If you think that nobody would be fired for refusing to work in unsafe conditions and nobody would be fired for not drinking, you're still agreeing that the situations are similar. You're just agreeing that neither would get you fired, rather than that both would get you fired. Sio why is the employee to blame for one but not for the other when they are both dangerous and they both would or wouldn't get you fired?

Having to drink is basically an unsafe working condition. It's just an unofficial unsafe working condition instead of an official one.