I have read with interest all of the letters by LDS members castigating James Banford for his vote and outspoken viewpoint on the failed Draper alcohol initiative.
I live in Draper and voted for the initiative, although I knew it wouldn't pass. I voted for the initiative because I oppose alcohol -- period.Many people have used the word tolerant and have tried to turn the initiative into a freedom of choice issue. I tolerate, am friends with and have loving relationships with many who consume alcohol. I have also tolerated religious bigots and others who continue to litigate away the moral structure of this country.
And as for freedom of choice, the initiative would not have precluded people from consuming alcohol in their homes or at Draper establishments with liquor licenses granted prior to Jan. 1, 1999, not to mention the fact that Draper is not an island unto itself; it is connected to three cities with an abundance of liquor options.
What the opposition to the initiative was really about was money. I challenge anyone to present any advantage or benefit whatsoever that alcohol gives to an individual, family or community other than money.
I voted for the initiative because alcohol destroys individuals, it destroys families and it destroys lives. I am sure Mr. Banford was witness to this in San Antonio, or he probably would not have made the reference.
Shawn H. Graff
Draper