Opinion on the 21 drinking age

The August 12, 2007 edition of Parade asked readers what they thought of the drinking age (which was raised from 18 to 21 when I first entered college). The following were my responses.

Better parenting, not legislation, is the answer
By aagapud on 8/17/2007 1:10:AM
Just a few generations ago, there was no need for the 21 drinking age law because back then, more 18-year-olds were much more mature than they are today. This is clear from comments submitted by seniors. This is because of our agrarian past, coupled with adversities (e.g., the Great Depression and the World Wars.), in which heavier responsibilities were thrust upon them. The reason today's youth seem less mature is NOT because of lack of legislation, but because they have fewer responsibilities. Since there are fewer external stimuli, it is now up to the parents to sustain this sense of responsibility in our kids. Sadly, in general parents today are are way too accomodating. If this does not change, then no amount of stiff laws will ever help our kids to "grow up."

Fundamentalism, no lack of laws, is cause of teen drunkenness
By aagapud on 8/17/2007 12:39:AM
Compared to youths in other developed nations, Americans tend to be less mature when it comes to alcohol. But this is because Europeans, for example, grow up in an environment where wine is a normal part of life and therefore holds no special mystique. In America, generations of fundamentalist Bible thumping have branded alcohol as a kind of forbidden fruit. This, combined with the ready availability of alcohol, attracts rebellion in the youth. It's just another example of why fundamentalism has no place in a democratic society.