I

t'€™s that time again for the collective social pulse when the great alcohol debate rages on, fueled this time by the government'€™s hastily concocted policy to restrict beer retail sales.

As happens often in Indonesia'€™s vibrant society, public debate has carelessly flip-flopped between health (can alcohol be healthy?), commercial concerns (should alcohol be sold in grocery stores?) and morality (is alcohol forbidden?).

Let'€™s check out the health issue first. Beyond temporarily impaired judgment from alcohol, consumption does possess actual health risks, as various medical journals or the internal organs of lifelong alcohol drinkers can show.

Claiming that alcohol consumption isn'€™t risky to one'€™s health is being in denial. Adamantly boasting that regular alcohol consumption absolutely has no risks, as many occasional beer drinkers are doing on social media now, is inviting hysterical laughter from anyone who started guzzling down tequila at 17 and is being hospitalized for liver problems before the ripe age of 20.

Now, does that mean it is okay to drink at 17? Heck, no. Indonesia'€™s legal drinking age is 21 '€” a few years after a citizen can get a national identity card, driver'€™s license, voting rights and marital consent.

That alone indicates how the state means for an individual to first prove themselves capable of shouldering obligations or consequences coming from those other privileges before being trusted with consuming alcohol responsibly.

The responsibilities include but are not limited to retaining enough self-awareness of one'€™s intoxication level to avoid drink driving, drunken rage, getting robbed blind or, maybe, joining the latest misguided cult.

If you want to wage a holy war on alcoholic drinks, then wage it against selling alcohol to minors. The law is in place but isn'€™t upheld, so pressure the authorities for much stricter enforcement, all the while taking more responsibility in educating and guarding the minors around you.

Those two things are much more effective than hairsplitting on which commercial outlets should be allowed to sell beer (minimarkets no, novelty shops okay!), a debate that, should you wish to engage in it, must be based on supply chain by category for fast-moving consumer goods 101, instead of personal values over alcohol consumption.

Honestly, this is what it ends up boiling down to, isn'€™t it? Morality. The issue so mighty it has way too many different sides and scales that, when absent-mindedly swung around, pose more immediate danger of alienating parts of society than granting justice for the entire society.

Some see all alcohol as verboten, some think all alcohol is fine, while some feel beer or wine is harmless and hard liquor is not '€” where do you draw the righteous line? This is where the law comes in.

I didn'€™t say it was wrong to live by moral codes that forbid consumption of alcohol. You reserve every right not to consume alcohol, serve it on your property, be served it, or marry someone who consumes it.

What you don'€™t have is the right to get your knickers knotted about other adults'€™ rights to drink alcohol, let alone blocking their easy access to it.

Alcoholism impedes work? Then don'€™t hire 24/7 drunks, and fire anyone who turns up drunk. What you don'€™t have is the right to force employees or colleagues not to drink or have access to alcohol outside work.

Drunken people harass you? Slap their potty mouth, kick them in the groin, call the cops '€” I sure as hell have done all three. You have the right to defend yourself. But don'€™t steal other adults'€™ rights to drink themselves silly in the privacy of their own lives.

Detest alcohol, refrain from alcohol, but don'€™t take away other adults'€™ right to consume alcohol. I'€™m no beer drinker myself, but you and I have no divine rights to stop the next willing guy from developing his beer belly.

Last but not least, to the new government. This slapdash policy, met with steadily rising demand for alcoholic beverages in recent years, will only open black market. An illegal market where not only bootleggers reap profits while paying the government zero taxes, but also the products won'€™t need to go through Food and Drug Monitoring Agency (BPOM) inspection to ensure drinkability.

Instead of professionally manufactured beers, lower-class consumers may return to anything-goes, for all we know kerosene-based oplosan (bootleg liquor) of lesser civilizations. Stomach ulcers will be the least of the health problems arriving at community health centers (Puskesmas), dear government, expecting to be subsidized by a smaller purse lacking contributions from alcohol-sale taxes. Brilliant move, indeed.

Preserving local culture, shunning foreign influence? Perhaps if you read more foreign history, you can avoid committing America'€™s Prohibition mistake. A more discerning government? Seems I must wait longer to drink to that.