Election 2012 - Who to vote for?

  • Thread starter Thread starter edwest2
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did your confessor/spiritual father tell you that a couple joints per day is considered moderate and proper consumption for marijuana?
I don’t do MJ and never have; one of my sons does - and does it in moderation. With some research, you can find what amounts to moderate use with either alcohol or MJ.

What does a confessor have to do with it? :confused: :confused: Is he supposed to tell me to switch from gin to bourbon, maybe?
 
I don’t do MJ and never have; one of my sons does - and does it in moderation. With some research, you can find what amounts to moderate use with either alcohol or MJ.
It is illegal…unless used for specific medical conditions.
 
So, it’s illegal. Big deal. There was a time in America when alcohol was illegal, too.
I’m not trying to “be your confessor,” or judge your conscience. Merely would like to point out that it is a moral precept of the Church that we are to follow civil authorities unless those civil authorities require us to violate moral law. (And that not doing so is considered, yes, sinful.)

Example: I believe some of the motor vehicle laws are silly and unncessary. (I do.) However, I have no moral right (forgetting about legal right) to disregard those laws based on my own judgment.
 
I’m not trying to “be your confessor,” or judge your conscience. Merely would like to point out that it is a moral precept of the Church that we are to follow civil authorities unless those civil authorities require us to violate moral law. (And that not doing so is considered, yes, sinful.)

Example: I believe some of the motor vehicle laws are silly and unncessary. (I do.) However, I have no moral right (forgetting about legal right) to disregard those laws based on my own judgment.
Good point Elizabeth. Furthermore, it is always wise to seek council from the Church on such matters.
 
I’m not trying to “be your confessor,” or judge your conscience. Merely would like to point out that it is a moral precept of the Church that we are to follow civil authorities unless those civil authorities require us to violate moral law.
Ah, yes! A sin to follow too closely or failing to put a dime in the parking meter. My conscience is quite clear about not always following the civil authorities. I am not all that scrupulous. 🙂
 
Yes but his actions have followed his personal dislike…the White House leaks regarding Israel’s actions have compromised not only its position but its strategy for dealing with its enemies. His support of Bashar Assad (remember Hillary saying we can work with him, he’s a reformer!" has allowed slaughter to continue apace while the White House fiddles.

Obama has a clear record of compromises when it comes to our enemies and hostility toward our friends. His foreign policy is scary. I don’t trust him at all…remember the hot mic when talking to Putin? Gee once I get elected I can stop worrying about the stupid American people and do what I want.

Hope you sleep better at night than I do

Lisa
I’m not a big fan of romney’s foreign policy either, I don’t know how his actions with enimes and friends compare, but I want a president who wants to get us out of the foreign entanglements that we are currently in. Not a president who will continue bankrupting this country on military spending.
 
Ah, yes! A sin to follow too closely or failing to put a dime in the parking meter. My conscience is quite clear about not always following the civil authorities. I am not all that scrupulous. 🙂
Who said anything about scrupulosity or about parking meters? Is that your best “argument,” Counsellor? Let’s hear you proclaim about how a Judge in court would describe such an “argument” which does not address the general issue of obeying civil authorities in matters of importance. Actually, Catholic moral doctrine does address the respectful use and abuse of the body, including the consumption of substances.

I’ll be more specific: It is often my opinion that driving considerably faster than the speed limit is a minor offense, and that’s because I am an outstanding driver, with exceptional control and confidence behind the wheel. The law proclaims, however, that there is a certain uniform expected speed limit, and driving considerably faster than that is dangerous. It also proclaims that one may not drive faster than road conditions permit, regardless of formal speed limits. I also judge that I can often bypass that law, too, but to do so is violating a legitimate right of civil authority. if I don’t like the driving laws, I can lobby my legislatures in an effort to change some of them. Arrogantly disobeying them (because they’re “bad,” or “stupid”) is a sin. That is not scrupulosity.
 
His support of Bashar Assad (remember Hillary saying we can work with him, he’s a reformer!" has allowed slaughter to continue apace while the White House fiddles.
Interesting that you should mention this. On another thread one of our posters is arguing that Assad is doing the right thing in Syria’s civil war, and is the best friend of Christians in Syria. I’d guess that while that gentlemen would applaud Secretary Clinton, you’d not.
Obama has a clear record of compromises when it comes to our enemies and hostility toward our friends.
Whom do you consider our friends, and our enemies?
Hope you sleep better at night than I do
Like a baby! 😃
 
Rich, honestly think you are trying to mitigate the “whatever you want” aspect of Libertarianism by including alcohol in the argument. Marijuana is not just a ‘recreational drug’ and I do not think children “need to be exposed” to it. You cannot equate this to a glass of wine a glass of wine with dinner.

Again the point is that even if someone like Dr Paul is personally opposed to a particular aspect of the party, if the platform supports that activity, then his personal feelings matter little more than when people try to support abortion by saying “Well I wouldn’t do it but it’s a matter of personal choice.” You can’t overcome the platform with one vote.

Lisa
but Dr. Paul is a republican and as a member of house he was influence, if influenced at all, not by the libertarian party platform but by the republican platform. Don’t think because Ron Paul’s views are libertarian that his views are in line with the libertarian platform.

first he is more of a states rites guy then all government keep your hands off. He believes abortion and marriage should be decided on the state level not the federal level. Actually I think, have to do some research, but he holds to the view that marriage should be left up to the churches not the state or the federal government. So no need for being legally married or anything like that. He thinks there isn’t any reason why government should be involved with religion. As far as abortion goes, he believes that it is a states rites issue. States should be the ones to put restrictions against abortion, and ultimately make it illegal, not the federal government. The only issue you are right on is the drugs issue. He thinks recreational drugs should be legal. About Marijuana, studies have shown it is less addictive then alcohol, Nicotine is also more addictive than Marijuana. Not saying we should make it legal but it is something to consider
 
That’s probably news to all those people who have been smoking pot every day since 1968. :hmmm:
I didn’t say it wasn’t addictive but it isn’t the most addictive drug. I think people over-exadurate at times how bad it can be
 
I didn’t say it wasn’t addictive but it isn’t the most addictive drug. I think people over-exadurate at times how bad it can be
Over-exadurate?

“The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.”
(CCC 2291)****
 
Who said anything about scrupulosity or about parking meters? Is that your best “argument,” Counsellor? Let’s hear you proclaim about how a Judge in court would describe such an “argument” which does not address the general issue of obeying civil authorities in matters of importance.
The defining term is “of importance.” I dare say that I could be representing someone in court on something and opposing counsel would have a different view than mine as to what consitutes “importance.”
Actually, Catholic moral doctrine does address the respectful use and abuse of the body, including the consumption of substances.
That it does, and I agree that use of intoxicants must be respectful of the body and not abusive. There are those substances that are always abusive (cocaine and raw moonshine) and those that are not - ordinary alcoholic beverages and marijuana.
It is often my opinion that driving considerably faster than the speed limit is a minor offense,~~~ I also judge that I can often bypass that law, too, but to do so is violating a legitimate right of civil authority. if I don’t like the driving laws, I can lobby my legislatures in an effort to change some of them.
Or possibly hire a good attorney who specializes in such things to get you off if a cop does stop you for speeding. No need to try to change the law when that could take years.
Arrogantly disobeying them (because they’re “bad,” or “stupid”) is a sin. That is not scrupulosity.
Yes, it could be. Arrogantly doing 75 in a 25 mph School Zone would be a sin, doing 28 in that same 25 mph school zone wouldn’t be - at least to me.
 
Over-exadurate?

“The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.”
(CCC 2291)****
you are correct I take my statement back
 
Over-exadurate?

“The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.”
(CCC 2291)****
How does CCC2291 feel about the use of the drug known as alcohol (and it most definitely is a drug)? I would challenge the opinion that it can be used only on strictly therapeutic grounds. At my church, for example, one can take the Body of Christ either by wine or wafer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top