|
Post by freecharlie on Mar 19, 2015 3:05:25 GMT
If we are still talking about school, I wouldn't send them. Hell, I am not even allowed to drink cough syrup and go to work (teacher) as it violates our no drugs/alcohol policy.
|
|
azredhead
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,755
Jun 25, 2014 22:49:18 GMT
|
Post by azredhead on Mar 19, 2015 4:29:51 GMT
My Dh's family is super conservative religious family. They have a birthday tradition or special occasion tradition that calls for Rum Cake. One time ,we had ordered one from a local bakery. The smell in the car was sooo strong. We kinda joked about it. It was pretty strong! I'm not a fan of the rum. I do like Chicken Marsala and other things cooked with Red wine. My mom is big in adding Whiskey too BBQ sauce for her knock out ribs. (the name is a joke it's not that strong really! They are way more laxed and liberal than my inlaws so I am used to it. My step dad is a big whiskey fan more than the beer. We do do some beer battered stuff and Beer Cheese soup is another one of my favorite things!!
On that note i wonder if Rum Cupcakes would be accepted in school? I hadn't thought about it. But probably not something kids would like? I don't have kids so I don't know if the taste would be good for them?
|
|
Dalai Mama
Drama Llama
La Pea Boheme
Posts: 6,985
Jun 26, 2014 0:31:31 GMT
|
Post by Dalai Mama on Mar 19, 2015 10:19:02 GMT
I think you're utterly misunderstanding the questioning. If my vegan friend ate beef broth, I'd be confused and would probably ask why they eat beef broth when they are a vegan. I have no problem with anyone abstaining from anything - I was inquiring on why one would abstain from one type of alcohol and not another and learned that I was an alcoholic. I don't think you're an alcoholic, but I do think you're being pretty obtuse. If I'm a religious person who interprets the scripture's injunction not to be drunk on wine but to be filled with the Spirit to prohibit drunkenness at all, then I may take that particularly conservatively and say that there is no "safe" amount of alcohol to be consumed whilst still avoiding drunkenness. Therefore I would decide to avoid alcoholic beverages (and probably other substances that have the possibility or likelihood of altering my judgment or other functions). But if you put a bottle of rum and a bottle of vanilla extract (about the same alcohol content) side by side on the table, I would know they were both alcohol products, but I would know there were some key differences. For example, for vanilla extract to be taxed and sold as a flavoring agent in the grocery store and not as liqueur in the package store, it has to be held to a manufacturing standard that makes it unpalatable for straight consumption. It is designed, intended, and manufactured only as a flavoring agent, and while a few people do manage to drink enough of it to get soused, it is specifically designed to avoid that potentiality. The bottle of rum, on the other hand, is manufactured as an alcoholic beverage, which if consumed as normally consumed can readily lead to drunkenness, and therefore would fall outside of my boundary on this. As a result, I could very well use the alcohol-containing flavoring agent vanilla as it was intended, with no challenge to my belief system at all, because it does not, in intent or in normal possibility, pose a risk of drunkenness. I could not use the rum as it was intended without posing an inherent risk of drunkenness. Like I said, I drink and I don't have a problem with it. But I know people who don't for this reason, and I respect that. I don't see it as inherently contradictory, because it's one of those situational personal ethics matters that doesn't fit neatly in black-and-white categories all the time. And, like Darcy, I think looking at it as a matter of packaging or intent makes the whole argument a matter of semantics and, therefore, silly. If one approves of vanilla because it has always been used in baking, but not Guinness, used for the same purpose but with a lower alcohol content, I'm going to question that person's objections - maybe not to someone I know in person, but certainly on a message board where this is what we do.
|
|
|
Post by crimsoncat05 on Mar 19, 2015 15:43:35 GMT
moveablefeast, thank you for your thoughtful explanation on page 3. I do understand it a bit better now. (and I also understand the alcohol allergy situation, too-- that's just not what most people in this thread were talking about.) eta: I must admit, I really don't agree with the semantic difference (see Dalai Mama's post above mine) either, but I at least understand better how you're looking at it. okay, one more ETA: I don't believe Darcy Collins is being deliberately obtuse, at all. I believe she was being totally scientific and dispassionate in showing using mathematical reasoning why Guinness and vanilla extract (containing alcohol) are really no different, and that the Guinness amount used in the cupcakes mathematically contains LESS actual alcohol than an alcohol-based extract. Just because something is an *alcoholic beverage* doesn't make it 100% alcohol. Scientific. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by moveablefeast on Mar 19, 2015 16:24:22 GMT
moveablefeast, thank you for your thoughtful explanation on page 3. I do understand it a bit better now. (and I also understand the alcohol allergy situation, too-- that's just not what most people in this thread were talking about.) eta: I must admit, I really don't agree with the semantic difference (see Dalai Mama's post above mine) either, but I at least understand better how you're looking at it. okay, one more ETA: I don't believe Darcy Collins is being deliberately obtuse, at all. I believe she was being totally scientific and dispassionate in showing using mathematical reasoning why Guinness and vanilla extract (containing alcohol) are really no different, and that the Guinness amount used in the cupcakes mathematically contains LESS actual alcohol than an alcohol-based extract. Just because something is an *alcoholic beverage* doesn't make it 100% alcohol. Scientific. That's all. I suppose, then, that I would assert that the ethics and personal lifestyle matters involved here extend beyond the chemical formula of alcohol (the scientific) to the functional and practical matters of alcohol consumption. Because I can know that scientifically speaking, the alcohol in vanilla and the alcohol in rum is chemically the same, but still feel that consuming the alcohol in vanilla is fundamentally different from consuming the alcohol in rum. Because we are not only talking about things that are chemically the same, we are talking about things that are used differently, manufactured differently, and have different potential personal and social/societal impact. Therefore the distinction is not only scientific but also personal and situational.
|
|