Bishop Hubbard approves free distribution of needles to drug abusers [CWN]

[didymus]

Well, they’re off and running. From the Troy Record:

ALBANY - A free needle exchange program for drug users began Monday in Albany, a joint effort of Catholic Charities and the AIDS Council of Northeastern New York.

. . . . .

“We had our first customer ] today,” Keller said Monday. “It went really well.”
The AIDS Council will also provide HIV and Hepatitis C testing on the van.
Albany County District Attorney David Soares said he believes the mobile outreach program will help improve the quality of life for area residents.

So the Church is giving out needles to addicts with the blessing of the DA. I think the whole world must be on acid. Improve the quality of life? How, exactly?

Btw, a couple co-workers are glad to see this but think that the Church needs to “get over it” and give out condoms as well to fight HIV.

 

[rlg94086]

Well, they’re off and running. From the Troy Record:

So the Church is giving out needles to addicts with the blessing of the DA. I think the whole world must be on acid. Improve the quality of life? How, exactly?

Btw, a couple co-workers are glad to see this but think that the Church needs to “get over it” and give out condoms as well to fight HIV.

There are no needles required for acid, are there?

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

Sure. They may be using the needle for some other purpose. Give me a break!

Never said that, never claimed that. Straw man.

Source please. That doesn’t sound correct…at all. The point of impairment is a very low threshold. I need something from the Church that clearly states where that point is that equals sinful drunkenness.

The Church doesn’t have a hard and fast definition of when someone is drunk.

It only takes one drink to be impaired:
articles-central.info/Art/185564/156/It-Only-Takes-One-To-Get-An-Impaired-Driving-Ticket.html

Some people can be drunk on one drink, that’s indeed true.

If you are arguing that even one drink is mortal a sin, then you are not making a Catholic argument.

If one drink makes you drunk then you are in sin.

If you are giving someone a needle to inject themselves with a harmful drug (potentially causing their death through overdose), I see it as very similar to euthanasia.

Need Exchange and euthanasia deal with different moral principles. Secondly, the person already has a needle, they are merely exchanging it.

 

[rlg94086]

The Church doesn’t have a hard and fast definition of when someone is drunk.

Some people can be drunk on one drink, that’s indeed true.

If one drink makes you drunk then you are in sin.

IOW…this is your personal opinion. Without back-up from the Church, your argument is meaningless. Nice attempt though.

Giving a needle (clean or otherwise) to a drug addict who is injecting themself with a deadly drug sure sounds like cooperating with evil to me. I haven’t seen anyone give a rational justification.

Just to be clear, the HIV justification is equivalent to the argument for condoms. I guess as long as they have a condom and are exchanging it for a new one, you would be okay with that…

 

[canadianguy1143]

The best comparison is with a condom and HIV/AIDS. We should all avoid getting HIV/AIDS as best we can. Condoms can stop the transmission from spreading, but are immoral in Catholic teaching.

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

IOW…this is your personal opinion. Without back-up from the Church, your argument is meaningless. Nice attempt though.

The Church says being drunk is a sin. How many drinks are required to become drunk depends on the individual.

Giving a needle (clean or otherwise) to a drug addict who is injecting themself with a deadly drug sure sounds like cooperating with evil to me. I haven’t seen anyone give a rational justification.

No one has denied that it is cooperating with evil, IT IS. However, there are times that Catholic moral theology states it is acceptable to cooperate with evil to avoid a greater evil.

Just to be clear, the HIV justification is equivalent to the argument for condoms. I guess as long as they have a condom and are exchanging it for a new one, you would be okay with that…

For starters, that makes no sense. As far as I know, a condom cannot be reused. Secondly, birth control use by victims of rape has huge support in even conservative Catholic theological circles.
Third, when it comes to drugs we’re dealing with addictions that can’t be cured by someone simply saying, “stop it!”

 

[NewEnglandPriest]

The best comparison is with a condom and HIV/AIDS. We should all avoid getting HIV/AIDS as best we can. Condoms can stop the transmission from spreading, but are immoral in Catholic teaching.

But not in all situations. If someone is forced into prostitution they need not refuse to use condoms.

 

[rlg94086]

The Church says being drunk is a sin. How many drinks are required to become drunk depends on the individual.

Back up? Anything? The Catechism is available online…can you at least give a citation?

 

[momor]

The Church says being drunk is a sin. How many drinks are required to become drunk depends on the individual.

Please define drunk.

No one has denied that it is cooperating with evil, IT IS. However, there are times that Catholic moral theology states it is acceptable to cooperate with evil to avoid a greater evil.

CCC 1761 states: There are concrete acts that it is always wrong to choose, because their choice entails a disorder of the will, i.e., a moral evil. One may not do evil so that good may result from it.

Please support your statement that it is OK to cooperate with evil to avoid a greater evil.

 

[whatevergirl]

What a marvelous idea. Continue feeding and encouraging the addiction, but alleviate one of the negative side effects. Because actually helping the people involved would be too much work.

*You read my mind.

In Pittsburgh, there was a charity that had a very high rehabilitation rate for drug users. They took homeless drug abusers in for 30 days, gave them a place to eat, and live for free…and they had counselors there who volunteered their time …to help them get their lives back on track. (helped them find a job, etc) That is true love. Not giving out clean needles and saying…ok, continue abusing drugs…you can now do it safely. How is it legal to aid and abet drug users anyways? *

 

[CradleCath]

I guess the Church has just forgotten about ecumenism. My Protestant friends will run the other way when they read this headline.

**Bishop Hubbard approves free distribution of needles to drug abusers **

 

[Stylites]

*You read my mind.

In Pittsburgh, there was a charity that had a very high rehabilitation rate for drug users. They took homeless drug abusers in for 30 days, gave them a place to eat, and live for free…and they had counselors there who volunteered their time …to help them get their lives back on track. (helped them find a job, etc) That is true love. Not giving out clean needles and saying…ok, continue abusing drugs…you can now do it safely. How is it legal to aid and abet drug users anyways? *

You were right when you wrote about charity - but when your last sentence came up - “How is it legal to aid and abet drug users anyways?” whether something is legal or illegal ought to be the last thing any Christian considers. It used to be illegal to profess Christ, remember, and someone we all know and love faced righteous indignation once for illegally curing on the Sabbath.

.

 

[pnewton]

An odd side note is that in Texas such a group could legally be arrested or ticketed. Possession of drug paraphenalia is a class-C misdemeanor.

 

[whatevergirl]

You were right when you wrote about charity - but when your last sentence came up - “How is it legal to aid and abet drug users anyways?” whether something is legal or illegal ought to be the last thing any Christian considers. It used to be illegal to profess Christ, remember, and someone we all know and love faced righteous indignation once for illegally curing on the Sabbath.

.

*True, but your examples brought about good, despite the legality of them. Aiding drug abusers to continue to do more drugs, doesn’t bring about a good, and thus it’s illegal as well.

I can see the reason the Bishop is doing this…perhaps, on the one hand, he feels this IS charitable. But true charity doesn’t enable someone to remain in sin…*

 

[Stylites]

*True, but your examples brought about good, despite the legality of them. Aiding drug abusers to continue to do more drugs, doesn’t bring about a good, and thus it’s illegal as well.

I can see the reason the Bishop is doing this…perhaps, on the one hand, he feels this IS charitable. But true charity doesn’t enable someone to remain in sin…*

Where there is life there is good. Consigning someone to an early and painful death because of a distaste for what they do is not a hallmark of charity. Throw in the mix of addiction which mitigates their culpability and whatsoever the law says becomes immaterial, as it usually should be.

Also, the implication that something is illegal beacuse it doesn’t foster the good is not always accurate, and is a dangerous thing to hold onto. There’s a lot of things that are wrong to do but are also perfectly legal to do. Conversely, there’s also a lot of things which are good and proper and advisable to do but which are illegal.

We need to remember that the Sabbath (i.e., human laws) was made for man, not the other way around.

.

 

[rlg94086]

Where there is life there is good. Consigning someone to an early and painful death because of a distaste for what they do is not a hallmark of charity. Throw in the mix of addiction which mitigates their culpability and whatsoever the law says becomes immaterial, as it usually should be.

Also, the implication that something is illegal beacuse it doesn’t foster the good is not always accurate, and is a dangerous thing to hold onto. There’s a lot of things that are wrong to do but are also perfectly legal to do. Conversely, there’s also a lot of things which are good and proper and advisable to do but which are illegal.

We need to remember that the Sabbath (i.e., human laws) was made for man, not the other way around.

.

By providing a needle to someone who is shooting themselves up with a deadly drug, you may very well be consigning them to an early and painful death. I see nothing charitable in giving someone a tool to kill themselves with.

It’s like giving them a gun, and then claiming that you didn’t give them the bullets they used to shoot themselves.

 

[joelo]

What’s next, condoms for rapists?

 

[Stylites]

What’s next, condoms for rapists?

Are you implying that a bishop would entertain such a notion? Or that charitably helping an addict to avoid a deadly disease is a slippery slope which the Church will be unable to avoid? Let me know when you have something serious to contribute to the discussion.

.

 

[whatevergirl]

Where there is life there is good. Consigning someone to an early and painful death because of a distaste for what they do is not a hallmark of charity. Throw in the mix of addiction which mitigates their culpability and whatsoever the law says becomes immaterial, as it usually should be.

Also, the implication that something is illegal beacuse it doesn’t foster the good is not always accurate, and is a dangerous thing to hold onto. There’s a lot of things that are wrong to do but are also perfectly legal to do. Conversely, there’s also a lot of things which are good and proper and advisable to do but which are illegal.

We need to remember that the Sabbath (i.e., human laws) was made for man, not the other way around.

.

*If you find handing out clean needles appropriate in this situation, you are entitled to your opinion. I respectfully disagree. *

 

[white_sheep]

People seem to ignore that this is a needle exchange program. What the sponsors do is lessen the danger in an instrumentality which may be used by an addict.

The program is not designed to enable or assist someone to take drugs.

So how is that morally superior to a condom exchange program?