Cool story, brew: Utah karaoke crooners receive cold, refreshing shock as alcohol authority refuses beer licence Shit hoppened for the Heart & Seoul karaoke lounge in Utah after the US state's alcohol control authority yesterday rejected its application to serve beer. The amateur wailers' joint in downtown Provo, Utah (69km from Salt Lake City) was left foaming after pouring its heart out to the state's Department of Alcoholic Beverage …
This post has been deleted by its author
The funny thing is that the Church of Mormon is a pretty close ripoff of Islam.
I won't bother to list all the parallels, but five quick ones:
Ban on alcohol
Revelation directly dictated to founder by angel
Jesus has lower status than in Christianity
Special "modest" clothes
Polygamy (which has gradually eroded with time, as it has in advanced Muslim societies like the Kurds).
At the time Islam started, people didn't know coffee was a stimulant.
The thing that amazes me about the Mormons is that Joseph Smith was so obviously a fraud, someone who made Lord Archer look like a candidate for the Supreme Court. Jesus, when you cut out the later embellishments, obviously wasn't. For his day, he talked extremely good sense. He didn't bang on about silly clothes, magical goggles and nonexistent civilisations.
How do people manage to do science degrees and remain Mormons? Is the cultural pressure that strong? As far as I know there isn't even a death sentence for blasphemy, so it isn't a proper desert religion.
I'm fairly certain that Jesus himself approved of wine ... I mean, did he turn wine into water, or water into wine? See John 2:3-11 ...
Drink thy wine with a merry heart. —Ecclesiastes 9:7
Drink no longer water, but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities. —1 Timothy 5:23
Give ... wine unto those that be of heavy hearts. Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more. —Proverbs 31:6b-7
I start right from the beginning and ask "Which version of Creation do you believe in? The one described beginning at Genesis 1:1, or the one beginning at Genesis 2:4?" Usually makes them go away.
Rarely, one will stump up with "But that's the OLD testament, we have a new covenant now". So I muse over their "perfect" God getting the covenant wrong the first time and then ask which of the gospels got the last words of Jesus right ... Matthew, Luke and John all have completely different takes on the subject, Mark (perhaps wisely?) remained silent on the subject.
There are more than 2. There is the Elohim legend (In the Beginning...), the Middle East Drying legend (Adam and Eve, but the named humans may be from a third story about the earth god and water goddess getting it on), and the Watcher legend (the Giants and the Angels). There are traces of yet others.
The point is that the compilers of Bereshit were neither Orthodox Jews nor Literal Protestants. They were early Iron Age descendants of desert nomads, codifying the different stories of the oral tradition. They just bunged them in one after another because they had no concept of narrative integrity - Aristotle wasn't only a bit later but belonged to a much more advanced civilisation. They would be astonished, I'm sure, at the verbal acrobatics of the Mishnah or all those tomes in theological libraries.
One thing to ask them, by the way, is that if the law is perfect, why do rabbits chew the cud and how are bats birds?
Yes, I know. But the people I'm talking about are very simple. They have never read and interpreted and understood their "good book" for themselves. They have always been told what and how to think about it. Hit them with too much outside their conception of what the tradition says, and their brains turn off.
My friend Dan says the translation is in error ... it's rabbis that chew the cud. His explanation for bats as birds is also simple ... not having flashlights (torches to you Brits), they couldn't catch one to check and jumped to the obvious conclusion. You can often find Dan reading the Torah to all and sundry at his synagogue, unless he's at work running his brewery.
Ah yes.
King David and King Solomon led merry, merry lives
With many, many lady friends and many, many wives.
But then as they grew older with many, many qualms
King Solomon wrote the proverbs, and King David wrote the Psalms.
As another atheist, I say you need to know the Bible because it helps understand the delusions of some of the people around you.
I thought that the Polygamy issue was the biggest schism in the Mormon faith. With the fundamentalist Mormons (read "angry and deluded") wanting to keep the decree, and then with the normal (read "generally deluded") Mormons wanting to rid themselves of it.
I'm only stating what I remember from the fantastic book Under the Banner of Heaven by John Krakauer. Great book; and despite his obvious restraint, it does paint the average Mormon follower as a whackjob who has spent too much time in the sun.
I would normally agree but my manager is a mormon (autocorrect keeps telling me that should be spelt moron...) who, whilst not being the most sane of people, is by far and away the best manager I've ever worked with and the closest to an actual, decent human being that I've come across. This includes working from home on a Friday so he can clame ignorance of some team members pub lunch.
it sounds to me like a recreational license allows somewhere that isn't a bar to serve drinks incidentally to the main activity of the establishment. This sounds like a bar that specialises in Karaoke wants to operate somewhere that a bar would not be allowed (too close to a church). Whatever one may think of the licensing laws of the state this sounds like an attempt to bypass on a technicality to me.
obvs--->
G*d shouldn't be a factor in licensing laws
Next time you say, "Oh G*d I wish I hadn't drunk so much last night" You will remember those words. As for the "Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Commission" in the UK we call it the Ministry of Fun, or "Drink All the Booze you Can Carry".
The prior commentards are taking a rather limited view of history. There was an era where drunks hassling church-goers was a thing. Putting space between the two was a sensible restriction. Furthermore, many jurisdictions put space between schools and bars. Whatever you think of that, churches are also places where children notably congregate--and are more likely to do so with hours that overlap bars. In the one case that I am aware of, the board was much more concerned with children and bar patrons interacting than anything religious per se.
"There was an era where drunks hassling church-goers was a thing. Putting space between the two was a sensible restriction."
That may be the historical reason, but it's hard to believe that's the reason why it continues to be enforced today. There are lots of places in the US where there is no such restriction, and I haven't heard about any serious problem with drunks hassling church-goers in those areas.
Possibly worth noting, while deploring a limited view of history, that the era of drunks hassling church goers also featured do-gooders hassling drunks.
This was in Provo, UT. While not as bad as places like American Fork just down the road, a huge proportion of the permanent population _is_ LDS (aka Mormon). A lot of the rest are transient/under 21 (i.e. students at BYU), so what this really represents is a fine example of democracy in action: three wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner...
There was also a much longer era where all church goers drank wine and/or beer as their normal, day in and day out beverage. Even the kids. Granted, it was because the water would kill them ... but I don't remember any busy-bodys bitching about the evils of drink back in those days!
Nearly all Americans from the Founding to the 1830s at least were mostly half-cut from dawn till dusk. As is shown in their political achievements of the time. *
Americans drank an average of thirty-four gallons of beer and cider, five gallons of distilled spirits, and one gallon of wine per year in 1790
And that's just the average: for those who like the current president never drank either alcohol nor coffee, it follows that others were getting more than their fair share.
* Seriously, Calhoun ?
The Gin Craze, brought in with Dutch Billy, was a time-specific addiction problem, like crack-cocaine, that went away. Even in the heavy drinking Georgian and Victorian periods most people in Britain didn't drink regularly. outside the slums and the House of Commons [ Billy Pitt, anyone ? ]. People like George III barely drank at all,
"Whatever you think of that, churches are also places where children notably congregate--and are more likely to do so with hours that overlap bars."
Yes, and those self same law makers really don't want their kids seeing them coming from the bar to church or church to bar, so a bit of distance, preferable around a corner is best.
In the US, a law that is "upcoming" can't be used for criminal prosecution. I find it odd that it can be applied for license rulings. Of course, if the rules of criminal law applied to the case, one could argue that listening to karaoke sober amounted to cruel and unusual punishment.
If the licence is granted, then both the licence and the new law run in the future, and you would have a licence for drinking at a recreation that wasn't legally a recreation any more.
I'm a bit puzzled that neither karaoke nor just drinking alcohol are considered recreations in Utah.
I also was puzzled why the karaoke singers were also called, or actually were, axe throwers too. I think I've got it now, it's two different groups.
So that just leaves converting karaoke into a religion, singing Psalms from the autocue, and being sure to include alcohol overindulgence as a sacrament. Where the axe throwing comes in, I'm not sure.
Go stand in line at the chaplain's office. He'll listen to your complaint and punch your ticket. (Old military response).
Maybe they need to sing outside the church "In heaven there is no beer..."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6ZQx11TbQU
And for good measure: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsS_CXk2z_Q
Which then makes me wonder, exactly what falls into the "recreational amenities" category if it requires "physical activity"? And, for that matter, exactly who has to perform the activity?
Do they grant such licenses to "football" or baseball arenas?
What about a popup bar in a park, most of those being active are kids, whilst the adults sit around drinking, hardly physical activity there either.
Maybe they all qualify by selling enough food.
Had a guy from Provo seconded to us about 20 years ago. He was so excited to be in Scotland for a year, it was like he was going to stay awake and see everything.
First week he asked us what we were going to do at the weekend and we had him convinced that in Scotland it was typical to go into the mountains and swordfight like in Highlander... Gullible lad - we got that sorted out with some good old sarcasm. Nice chap, though. Was a Mormon, so wouldn't drink alcohol, tea, coffee, coke... Takes all types.
Re: "Was a Mormon, so wouldn't drink alcohol, tea, coffee, coke."
Many years ago some Mormons visited my shared house and tried to convert us all (Physics graduates, no chance) but we entertained them. They wouldn't drink tea, coffee, or coke, but would drink hot chocolate, ... which does contain caffeine. Go figure.
I had a visit from a couple of well dressed young men, at my home in Rugby, England. They were astonished when I told them that I had visited Nauvoo, Illinois whilst temporarily resident in the US. Neither of them had ever visited Nauvoo, from which Brigham Young led the original Mormons to Salt Lake City, in spite of the fact that it is only a couple of states away.
"only a couple states away"
True enough. Just three states between Illinois and Utah. And these days it is all super-slab (I-80). However, distances are a trifle longer than most folks in Blighty are used to ... call it 1250 miles, give or take. The wife and I have done it (well, Peoria IL to Salt Lake City, another hundred miles or so) in about 17 hours, with two pee stops and she & I swapping driving time. Not exactly "just popping down to the shops".
"True enough. Just three states between Illinois and Utah. And these days it is all super-slab (I-80). However, distances are a trifle longer than most folks in Blighty are used to ... call it 1250 miles, give or take."
But they had travelled a few 1000 miles to a foreign land as missionaries to convert the "heathens" here in the UK. I've heard you still have non-grounded aircraft in the USA and don't rely solely on UK (European) planes to travel abroad :-)
I've been throwing an axe in logging competitions (and occasionally in bars/pubs) since almost before I can remember. In all that time (well over half a century), I cannot remember anybody getting hurt. Not even once.
I can't say the same thing about darts.
Just discovered axe throwing on a visit to Toronto - crazy bonkers, especially when they bring out the big axes. Highly recommended. They did have a booze license [*], so it must be that physical exercise thing.
[*] Absolutely no issues with the axe slipping out of my grip, your honour.
"They did have a booze license"
Note to the traveler: Toronto is in Canada, not the US, and has completely different laws when it comes to axes and booze, so caveat viator. With that said, advice I would give for any bar in any jurisdiction is "go with the flow, it's probably both legal and fun".
I was told of a story that there was a nice Mormon fellow who was in outside sales. The bosses were wondering why his expense account charges were so small, then they found out. No wining and dining for him. They had to let him do other work.
On the other hand, if you ARE in the church, you ARE taken care of if you happen to come across in bad times.
Me? Yes, I have relatives (cousin) who live in that part of the world, but my (now deceased) grandparents weren't of that persuasion from what my mom says, it was an enlightening experience to be a "minority".
Karaoke has no attraction for me and the thought of one less amateur crooning bar in the world does not fill me with despair. I do think however that the bar's owners have a valid claim for appeal.
The karaoke establishment itself has not been banned, just the selling of beer (and presumably any other alcoholic drink). The Eighth Amendment to the US Constitution bans "cruel and unusual" punishment. Any way you look at it, karaoke when you are not pissed meets that standard and some. If you doubt me, visit such an establishment when sober and see how long you last.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
