Getting drunk is not an issue. Actually I would argue that the bible doesn't prohibit getting drunk either. Just not getting drunk all the time. The marriage in canae is definitely full with drunk people. Your bible translator would bowdlerize it of course. However, the party leader did say, "After the people are drunk". It suggest, as can be corroborated by pretty much any historians, that typical wedding parties at that time consist of drunk people.
Really. People live with usual genocide, crucifixion, no video game, and very low life expectancy. I would be surprised if Yahweh or any god in any culture would actually prohibit getting drunk. It's like a minor problem compared to the sort of problem people at that time face.
I repeat. Getting drunk is not an issue. Harming others while getting drunk is the issue. And there are TONS of people that drink wine and get drunk occasionally without harming others.
The fact that some people get drunk and beat up their wife is another issue. You don't prohibit porn to stop rape. You don't prohibit gun to stop murder. Fuck. You don't even blame blasphemy for terrorism. You just kill terrorists. The attack on US embassy in Libya is a very coordinated attack to seize weapon made possible by shillary leaking information to terrorist group.
Why prohibit alcohol to stop people beating up each other? There are tons of rich smart responsible alcohol drinker that don't beat each other up. If someone beat up their wife because of alcohol then a judge can penalize him from not drinking alcohol again in addition to jail time. There are criminals that do fucking real harm. Why aim for those who are relatively fine.
Even Jesus manufactures alcohol. What? You want him shot death by vigilantes too for manufacturing narcotic far more dangerous than weed?
And you still don't answer my question. What makes you think free market won't take care of it?
I am sick and tired seeing commies advocating centralized economy. If you allow government to prohibit drugs, what else would government promote and prohibit? Public schools with government curriculum? Not having health insurance? Mandatory health care? Being jewish? Practicing christianity?
Yes you would argue that practicing christianity is NOT dangerous just like I would argue that ganja, xtc, acid, and alcohol is NOT too dangerous. Well guess what? So what? Everything is true or false according to somebody. Humans are subjective. What matters is not whether something is true or not. What matter is who should decide what's good or bad.
Individuals? or some government officials?
If you want to be a christian, whose right should it be? Yours, or some government officials? The same way, if you want to do weed, whose right should it be? Yours? or some government officials?
What right do any government officials have in deciding, oh this substance is dangerous and this one is not? If they can do that with substance, what would stop them from deciding what religions is "safe" and stuff?
Communism and facism goes hand in hand. Somehow some supposedly trustworthy uhuk uhuk politicians know and decide what's best of us. It's as if you're asking for a benevolent dictator. No. All you will have is a dictator that line it's pocket and suck your blood and freedom.
Yes the wedding parties had some drunk people. I'm confused as to what point you think you are making. The Bible has many stories in it of what happened. Just because it happened, doesn't mean it was good, or that Jesus approved of it.
The Bible is real. It's not a fictional tale of how everyone should be in the magic perfect world.
I have some stories of things I did, that were bad, and should not be done. If I wrote a book about it, that wouldn't mean I advocate doing dumb things.
Again, I posted hundreds of examples where people intoxicated were doing real harm.
We spend hundreds of billions dealing with people who are intoxicated, doing real harm.
You keep saying that it's not a big deal, but the facts and dollar amounts are very big deals.
The facts are not on your side. Period. You are wrong.