Doctors Petition The Vatican to Ban Smoking

  • Thread starter Thread starter idrum677
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I have no desire to control others except when they are in my car and my home. Smoking is banned in both places and I refuse to hang out in their homes where I have to breathe in that filth which does cause cancer.
 
lovesMary said:
You think Canada is corrupt because they won’t ban smoking? 🤷
Click to expand...
No I think the Politicians are hypocrites for saying one thing (speaking on the evils of it) and not banning it. We know why they are doing it ($$$), but its still hypocritical.
 
Smoking in excess is a grave sin but smoking in moderation would therefore only be a venial sin I believe. I smoke but I am addicted to it. I would like to quit because it adversely affects my health but that is very hard to do.

As for this smoking ban, I personally think it sounds like a good idea but these doctors should not think that they have any influence with the Vatican. To think so would be prideful. Now, I suffer from pride sometimes but I still must preach the Truth. 😉
 
Where in the Catechism, or anywhere else does it say smoking is a grave sin? Where is smoking in moderation (like the pipe smoker) called a sin at all? We do not get to make up what is sin based on our own opinions and lifestyles.
 
pnewton said:
Where in the Catechism, or anywhere else does it say smoking is a grave sin? Where is smoking in moderation (like the pipe smoker) called a sin at all? We do not get to make up what is sin based on our own opinions and lifestyles.
Click to expand...
I agree with you. I don’t think smoking is a sin. I do think it’s okay for these doctors to bring a public health concern to the leaders of the Vatican for their consideration. I don’t believe in outright banning smoking, but reasonable limits are acceptable to me, such as banning smoking in public buildings.
 
I will state that I believe (not the Church) that it can be a sin, if one is knowingly harming their bodies to the point of death, albeit venial. I believe it can also be a sin against charity to smoke in front of others who are offended by the smoking, or are likely fall into temptation because of it.
 
pnewton said:
I will state that I believe (not the Church) that it can be a sin, if one is knowingly harming their bodies to the point of death, albeit venial. I believe it can also be a sin against charity to smoke in front of others who are offended by the smoking, or are likely fall into temptation because of it.
Click to expand...
Your point of view sounds like a common sense one. I agree with you.
 
My understanding of the church’s teaching is that smoking to excess is sinful. Where the line between moderation and excess for that particular activity is fuzzy to me. But clearly, you can smoke some amount without incurring sin, mortal or venial.

I wonder though, is smoking around other people the equivalent of driving too fast on the roads.

As for me personally, my wife and I never go places where there is smoking. For the most part, this isn’t really a problem, but it does keep us from going to some restaurants and about virtually all bars. My wife is really sensitive to smoke. The few times we made exception and gone to a place that has a non-smoking section, she gets sick the next day.

As for legal restrictions, I am generally against them. The free market will eventually solve this issue. If you have the gumption to own a busines, you should have the right determine whether there will be smoking or not. Consumers and potential employees have the right to not shop or work there based on their smoking preferece.

I have actually seen this in practice. Before I was married I went to this sushi place a lot. After I got married I stopped going there, other than for take out, because they allowed smoking. The owner, who I was on a first name basis with, asked me why I never come back. I explained the smoking issue. A few weeks later they went non-smoking. I am sure other complained as well. My perception is that there business has gone up since they banned smoking.
 
How can they be arrogant? They are medically and logically correct in what they do, smoking is detrimental to one’s health, in particular, tobacco.
 
Mirdath said:
Better get with the Mormons and stop drinking caffeinated beverages then. And no alcohol, no tobacco, no visiting the doctor to get a prescription.

Jesus’ first miracle was to create wine from water. And not just any wine, but good wine, and not just a little, but one hundred eighty gallons of it. Would he have done such a thing if taking a psychoactive drug – alcohol – is sinful?
Click to expand...
What does consuming alcohol have to do with any of my posts or this thread for that matter???
 
pnewton said:
No, I think when God told Moses this, he did not have drugs in mind, as much as clubbing someone to death.

Perhaps Canada does not ban smoking in the nation because they desire to keep some vestiges of freedom.
Click to expand...
So then RU-486, a drug, wouldn’t be murder of an unborn baby, in God’s eyes, if a woman takes it?
 
childofmary1143 said:
What does consuming alcohol have to do with any of my posts or this thread for that matter???
Click to expand...
If you think taking drugs is a sin – alcohol and caffeine are drugs. So no Coke, no coffee, no wine with dinner, and you’re going to have to convince the Vatican to go with grape juice for the Eucharist. Which I think would be a slightly taller order than ‘no smoking please, thanks’.
 
Emotions run high when talking about smoking, eh?:rolleyes:

I remember “non-smoking sections” in restaurants; I also remember a comedian saying that “Having a non-smoking section in a restaurant is like having a non-peeing section in a pool.” 😛

I looked at the link to the apologist thread. I don’t think he said it was morally legitimate, but morally neutral. I believe there’s a shade of difference.

I don’t think it should be made illegal; the genie is already out of the bottle, and prohibition would probably have the same effect as the Big P back in the twenties had on booze: beneficial to none except organized crime.

I do agree with banning it in hospitals & health-care facilities, or places with children. And I can’t say I’m sorry that it’s been banned indoors in public places in Toronto. I don’t know if there’s been a huge nicotine diaspora to Richmond Hill; still seems pretty busy downtown on the weekends.

And as for comparisons with, say, wine: If someone had to pop out for a glass of wine as often as a pack-a-dayer had to pop out for a smoke…🤷

Question to smokers: If the Magesterium decided smoking was sinful…would you quit?
 
b_justb said:
http://www.outwesttobacco.com/Images/Pipes/LargeImg/Peterson-Shannon-999.jpg
Click to expand...
Excellent ! I haven’t had a good smoke in almost over a month now (haha I never got around to buy more pipe cleaners after I ran out in early feb.) I think sunday sounds good for a nice evening smoke.

Anyways, I don’t quite understand why the government has to get involved to control people’s smoking habits, if someone doesn’t want to smoke then don’t smoke. If someone doesn’t want to go to a restaurant or pub with smoking, then go somewhere else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top