Is drug abuse ever moral?

[EricPavlat_TOP]

Hi,

My Catholic, Libertarian friend presented me with the following argument:

“Drugs should be legal. They are part of God’s creation, and Scripture never speaks against using drugs. In fact, the Church never taught against using drugs until after about 1900, when the government outlawed many drugs in order to persecute Asians who were no longer needed to build railroads. Since the Church has no history of opposing drug use before civil governments did, the current teaching in the catechism is not grounded in Tradition, and has no binding force. Government has no business using force to prevent people from using God’s creation.”

Comments?

Veritas,
–Eric Pavlat, T.O.P.

 

[kjvail]

Abuse? No.

The DSM - IVr defines two broad subtypes of substance related disorders. Abuse and addiction. The difference being the ability to abstain from use in the face of negative consequences from that use.
Those that abuse drugs, including alcohol, appear to have the ability to abstain without outside intervention, addicts do not.

Addiction has nothing to do with morality, it is a bio-psycho-social disease often inherited genetically and reinforced by the family of origin. You often see obsessive and compulsive behaviors even in those individuals that for whatever reason do not fall into the use of drugs. There is a strong tendency towards other addictive behaviors such as gambling, workaholism, eating disorders and sexual addiction.

I generally reject the libertine notion that since drugs are part of God’s creation their abuse is licit. Drugs, for the addict and the abuser, become a form of idolatry a panacea for life’s problems. Alcoholics Anonymous (and other 12-step fellowships) teach that addiction is in part a spiritual disease and therefore the treatment is spiritual in nature. The 12-step programs are far and away the most succesful in treating addicts.
If you are interested in more information on addiction I recommend

alcoholics-anonymous.org/%between%
www.na.org

 

[ChrisDavis]

No. Drug abuse is never moral. Our bodies are gifts from God. Abuse of drugs harms our bodies and therefore is wrong.

The reason that laws prohibiting the abuse of drugs has only been recent in the past 100 years is because science has only in that time come to find that addictive drugs cause harm to the body.

The government is supposed to be there to help the people. If something is found to be harmful, laws should be enacted to prevent the people from abusing it or being introduced to it.

 

[Richard_Lamb]

EricPavlat:

Hi,

My Catholic, Libertarian friend presented me with the following argument:

“Drugs should be legal. They are part of God’s creation, and Scripture never speaks against using drugs. In fact, the Church never taught against using drugs until after about 1900, when the government outlawed many drugs in order to persecute Asians who were no longer needed to build railroads. Since the Church has no history of opposing drug use before civil governments did, the current teaching in the catechism is not grounded in Tradition, and has no binding force. Government has no business using force to prevent people from using God’s creation.”

Comments?

Veritas,
–Eric Pavlat, T.O.P.

Drug **abuse **as with abuse of any kind is always inmoral…Drug use can be moral or inmoral, depending on the circumstances…When used for medical reasons it is good, when used for self serving reasons, well I think this should be seen on a case by case basis, the drugs that have been made illegal for the most part have a damaging effect onindividuals and society as whole…

 

[Dr.Colossus]

Drugs should be legal. They are part of God’s creation, and Scripture never speaks against using drugs.

This argument makes no sense. Dirt is part of God’s creation. The Bible never forbids eating dirt. Oil is part of God’s creation, and Scripture never speaks against drinking Oil. See what kind of idiocy this can lead to?

 

[theMutant]

"Drugs should be legal. They are part of God’s creation…

Arsenic is part of God’s creation but taking it in order to kill ourselves is immoral. The problem with the argument is that it tries to equate the mere existence of something as justification for virtually any means of using it.

An equivalent saying would go, “God gave me the capability of having sex with many women so therefore it can’t be wrong.” Such logic is flawed. God gave me enough strength to kill a person but that does not mean that I can justify using my strength to committ murder.

Additionally, does your Libertarian friend limit his argument to only natural drugs? I ask this because most pro-drug Libertarians I have encountered (and I must admit that I haven’t encountered all that many Libertarians) don’t. Many of the drugs widely abused are not “natural” but are the result of processing by people. So we can take the argument one step further: “God gave us our intellect and creativity and it was used to create these drugs; therefore, the using the drugs cannot be wrong.” (This kind of argument is also used by many Catholics to justify the use of artificial contraception.)

The fact that some thing exists does not imply any morality in regard to it. Existence is a morally neutral fact. The existence of guns is not immoral because guns can be used for good. The existence of guns is not moral because guns can be used for evil. Morality has to do with one’s actions. To abuse a drug (or anything else) is always immoral. There may be different levels of culpability for an individual according to their particular situation, but nothing can make an inherently immoral act moral. This is the basis of what was once popularly called “situational ethics.” I took several classes that taught situational ethics and I noticed a disturbing trend; all examples were ways to justify immoral acts by the situation. “A person is starving so it is moral for them to steal in order to get food.” Wrong, it is not moral for them to steal even if they are less culpable for doing so because of their situation. Likewise it is never moral to abuse drugs because of the damage it does to ourselves and others.

 

[EricPavlat_TOP]

Thank you all for your insights. I anticipate that Mutant’s thoughts will be especially well-received.

Any thought on his Church-teachings-pre-1900 statement, besides what’s already been stated?

–Eric

 

[Michael_C]

Your body is a temple for the Holy Spirit and I think the earlier response that the drugs become idols is an excellant point. You’re supposed to love the Lord your God more than anything and if your addicted the drugs will come first.