> that's just not true. so unless the votes were >90% in favor of banning, there's always going to be someone's morals being forced upon others. And that cuts

> that's just not true. so unless the votes were >90% in favor of banning, there's always going to be someone's morals being forced upon others. And that cuts both ways. Consider someone who for whatever reason would want alcohol to be prohibited for their own sake. So they would like freedom from alcohol. Coincidentally though, what “freedom” is in the context of commerce ultimately boil down to the freedom of commercial outlets to sell things. If they can’t sell a thing? Well that’s unfreedom. But the so-called consumer is always pushed in front of them.