3 ms·

I am not sure what diversity has to do with it? As said, I don't drink but does that mean no-one else should be allowed to drink? What is the idea behind that?

I am not sure what diversity has to do with it? As said, I don't drink but does that mean no-one else should be allowed to drink? What is the idea behind that? Just imo: if you don't drink but have a problem with others doing so then there is something wrong with you, not with the people who drink. And speaking from experience, the people who do have a problem with others drinking tend to be motivated by religions that conflict with accepted ideals of liberal democracy (i.e. they look down on people who drink, believe they are unclean/mad/whatever).

ellard 8y ago
It's the difference between a tolerant atmosphere vs a welcoming one. A simple example is that when i'm with mixed company, I speak in English even if everyone i'm currently talking to can speak another language that i'm familiar with. This allows others to listen in and maybe join in the conversation. This is tossed out of the window when i'm speaking to the same folks but in private. Being welcoming means taking the extra step to make others comfortable, even if it means you end up inconveniencing yourself. Having no alcohol is more "welcoming" as it takes into account folks who might be recovering from alcoholism, while inconveniencing folks who casually drink.
- subjectHarold 8y ago
  Ah, I forgot...the most welcoming environments are ones where things are banned.
  - ellard 8y ago
    If you want to look at it that way, sure. Most communities ban certain behaviors to cultivate a welcoming culture for their target audience. Even HN has the guidelines which highly discourages certain posting behaviors to keep comment threads civil.
basilgohar 8y ago
I don't drink alcohol, and I also belong to one of the religions where alcohol is explicitly and strongly forbidden. As such, I avoid, as much as possible, where alcohol is served, which is challenging at times, but I make do. However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk. But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever. Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone. One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.

ellard 8y ago

It's the difference between a tolerant atmosphere vs a welcoming one. A simple example is that when i'm with mixed company, I speak in English even if everyone i'm currently talking to can speak another language that i'm familiar with. This allows others to listen in and maybe join in the conversation. This is tossed out of the window when i'm speaking to the same folks but in private. Being welcoming means taking the extra step to make others comfortable, even if it means you end up inconveniencing yourself. Having no alcohol is more "welcoming" as it takes into account folks who might be recovering from alcoholism, while inconveniencing folks who casually drink.

subjectHarold 8y ago
Ah, I forgot...the most welcoming environments are ones where things are banned.
- ellard 8y ago
  If you want to look at it that way, sure. Most communities ban certain behaviors to cultivate a welcoming culture for their target audience. Even HN has the guidelines which highly discourages certain posting behaviors to keep comment threads civil.

basilgohar 8y ago

I don't drink alcohol, and I also belong to one of the religions where alcohol is explicitly and strongly forbidden. As such, I avoid, as much as possible, where alcohol is served, which is challenging at times, but I make do. However, I never asked someone not to drink on account of me (though I've definitely given advice to avoid it to people as I would advise anyone to avoid something that is harmful, which I believe alcohol generally to be). My way of dealing with this is to avoid places expressly for the purpose of drinking alcohol (e.g., bars) and to avoid, as much as possible, being the presence of it when it's being drunk. But those are actions I impose on myself, and not others. I fail to see how this is conflicting with the accepted ideals of liberal democracy (which you ascribe to my entire faith, apparently) and how that is a judgment on people, or how what I do or believe concludes that people are unclean/mad/whatever. Having said all of that, if the accommodation were made to offer an alcohol-free alternative to something that otherwise is not, I would overwhelmingly welcome that, as I imagine anyone in the world would overwhelmingly welcome any accommodation to their own choice in beliefs, practices, limitations, or other factors that everyone has to some degree, as long as it were not cause to exclude anyone. One of the differences here is that, by choice, I cannot drink and prefer not to be around alcohol, but I fail to see how a lack of alcohol is an equally discriminating thing. I would argue keeping alcohol out, while maybe less enjoyable for some, would make the environment overall better for most due to the lack of people getting drunk and doing things they otherwise would not do, cost would be significantly reduced, and once again, allowing more people to attend than could otherwise due to the reasons outlined throughout this conversation.