fake sugar a sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter jennyr
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
prv said:
In regard to the OP’s inquiry, “[Is eating] fake sugar a sin?” I would say no, though you may wish to read the labels on the back concerning saccharin and the like. Quite frankly, I think it tastes better than real sugar.
Click to expand...
and you’ll go to hell for getting pleasure out of it 😉 😛
 
BLB_Oregon said:
People used cinnamon for thousands of years, and continue to use it, for reasons that have nothing to do with imagined health benefits other than making the food more enjoyable to eat. I use cloves on a periodic basis, but to the best of my knowledge, I’ve never had a parasite in my life, and wouldn’t treat it with cloves if I did. In other words, my herb and spice drawer has nothing to do with “health” benefits, except the benefit of knowing that Mom goes that little extra mile with the food, to let us know she loves us. The use of herbs and spices to enhance food and therefore to enhance our shared experience at the dinner table is a moral and commendable art, in and of itself.

From the website of the Holy See:
It is unnecessary for the Christian to be concerned about…avoiding imagined defilement through ascetical practices in regard to food and drink (Col 2:20-23). True Christian asceticism consists in the conquering of personal sins (Col 3:5-10) and the practice of love of neighbor in accordance with the standard set by Christ (Col 3:12-16).

.

As far as the fake sugar goes, it can be a way for people who need to restrict their caloric intake to stay on the wagon. When it does not have a detrimental effect on health or on the person’s ability to love others, that is a legitimate use.
Click to expand...
But again, fake sugar is indeed bad for your health. There are better ways to control caloric intake. There are other healthy things that can be substituted.

Going back to the spices thing, I agree that using spices the way you explained is not morally problematic. I was just pointing out that herbs DO in fact cure various ailments and therefore ARE healthy, whether you are aware of it or not. (By the way, most likely you do have parasites—pretty much everyone does. It’s just part of life.) So your previous argument comparing them to fake sugar did not therefore make sense. Fake sugar is always bad, herbs are always good, in moderation. I don’t think that there can honestly be a way of eating fake sugar “in moderation.” It’s always bad. There’s always an excuse for the person who is completely unaware of all of this, but beyond that, I think fake sugar is one of those foods that shouldn’t be a part of our diets at all. It would be better if it had never been invented. Is it a sin? Maybe, if the person is aware of how toxic it is but just can’t say no… if they just don’t care b/c darn it…they just like the stuff! I think in that case it could be a sin. You are knowingly doing damage to your health, and therefore you will most likely not be able to live as long as God wants and will therefore not be able to fulfill your vocation to the extent that God perhaps wants. That is why I think it could be a sin.

The previous quotations from the Catholic Encyclopedia hits it right on the head.

If you know certain foods contribute to poor health, avoid them. Eating unhealthy foods just because you like them is not moral, IMO. At first I was unsure about this, but the more I think about it, the more sense it makes. If unhealthy foods are all that is available to you, and you need to eat, then you need to eat whatever is available. But when you have a real choice, you need to choose appropriately.

The downside is always ignorance. People especially in this day and age are often under the assumption that certain foods, like coconut oil, for instance, are very unhealthy, when in fact they are quite healthy, if eaten in the right way for the right reasons. If they truly believe that it is unhealthy and therefore avoid it, it is no sin. It’s all about what you know and how you act on that knowledge.
 
Why is there such a long thread on whether it is a sin to eat fake sugar or not.
Of course its not a sin and its a pretty stupid subject to be debating!!
 
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...
Fake sugar is bad because it contains chemicals like Aspartame!

Purposely damaging your body for pleasure can be sinful!

Enjoying something pleasurable that may not result in the primary end is not sinful!

Or else everytime husband and wife made love without conceiving, it would be a sin!

Then again, specifically frustrating the natural aspect of the food to prevent nutrition might be a sin.

I suppose it depends on what kind of fake sugar you are talking about: healthier versions or really bad ones? Eating it all the time because you don’t want to discipline yourself or using it as a way to care for your body?
 
thistle said:
Why is there such a long thread on whether it is a sin to eat fake sugar or not.
Of course its not a sin and its a pretty stupid subject to be debating!!
Click to expand...
It’s a sin to be wasting time on something so silly;)
 
thistle said:
Why is there such a long thread on whether it is a sin to eat fake sugar or not.
Of course its not a sin and its a pretty stupid subject to be debating!!
Click to expand...
Are you sure… you could burn in hell forever for that one little sweetener in your coffee this morning 😛
 
As a diabetic, I sertainly feel that eating fake sugar is a good thing. While I would prefer to eat real sugar, I also enjoy seeing, living, having both feet, etc.

However, while eating large quantities of sugar free chocolate may or may not be gluttony, (and I speak from experience here, folks) doing so WILL result in flatulence of Biblical proportions.
 
DeltaForce said:
Are you sure… you could burn in hell forever for that one little sweetener in your coffee this morning 😛
Click to expand...
Not me. I don’t take sugar (real or fake!), milk or anything in tea or coffee!😃

I’m wondering what the next thread might be. Going out could get a person injured by a vehicle or mugged or whatever so I guess by leaving the house we are deliberately and knowingly putting our health and well-being at risk. Does that mean going out of our houses is a sin?? 😛
 
That’s a good point, thistle, but I think there is difference there. People’s beliefs about this have a lot to do with ignorance of nutrition because there is so much conflicting information out there nowadays. It’s hard to know what’s good for you and what’s not. I think that going out of your house each day might technically be a risk, because you don’t know exactly what is going to happen to you each day. Risks are okay. You can’t live without taking at least some risks. The problem lies when you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that something is harmful and you do it anyway, and not for a valiant reason like to save someone else’s life, but only because you simply want what is bad for you. Eating fake sugar (or even real white sugar, for that matter) would be more like looking out your window, noticing that there is an axe murderer on your porch, and opening the door to let him in because you want to see his cute outfit. Bad idea, and most certainly sinful. There is no risk there. There is just plain danger. Fake sugar and white sugar and are always bad. They always do harm, though it may be imperceptible for a while. You don’t necessarily feel sick the first time you eat sugar but over time it weakens your body more and more. Eventually you get diabetes or cancer or heart disease or whatever. Granted, it’s not the same level of danger as the axe murderer because it isn’t immediate danger. But it’s danger in the distance. You are making yourself sick on purpose, and without a care in the world. I would call that at least venially sinful.
 
AnnaTherese said:
T People’s beliefs about this have a lot to do with ignorance of nutrition because there is so much conflicting information out there nowadays. It’s hard to know what’s good for you and what’s not.
Click to expand...
Very true.
Eating fake sugar (or even real white sugar, for that matter) would be more like looking out your window, noticing that there is an axe murderer on your porch, and opening the door to let him in because you want to see his cute outfit. Bad idea, and most certainly sinful. There is no risk there. There is just plain danger. Fake sugar and white sugar and are always bad. They always do harm, though it may be imperceptible for a while.
Click to expand...
These assertions are not based in fact. Can you show why you conclude this?
 
Oh, it most certainly is based in fact. All you have to do is google “dangers of sugar” or “dangers of aspartame” or “dangers of Splenda” etc. and you will find loads of information. Volumes have been written on this subject, you need only open your eyes to see them. Here are some links I found to get you started:

wholife.com/issues/10_1/02_article.html

womentowomen.com/nutritionandweightloss/splenda.asp

shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/nutraswt.htm

holistichelp.net/sweetpoison.html

By the way, I’m not necessarily saying that because it’s dangerous it is therefore sinful, and that I know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. I’m just saying that at this point in the conversation it seems to me that it must be sinful. But I’m open to other ideas because I really don’t know.
 
AnnaTherese said:
Oh, it most certainly is based in fact. All you have to do is google “dangers of sugar” or “dangers of aspartame” or “dangers of Splenda” etc. and you will find loads of information. Volumes have been written on this subject, you need only open your eyes to see them. Here are some links I found to get you started:

wholife.com/issues/10_1/02_article.html

womentowomen.com/nutritionandweightloss/splenda.asp

shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/nutraswt.htm

holistichelp.net/sweetpoison.html

By the way, I’m not necessarily saying that because it’s dangerous it is therefore sinful, and that I know that beyond a shadow of a doubt. I’m just saying that at this point in the conversation it seems to me that it must be sinful. But I’m open to other ideas because I really don’t know.
Click to expand...
I am sorry but those advocacy based sites do not prove sugar, artifical or not, are deleterious to the public.
 
Why do you say that? So many people say the same thing. And it makes perfect sense to me, given that it’s essentially chemicals. Just because people advocate something means that it is false?
 
AnnaTherese said:
Why do you say that? So many people say the same thing. And it makes perfect sense to me, given that it’s essentially chemicals. Just because people advocate something means that it is false?
Click to expand...
All those websites you listed are people believing in and perpetuating urban legends. Especially the aspertame/ sacarchrane mess.
 
What makes you think they are urban legends? Where do you get your information? And how do you know yours is true and mine is false? By the way, I did not restrict you from doing your own search. I simply listed a few links to get the other guy started. Everywhere you turn there is information about this. It’s not a secret by any stretch of the imagination.

I have seen many things on so-called “urban legend” web sites that say that certain things are not true when indeed they most certainly are. Could this be one of those things?
 
AnnaTherese said:
What makes you think they are urban legends? Where do you get your information? And how do you know yours is true and mine is false? By the way, I did not restrict you from doing your own search. I simply listed a few links to get the other guy started. Everywhere you turn there is information about this. It’s not a secret by any stretch of the imagination.

I have seen many things on so-called “urban legend” web sites that say that certain things are not true when indeed they most certainly are. Could this be one of those things?
Click to expand...
I call them urban legends becuase thats what they are. I got into a debate with a co-worker two years ago and presented him with a ton of scientific research showing all these claims that artificial sweetners are poison was a load of mule fritters. Feel free to look it up; I find it much more reliable than nutritionists and rogue doctors that are shooting off their mouths.
 
wabrams, you have done this with me before in a previous conversation, some time ago. You refute my claims but offer no evidence of your own. You also do not share your information with me at all. If you want me to read something, provide a link or some information so I can find it. Anyway, go on and consume all the sugar and fake sugar you want. Don’t say you haven’t been warned.
 
AnnaTherese said:
Why do you say that? So many people say the same thing. And it makes perfect sense to me, given that it’s essentially chemicals. Just because people advocate something means that it is false?
Click to expand...
If we are talking about biology and chemistry then I would think there can be a consensus reached that will change with time as more information becomes available. Groups that support a certain philosophy of life have a vested interested in only sharing information that proves their position.

Refined sugar or the artificial sweeteners may be problematic for folks with certain conditions or in very large amounts for healthy folks. My point was it is not accurate to say any amount of these products for healthy folks is always deleterious. That position requires proof which I have not seen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top