fake sugar a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jennyr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jennyr

Guest
Just a random thought going through my head that im sure people can help me with… I understand that lust is bad because you are trying to seperate pleasure from the act of re-production. (among other reasons that its bad)

My head just continued that analysis though and wouldn’t that make diet soda, low-fat foot, etc serious sins? You are gaining pleasure without nutrition… you are gaining pleasure without getting full or as full as you should?

Obviously gluttony is a problem, but I wouldn’t consider a single diet coke gluttinous, but maybe it is.
 
jennyr said:
Just a random thought going through my head that im sure people can help me with… I understand that lust is bad because you are trying to seperate pleasure from the act of re-production. (among other reasons that its bad)

My head just continued that analysis though and wouldn’t that make diet soda, low-fat foot, etc serious sins? You are gaining pleasure without nutrition… you are gaining pleasure without getting full or as full as you should?

Obviously gluttony is a problem, but I wouldn’t consider a single diet coke gluttinous, but maybe it is.
Click to expand...
…that would kind of leave diabetics and those on restricted diets high and dry, wouldn’t it?
 
jennyr said:
Just a random thought going through my head that im sure people can help me with… I understand that lust is bad because you are trying to seperate pleasure from the act of re-production. (among other reasons that its bad)

My head just continued that analysis though and wouldn’t that make diet soda, low-fat foot, etc serious sins? You are gaining pleasure without nutrition… you are gaining pleasure without getting full or as full as you should?

Obviously gluttony is a problem, but I wouldn’t consider a single diet coke gluttinous, but maybe it is.
Click to expand...
I’ve asked a similar question before. I figured that eating something like sugar candy would be gluttonous, since it serves no reasonable purpose other than to stimulate the taste buds.

The general consensus was that I was being scrupulous. I’m still not sure what the logic was behind that.
 
  1. Gluttony is overeating. Eating something because it tastes good is not gluttony.
  2. If eating fake sugar is a sin because in eating it you “are gaining pleasure without nutrition,” then eating real sugar would be a sin too. Neither is.
 
Food is a legitimate source of pleasure, AS WELL AS nutrition, as long as we don’t overindulge to the point of causing weight- or diet-related health problems.

Remember Christ himself was accused of being a glutton, because he didn’t fast often. So he obviously took pleasure in his food, and it’s not like they didn’t have cakes and sweets in his time too!
 
atsheeran said:
  1. Gluttony is overeating. Eating something because it tastes good is not gluttony.
  2. If eating fake sugar is a sin because in eating it you “are gaining pleasure without nutrition,” then eating real sugar would be a sin too. Neither is.
Click to expand...
Eating real sugar obviously wouldn’t because it has calories. The calories give you energy. Fake sugar is taste without anything else.
 
Island_Oak said:
Nor would anyone else on the planet. Perhaps it’s time to find a new hobby.
Click to expand...
maybe you shouldn’t comment if you don’t have anything nice or worthwhile to add…

I am trying to better understand the often heard statement that God created pleasure to guide people’s actions and trying to obtain the pleasure apart from the intended action is wrong. From what I can gather God never made a calorie-free sweet indulgent substance that allows people to eat and drink more than they would otherwise.
 
Island_Oak said:
Nor would anyone else on the planet. Perhaps it’s time to find a new hobby.
Click to expand...
The Opening Poster sounds like a gentle and kind soul, and I think this cutting and sarcastic response is uncharitable, Oak. Why post at all if only to respond like this? I don’t understand the purpose of your response.:confused: It sounds mean to me.
 
jennyr said:
maybe you shouldn’t comment if you don’t have anything nice or worthwhile to add…

I am trying to better understand the often heard statement that God created pleasure to guide people’s actions and trying to obtain the pleasure apart from the intended action is wrong. From what I can gather God never made a calorie-free sweet indulgent substance that allows people to eat and drink more than they would otherwise.
Click to expand...
Too much of (almost) anything is bad. Even diet sodas. Did you know drinking excessive amounts of diet Coke (or most soft drinks) can lead to increased levels of uric acid. This can lead to kidney stones and gout.
 
I honestly can’t see how artificial sweeteners could be sinful. It’s OK to take pleasure in food, we just have to avoid gluttony. It might be a good idea for you, though, to discuss this with your priest, just to get a better, and official, understanding of the issue. All we can give you are opinions. 🙂
 
Uncle_David said:
Too much of (almost) anything is bad. Even diet sodas. Did you know drinking excessive amounts of diet Coke (or most soft drinks) can lead to increased levels of uric acid. This can lead to kidney stones and gout.
Click to expand...
I agree, it’s better to eat natural foods in my opinon. Also too much regular sugar is bad for you. But it’s hard to be perfect. I think all pop is basically empty calories. It depletes your body.
 
Sailboat said:
I agree, it’s better to eat natural foods in my opinon. Also too much regular sugar is bad for you. But it’s hard to be perfect. I think all pop is basically empty calories. It depletes your body.
Click to expand...
Alcohol is also empty calories. 7 calories per gram. No nutrition. Everything in moderation! Nutritionists often quote the 80/20 rule: If 80% of what you eat is good, healthy food, don’t worry so much about the other 20%.

So, if you see me in the supermarket with ice cream, that’s my 20% 😉
 
paramedicgirl said:
Alcohol is also empty calories. 7 calories per gram. No nutrition. Everything in moderation! Nutritionists often quote the 80/20 rule: If 80% of what you eat is good, healthy food, don’t worry so much about the other 20%.

So, if you see me in the supermarket with ice cream, that’s my 20% 😉
Click to expand...
LOL 😃
 
Wait a minute here…time out, let me get this straight…

Some of you folks are saying that artificial sweeteners are sinful because it is the good taste without any benefit to the body?

So, in your opinion, if I put Splenda in my Iced Tea, that is sinful, but I can run down to the bakery and stuff my face with an eclair and that is just dandy?

It makes little sense. I wouldn’t call it scrupulous, however. The rule of thumb is moderation. The eclair is far worse for your body than the Iced Tea with Splenda. So wouldn’t doing damage to your body be more sinful than using a sweetener in your Iced Tea?

By the way, I’ve visited the provincial houses of many religious orders, every one of them has splenda on the table.
 
I have run into this question before and it is a perfectly valid one to ask.

The version I have heard is sugarless chewing gum. The point is that if one objects to contraception on the grounds that it thwarts the purpose of sex (having children), Then why is chewing sugarless gum and spitting it out, which which thwarts the purpose of eating (nutrition) acceptable?

I have not tangled with the objection much, but off the top of my head I would say the answer lies in the unitive/procreative purpose of sex, and that it is grave matter while chewing gum is not, but I’ll let others take a whack at it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top