Buying booze on Sunday

August 11, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
One organization in Indiana is looking to end one of our state’s last remaining “blue laws” – buying alcohol from a store on Sundays. As an adult of legal drinking age, I am all for changing this state law. I know Indiana is a conservative state with deep-seated religious values, but not everyone in the state is religiously or morally opposed to drinking on Sunday. And those who don’t want to drink on Sunday can continue not to if the law is amended to allow alcohol sales on Sunday.

Although lawmakers will say this isn’t a religious issue, in some ways it is. The reason for prohibiting Sunday alcohol sales started with other shops and retailers being closed Sunday because it was most people’s day of worship. My parents have mentioned how when they were growing up in the 1950s and ’60s, a lot of shops were closed Sunday. Now, almost every retailer is open Sunday, with one other notable holdover from the blue laws – car dealerships.

I’ve lived here for more than 20 years and know that I can’t buy alcohol on Sunday from a store. But what I’ve never understood is why I can get in my car, drive to my local tavern and drink? To me, that would increase the chances of drunk-driving accidents more so than selling beer or wine in a grocery store, which is an argument some have for keeping the Sunday restrictions.

I can recall several times during the past few years this issue coming up for proposal or debate for our General Assembly. Each time, supporters of changing the law hoped it was finally the year Indiana changes it and those in opposition bring up drinking and driving and religion. This year, Hoosiers for Beverage Choices has started a Web site residents a petition to sign showing legislators people want to be able to buy alcohol on Sunday.

But with all of the other major issues Hoosiers are facing right now – property taxes, the economy, education, higher prices on commodities, health care – will the General Assembly 1) have someone sponsor a bill to change the alcohol laws here, and 2) will the bill even get through our legislature?
ADVERTISEMENT
  • I am in complete support of the booze sales on any given day of the week. If you go to Chicago and want something to drink, you can go to the local store and get it. There may be a time restriction, but not a day restriction there (except the usual -Election Day, and a few others).

    Here is a smart idea... Lets go drink and drive!... it will be much better than getting booze at the store and driving home and drinking it (AT HOME)....

    Where is the intelligence in that?
  • I am totally for this law to change. Indiana is losing a lot of tax dollars to other states by not allowing alcohol sales on Sundays. If I forget to go get beer on Saturday for the next day, Illinois get that revenue from me. I\'ve been there twice in the past 6 weeks. That\'s a lot of Hoosier dollars going to another state to buy it.

    I\'ve read on some other sites that people not wanting this to change, and in fact have all stores closed on Sunday. They have said we should spend that Sunday with our family. Well, when I have to go out to Illinois, I\'m missing out on a least an hour round trip, instead of driving 15 minutes round trip to the liquor store or the grocery store. Not to mention the gas it costs me.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. @BryanJBrown, You are totally correct. I have no words, you nailed it.....

  2. You have not overstated the reality of the present situation. The government inquisitor in my case, who demanded that I, on the record, to choose between obedience to God's law or man's law, remains on the BLE, even an officer of the BLE, and was recently renewed in her contract for another four years. She has a long history in advancing LGBQT rights. http://www.realjock.com/article/1071 THINK WITH ME: What if a currently serving BLE officer or analogous court official (ie discplinary officer) asked an atheist to affirm the Existence, or demanded a transsexual to undergo a mental evaluation to probe his/her alleged mindcrime? That would end a career. The double standard is glaring, see the troubling question used to ban me for life from the Ind bar right here: https://www.scribd.com/doc/312841269/Thomas-More-Society-Amicus-Brown-v-Ind-Bd-of-Law-Examiners (see page 8 of 21) Again, what if I had been a homosexual rights activist before law school rather than a prolife activist? A gay rights activist after law school admitted to the SCOTUS and Kansas since 1996, without discipline? A homosexual rights activist who had argued before half the federal appellate courts in the country? I am pretty certain that had I been that LGBQT activist, and not a pro-life activist, my passing of the Indiana bar exam would have rendered me an Indiana attorney .... rather than forever banished. So yes, there is a glaring double standard. And some are even beyond the reach of constitutional and statutory protections. I was.

  3. Historically speaking pagans devalue children and worship animals. How close are we? Consider the ruling above plus today's tidbit from the politically correct high Court: http://indianacourts.us/times/2016/12/are-you-asking-the-right-questions-intimate-partner-violence-and-pet-abuse/

  4. The father is a convicted of spousal abuse. 2 restaining orders been put on him, never made any difference the whole time she was there. The time he choked the mother she dropped the baby the police were called. That was the only time he was taken away. The mother was suppose to have been notified when he was released no call was ever made. He made his way back, kicked the door open and terrified the mother. She ran down the hallway and locked herself and the baby in the bathroom called 911. The police came and said there was nothing they could do (the policeman was a old friend from highschool, good ole boy thing).They told her he could burn the place down as long as she wasn't in it.The mother got another resataining order, the judge told her if you were my daughter I would tell you to leave. So she did. He told her "If you ever leave me I will make your life hell, you don't know who your f!@#$%^ with". The fathers other 2 grown children from his 1st exwife havent spoke 1 word to him in almost 15yrs not 1 word.This is what will be a forsure nightmare for this little girl who is in the hands of pillar of the community. Totally corrupt system. Where I come from I would be in jail not only for that but non payment of child support. Unbelievably pitiful...

  5. dsm 5 indicates that a lot of kids with gender dysphoria grow out of it. so is it really a good idea to encourage gender reassignment? Perhaps that should wait for the age of majority. I don't question the compassionate motives of many of the trans-advocates, but I do question their wisdom. Likewise, they should not question the compassion of those whose potty policies differ. too often, any opposition to the official GLBT agenda is instantly denounced as "homophobia" etc.

ADVERTISEMENT