Comments about ‘Liquor suit seeks to muzzle LDS Church’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Nov. 1 2011 12:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended

The LDS church or any other religious organization should be banned from lobbying or imposing their beliefs on any legislator. It is difficult enough for each legislator to consider the impact of legislation on all of their constituents and include the various minority views. Obviously they will be influenced by their own religious beliefs but their job is to consider all views equally. Besides, having the LDS church influence the drinking laws is a bit like having the blind lead the sighted on a hike. I went into culture shock when I moved to Florida to go to college and discovered that the liquor stores had drive-up windows and cold beer. You could even order a mixed drink at the drive-up as long as you were not the driver. The amazing thing was that Florida had a lower rate of DUI's than Utah and drivers acted more responsibly than they did in Utah. Maybe it was because they were allowed to act like adults and make their own responsible decisions without being hovered over.

Springville, UT

Some of you are clearly ignorant of the efforts by the LDS Church over the past five or so years to ease liquor laws. Even going so far as to say, through a spokesperson, that the Church does not oppose the responsible consumption of alcoholic beverages by informed adults (you can look it up).

My guess is that for some of you it isn't really a liquor issue as much as it is an LDS Church issue. Even if there were a bar on every corner with booze flowing freely, your dander would get up if President Monson said "Good morning."


I know that Utah has the lowest number of drinkers per capita in the nation. However, I question that Utah has the lowest rate of DUI's in the nation. Where did you get that information. When I lived in Florida in the early 70's , Florida had a lower rate of DUI's than Utah according to the national alcoholic beverage association statistics.

one vote
Salt Lake City, UT

Private sector , free enterprise time.

Sandy, UT

I'm asking this as a serious question cause I am not sure. Did the LDS Church actually make up these liquor laws or did the elected officials make up the laws and where influenced by their personal religious views? There is a big difference and I really don't know much about the subject.

Cedar Hills, UT

We should probably start requiring LDS people to sustain religious leaders online. Then, gather the names and prohibit them from voting on anything related to liquor, gambling, pornography, gay rights, prostitution, abortion, and probably many other issues. LDS people should also probably not be allowed to vote if a non-LDS person is running for office.

Baptists probably should be prohibited from voting over similar measures in Southern states, as well as Catholics in Massachusetts. 7th-Day Adventists in Loma Linda, California should also be denied their voices in such matters.

Why should any of these groups have any influence over the government of communities in which they live and raise their families? In fact, if you belong to any church whatsoever, you should just butt out and let everyone else establish all community living standards for you.

Clearly, we need to move toward a government of the minority, by the minority, and for the minority.

West Valley, UT

Religious speech is protected. Religious practices are protected. Using religion to influence government policy is called *theocracy*. If you love your religion that much and think that the church knows what is best I invite you to examine the lives of people in Iran.

Religions, like all other institutions, have their own agenda. I guarantee you that agenda is not freedom and equality for all.

Cottonwood Heights, UT

There is nothing wrong with allowing the State Legislators to hear the opinion of the leaders of any Church within the state. That is part of their job.. to listen to the people of the State. Church leaders, whether Catholic, Baptist, Muslim, or LDS respresent the peoples of Utah. These same legislators also ask the opinion of business leaders and other influencial people. The legislators then determine how to vote on the varied proposals before them. This is common practice in every state. It is one way that the voice of the people is heard. It is not unconstitutional.

To create a law saying any of these organizations can not voice their opinion however would be unconstitutional. I trust the courts will throw this lawsuit out of court and not waste time on it.

Taco Salad
Cottonwood Heights, UT

I think the alcohol law the state are dumb however the LDS Church has as much rights to be heard as the Restaurant, Club, and Hospitality Association that is trying to deny them the same rights in the suit.

Bountiful, UT

Since approximately fifty-eight percent of the population in Utah are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, it stands to reason that those elected by the majority to represent them in the legislature are going to be responsive to their constituency. The Constitution of the United States works only if our representatives hear and represent the majority view while protecting the constitutional rights of all.

Those pursuing this law suit need instead to concentrate their efforts on the passage of a constitutional amendment that makes free-flowing alcohol consumption a protect right. Otherwise, let legislators represent the majority view. After all, we believe in a government of the people, by the people and for the people. And, as one of the people, I would like to see alcohol consumption ended entirely. But I don't get my way any more than these folks do.


I support any legislation against alcohol consumption. If good, high moral, christian legislators want to vote the views of the majority of their voters then so be it. Don't call them "the" LDS church when they exercise their moral rights to protect and build up a better society. I was hit buy three drunk farm laborers in California June 19th. They all had multiple DUI's. My truck killed two of them, as they hit me head on with the drivers side of their Cavalier. The third ran to Mexico as he was the owner of the car. I took three drunks off the roads of California, lost my income, my ability to walk, and had to move back to Utah to live with family. So, tell me why you oppose stricter drinking laws? They are not strict enough. Do not blame the LDS church for your bad habits and choices. If you do not like the liquor laws then find another place to live. I will always be a victim and a statistic a sounding voice against alcohol the rest of my life, whats left of it.

Cedar Hills, UT

To DeltaFoxTrot - what a bunch of hogwash. Using religion to CONTROL government is called "theocracy." Allowing everyone, including sports clubs, insurance groups, unions, corporate lobbyists, the NRA, Mothers Against Drunk Drivers, Loggers, Environmentalists, Evolutionists, the American Medical Association, and yes, even Religions to have whatever influence they can legally wield on our government is called a Democratic Republic. If you don't like how your representatives represent you, convince others to your thinking and vote them out.

Follow your conscience, express your voice, engage in the debate, and let the voters decide. Engage the courts if you think the will of the majority is unconstitutional.

Your desire to silence all other significant voices in the formation of our society, when you are in the minority, is much closer to a theocratic philosophy, even if your theology doesn't include a God.

Bountiful, UT

Drinking alcohol is not a moral issue, unless it is abused. But that is true with a lot of things. The LDS church chooses to ask their members to abstain and this is fine, but there is no reason for the LDS church to try to make it difficult for the population in general to drink.

Jesus did make alcoholic wine. Some LDS doubt this, but when he made the wine from water, the lord of the feast, asked why the best wind was put out second, and not first. He said, when people are well DRUNK, then the lesser (good) wine is set out, but he said, you have put out the best wind out second. Therefore they were not talking about non alcoholic wine in the new testament. Their wind had alcohol.

Later in the New testament, it says bishops shall not be 'given to strong drink', i.e. drink (much) alcohol. This would never be said about bishops if the church back then didn't allow drinking of alcohol, because it would have been understood to apply to all people of the church.

Salt Lake City, UT

'SALT LAKE CITY A trade group for bars and restaurants is asking a federal judge to block Utah legislators from considering input from the LDS Church when drafting future liquor laws.' - Article

And when the LDS church starts PRODUCING it's own form of liquor, I can understand it's input.

However, since they do NOT factaully have any input except 'it's against our doctorine', I fail to see any facts that would contribute to the debate.

Also, we have EVIDENCE that the relaxing liquor laws have NO EFFECT on Utah's mentality in regards to alchohol consumption:

*'Utah DUI arrests DECLINE despite looser liquor law' - By BROCK VERGAKIS - AP - Published by SL Tribune - 10/11/10

Opening Utahs bars to the public didnt result in an increase in drunk driving arrests.

Keep your faith. It is yours.

Allow others the freedom to do as THEY wish.

Heber City, UT

First, I don't drink. Second, I can't tell from this article how much or how the LDS church influences the law. Are they helping to draft language? The church will always have its hands in our laws in Utah. That's part of the problem of having a church that believes it communicates directly with god. They feel they have better judgment than others despite their rather imperfect track record.

The laws are absurd and they serve little purpose except to make getting a drink inconvenient. They remind me of the security screening at the airport...more for show than for actual safety.

Trying to eliminate "daily drink specials" is clearly not the purview of the state legislature. It is also clearly over-reaching to limit liquor licenses based on population. Those who drink will drink. Having four more restaurants that serve alcohol won't cause anyone else to start drinking.

West Valley, UT

@gramma b: I see you've never lived in the South. There may be dry counties, but the South is the home of good old fashioned moonshine. All the Baptists over there who say they don't drink... you can find them pounding PBR at the race track, in the stands at a football game or with a cooler on the fishing boat. They dress up nice and go to service on Sunday, but they enjoy themselves the rest of the time. Believe me, I lived there for 27 years.

Bountiful, Utah

Linus | 4:05 p.m. Nov. 1, 2011
Bountiful, UT
Since approximately fifty-eight percent of the population in Utah are members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

@Linus -- that statistic includes inactive members of the church. I'd guess that significantly less than 50% of the population in Utah are active LDS and that number is dropping. Another 2 - 3 generations LDS will be way down there in the minority. The power and control of a religious institution over State politicians will then have been lost.


I was at the meet the candidates night last thursday here in Pleasant Grove. PG is in great need of a greater commercial tax base. We have the land for it. Zoned correctly and available cheap... We have a larger population base than neighboring American Fork or Lindon and yet we cannot attract a couple of nice sit-down restaurants due to no available liquor licenses. The candidates were excited to outdo each other in either how they were going to go fix this issue one way or another with no concept of how the DABC works in Utah. It was comical really... only a couple of the candidates knew anything about what the challenges were to dealing with this. Funny but I would bet my left foot each and every one of those running is a good LDS church member. All desperate to help get more licenses... As a LDS church member I think the DABC policies are too stringent. We need more agency... what happened to raise them up the way they will go and when they are old they will not depart from it or whatever... Seems like regulate so we can avoid temptation works better?

Heber City, UT

@LDSRichard - I feel for your loss. I've had two family members killed by drunk driving. However, more people are killed by over-eating every year than alcohol...should we make that illegal as well? Will we make it illegal to feed your children unhealthy foods and portions a crime?

Consuming alcohol in and of itself is not "immoral" or dangerous. It's the abuse of the alcohol. Why is it that the very people who want to make alcohol illegal are the ones who refuse to want to put any limits on firearms?

I believe in tough drunk-driving laws. I believe in education. I do not believe that laws that are primary for show are the answer.

Even if drinking is immoral, you can't and shouldn't legislate morality. It just doesn't work.

Salt Lake City, UT

My concern would be what FACTUAL information would the LDS church provide on this subject?


Not theological.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments