questions were asked. That should have been obvious and you still dodge them for some reason. I just wanted a look into your mind as how you really stand on that sort of situation. They were basically yes or no questions and then of course giving the reasoning for answering yes or no. I don't see what's hard about that and why you think it's some big huge trap.
And "How am I "altering the surroundings around me"?"
You really don't like answering questions or providing reasoning for your statements, do you?
I'm sorry, but you were asking whether I will jump from the aircraft or have you push me off, and told me I should explain myself on the way down. This is laughable. I don't address these sort of paradoxes in a direct and literal way. Because it would not be a matter of entering into a trap as much as it would be confronting a dimensions that does not even exist, but has real and present implications for your own reality. And that is why I was trying to express the nature of this whole argument, because to me, it was bloody obvious it was possible for someone to drink underage and do it responsibly, and that the act in-itself was not inherently irresponsible, regardless of law, social stigma and all of the things which might suggest that it is automatically some sort of nefarious deed and detrimental aspect of someone's character.
WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN IMPLYING THIS WHOLE TIME.
As I said before, the ultimate genesis, master and creator of this whole concept and authority is the individual self. That is why you are RIGHT to ASSUME that drinking underage IS irresponsible and that this should say something about your perception of that person. But you are WRONG to STATE that drinking underage CANNOT be done responsibly and that the person who does so is bad, or immoral or untrustworthy.
Now you are trying to make amends and drifting out of the absolutes in which you spoke of earlier and offering a general approach of understanding things. With this I find no fault and offer you my hand in peace, but I do not forget that it was not me who drew conclusions and wrote people off. I was affected by the general category into which your generalization drew me into, and when this happens I will always complain loudly and clearly to the offending party for as long as I live and have basis in truth, honor and dignity.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 10:56:03 AM
I'm sorry, but you were asking whether I will jump from the aircraft or have you push me off, and told me I should explain myself on the way down. This is laughable. I don't address these sort of paradoxes in a direct and literal way. Because it would not be a matter of entering into a trap as much as it would be confronting a dimensions that does not even exist, but has real and present implications for your own reality. And that is why I was trying to express the nature of this whole argument, because to me, it was bloody obvious it was possible for someone to drink underage and do it responsibly, and that the act in-itself was not inherently irresponsible, regardless of law, social stigma and all of the things which might suggest that it is automatically some sort of nefarious deed and detrimental aspect of someone's character.
WHICH YOU HAVE BEEN IMPLYING THIS WHOLE TIME.
Uh no. I was really just simply asking "does doing something illegal seem at all responsibly to you in any sense? Does that show the mark of a responsible person?" (Which I would still like to know.) The questions aren't really as black and white as they seem, (in that the answers won't be the same in all situations) but there is a level of being definite that can be answered or obtained.
You're trying to read way, way into this and make it into something it's not.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 10:56:03 AM
As I said before, the ultimate genesis, master and creator of this whole concept and authority is the individual self. That is why you are RIGHT to ASSUME that drinking underage IS irresponsible and that this should say something about your perception of that person. But you are WRONG to STATE that drinking underage CANNOT be done responsibly.
For clarification you can "responsibly drink" while underage in that you can make sure you don't drive drunk or drink too much and stuff like that. But drinking while underage is not being responsible at all.
Quote from: Socks on February 16, 2012, 10:56:03 AM
Now you are trying to make amends and drifting out of the absolutes in which you spoke of earlier and offering a general approach of understanding things. With this I find no fault and offer you my hand in peace, but I do not forget that it was not me who drew conclusions and wrote people off. I was affected by the general category into which your generalization drew me into, and when this happens I will always complain loudly and clearly to the offending party for as long as I live and have basis in truth, honor and dignity.
And no, I wasn't trying to "make amends". If you view me as "drifting out of the absolutes" then you didn't understand what I was saying to begin with because of your own assumptions about exactly what it was that I was saying, and then on me probably my lack of complete clarity in what I was trying to convey. Because I haven't changed anything at all about my viewpoint.
I may have expanded on it more, but nothing about it has changed from what i was originally saying.
At this point my friend we just have to keep on walking, we brushed shoulders in a crowded street while occupying the same space, and now let us go in our own directions and into our little worlds. I am no longer interested in this discussion. I said what I said and meant what I meant, nothing's changed, you're right, but I feel I have still confronted danger, and salvaged some justice for all.
I still would like the answers to those questions though.
Well I'll just continue being an irresponsible and immature heathen until I turn 21 in a couple months then. Then when I turn 21 I will magically be mature and responsible because the law arbitrarily decided I'm old enough to decide what I put into my own body.
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 09:10:01 AM
failure to comply with laws does generally show irresponsible behavior and is the mark of an irresponsible human.
rofl
in some states, underaged drinking is not necessarily banned if you are drinking in your own home.
Quote from: Edina Monsoon on February 16, 2012, 02:45:58 PM
in some states, underaged drinking is not necessarily banned if you are drinking in your own home.
it's like that in va isn't it?
but it's only if you are in the presence of your parents or guardians
Quote from: Echo Weiss on February 16, 2012, 02:48:55 PM
it's like that in va isn't it?
but it's only if you are in the presence of your parents or guardians
and/or spouse who is of legal drinking age
My boyfriend is from WI, I know there it used to be that you could go to bars as long as you were with your parents/legal guardians. Pretty sure they recently got rid of that, but nobody there gives a fuck about underage drinking so his parents still took us out to the bar a couple nights. The general attitude towards drinking up there is totally different than some other places I've been though.
Quote from: Ashley on February 16, 2012, 12:21:37 PM
Well I'll just continue being an irresponsible and immature heathen until I turn 21 in a couple months then. Then when I turn 21 I will magically be mature and responsible because the law arbitrarily decided I'm old enough to decide what I put into my own body.
Did I say that? And I don't know why you're getting so worked up over what I'm saying anyway. And where did being a "heathen" come into this?
Quote from: Dead End Moon on February 16, 2012, 07:20:45 PM
Did I say that? And I don't know why you're getting so worked up over what I'm saying anyway.
I'm honestly not getting worked up.
Quote from: Ashley on February 16, 2012, 07:22:53 PM
I'm honestly not getting worked up.
It sure is coming off that way considering the sarcastic remarks in your other post.