Is the Intent Of NLTP Act 1989 a Moral Issue?

I believe almost all will agree that the Nagaland Liquor Total Prohibition (NLTP) Act is a moral agenda or moral issue. Both the pressure groups who support and oppose the Act will also agree that it is a 100 per cent moral issue. Then where is the point at issue lies? Does it lie with the implementation part or does it lie with the moral part? May I cite an example from the Bible in this coincidence? Did the planting of “the tree of knowledge of good and evil” in the middle of the Eden Garden a mistake or objectionable? (Genesis 2:9). Do we shock of such Forbidden Fruit tree planting in the middle of the so called paradise of God? What is wrong with God for planting that forbidden tree? Should we blame God who had already foreknown the possibility of falling into sin to have planted the dead-end tree there? Why? What is wrong with it? God said, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat” (Verse 16). This utmost important gift of freedom suggests even the “Tree of Life” was also permitted to eat so that Adam and Eve could live without death. God gave them freedom of choice to choose between the two trees. To eat the fruit of the Tree of Life and live or to eat the fruit of the tress of good and evil knowledge and die: It was not the accessibility or availability of the tree of good and evil knowledge in the garden that the two were led into sin. It was the wrong choice of the two! We know that.

In the same way, both the healthful and harmful things are also available in the open market. It is the choice of the individuals that should be governed by themselves; neither by government nor by religious organisation: It is against the principles of the Bible, starting from the Eden Garden. Enforcement on moral issue is not only against the Biblical principles but also against the constitution of the country if the NLTP Act is considered as moral issue.

Then the imbroglio issue of NLTP is not with the implementation part; it is the immoral choice of the individuals that defy the government orders or against the freedom of choice given by God. It is not either the responsibility of the church to forcefully enforce the individual church members against their wills. The duty of the church is to simply impart the knowledge of good and evil to the church members. It is the ultimate choice of the individuals that left to decide to live a good non-alcoholic Christian life or not. Yes, implementation may be done by the government. It may recruit 10,000 or 20,000 more constables just to seal up the border lines or to completely ban the hidden secret liquor shops in the city spending lakhs of rupees, yet it will also not be possible to mold one’s individual life unless the person himself or herself is changed or committed to choose a God-fearing non-alcoholic life style. Implementation may go on as it is; drinkers will also keep on drinking as it is. Some ardent promoters of healthful living believe that government can do so to completely ban liquor if manpower is enhanced and if utmost and ultimate harsh steps are taken up by the government. IT IS FUTILE TO THINK IT SO. The point at issue is not with the implementation of banning the liquor shops in the state but to stop the drinkers so as to avoid its evil effects in the society. If it is not available in the city, drinkers themselves will go to Assam or wherever it is available and will return home in drunk. Enforcement to change someone’s life by stringent rules of the government instead of the alcoholics themselves changing will be futile. What some of the writers who had already cited about the failure of international efforts to free alcoholic State is true. The crux intent of the NLTP Act is an effort to stop the alcoholics from drinking, not just to ban the sales. But to do so, even granting capital punishment to the violators of the law will not be able to stop the drinking society. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THERE SHOULD NOT BE A LAW T0 DEAL WITH THE ALCOHOLIC PROBLEMS. Laws (Narcotic law/Traffic Law/Civil Law) are already there. For example: If a drunken driver kills a pedestrian, he would be booked under the Traffic law and Civil law. In case, if a drunken husband beats his wife or divorces; there is civil law to deal with it.