Dry, dry again
By: Paladin Editorial Board
Issue date: 9/25/09 Section: Opinions
Along with several hundred other students, The Paladin editorial staff attended the September 21 Association of Furman Students-sponsored open forum on alcohol issues. Furman's dry campus policy and related issues are highly charged, and it spoke highly of our students that they could discuss them in this setting with respect and civility. In addition to AFS for hosting the forum, credit is due to the members of the administration who were in attendance - and in particular to Student Life Vice President Connie Carson for her thoughtful and sensible responses and for the willingness she expressed to work with students on these issues.
The Paladin has long supported reforming the dry campus policy to allow students who are of the legal age to responsibly consume alcohol on the Furman campus. That the Vinings apartments were left "wet" after being acquired by the University suggests that some in the administration have already privately concluded that the current alcohol policy is at best unsustainable, and at worst deleterious to students' safety and quality of life. As several pointed out at the alcohol forum, our dry campus policy encourages the very sort of high-risk behavior that it aims to prevent, in particular the decision to drive after drinking. It makes no sense to insist, as our alcohol policy currently does, that every type of drinking, by every age of student, is equally harmful and should be punished in the same way. The goal is to minimize alcohol problems on campus, not to create them for students who are old enough and responsible enough to make these decisions for themselves.
For these reasons, we strongly endorse the current efforts to draft and pass a resolution in AFS that would ask Furman's Board of Trustees to end the dry campus policy. The current motion, which calls for a "reexamination" of the alcohol issue, is a good start, but it is not enough. The language should be strengthened so that it defines the AFS position as supporting an immediate end to - and not just a study or reexamination of - the dry campus policy. This is clearly what AFS seeks to do, and what student opinion supports, so there is no need to mince words about its intentions.
The Paladin has long supported reforming the dry campus policy to allow students who are of the legal age to responsibly consume alcohol on the Furman campus. That the Vinings apartments were left "wet" after being acquired by the University suggests that some in the administration have already privately concluded that the current alcohol policy is at best unsustainable, and at worst deleterious to students' safety and quality of life. As several pointed out at the alcohol forum, our dry campus policy encourages the very sort of high-risk behavior that it aims to prevent, in particular the decision to drive after drinking. It makes no sense to insist, as our alcohol policy currently does, that every type of drinking, by every age of student, is equally harmful and should be punished in the same way. The goal is to minimize alcohol problems on campus, not to create them for students who are old enough and responsible enough to make these decisions for themselves.
For these reasons, we strongly endorse the current efforts to draft and pass a resolution in AFS that would ask Furman's Board of Trustees to end the dry campus policy. The current motion, which calls for a "reexamination" of the alcohol issue, is a good start, but it is not enough. The language should be strengthened so that it defines the AFS position as supporting an immediate end to - and not just a study or reexamination of - the dry campus policy. This is clearly what AFS seeks to do, and what student opinion supports, so there is no need to mince words about its intentions.