This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2008, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
I keep waiting for Paul Mero of the Sutherland Institute, a conservative Utah non-think tank, to write a commentary I can agree with. After reading Sunday's column, "Maybe Utah's peculiar liquor laws are not so bad after all" (Opinion, Aug. 24), I'm still waiting. Mero says "Utah's liquor laws are not very peculiar" because millions of Americans live in "dry" counties. That's like saying a broken leg isn't an injury that needs treatment because millions of other people have cancer.
Why is it so hard for so many Utahns to understand that prohibition elsewhere does not excuse the fact that many of Utah's liquor laws are easily recognized as being stupid and reflect the same on the community that supports them? Prohibition demonstrates a community against drinking. Logical restrictions reflect a community that wishes to reasonably control consumption. Stupid laws reflect a community that is . . . well, you can take it from there.
Got any more sharp arrows in that intellectual quiver of yours, Mero?
Gail L. Porritt
Draper
