Letters to the Editor

9/18/08 7:00pm

Amethyst Initiative stance at Rice fickle

To the Editor:

Recently, an ongoing campaign called the Amethyst Initiative has been spreading around nearly one hundred colleges and universities, calling for an informed debate on the legal drinking age of 21 ("The Amethyst Initiative," Sept. 5). In response, our president, David Leebron, has declined to sign it, tacitly saying that one of the initiative's inquiries on the current age limit's effectiveness is, de facto, not working.

---

---

Leebron's decision seems to contradict his opinion that the drinking age also limits Rice's ability to carry out education in regards to drinking responsibly. Furthermore, it conveys the impression that Rice will sit back and let other institutions actively address an issue of national importance.

From a moral perspective, a drinking age limit of 21 is antithetical to an 18-year-old's right to vote, serve on juries, and be drafted for war. If we do not have enough information and statistics on the necessity of the current drinking age limit, then surely we could assume a student's responsibility in drinking instead of restricting a student's rights beforehand. From a logical perspective, the negative impacts of driving, like driving accidents, are or will be governed by relevant laws. The point of a general drinking age limit is excessive in this sense.

Rice University already has an alcohol policy in which the privacy of the student is sovereign over any illegal consumption of alcohol. An underage student drinking in the privacy of his room does not alter the fact that he is illegally drinking. Is it too much to call for an honest, official debate about the realities of underage drinking?

George Chen

Will Rice freshman

---