Is smoking Marijuana sinful?

[NewsTheMan]

What is your motivation for a glass of wine? What is your motivation for a candy bar? What is your motivation for exercising? The answer is generally - it feels nice. Why did I smoke weed? Cos it felt nice. Not in a “woah dude totally nice so trippy so nice lets do more hits broooo” kinda way. Just, nice. Having smoked it recreationally for so long, I can still remember what it feels like. In small quantities, its relaxing, it doesn’t really make you laugh uncontrollably although in a social setting and right circumstances it would (terrible effect, I know, laughing is just way bad). It can make you think out the box (typical hippy answer but its true) and it generally is just a relaxing and warm feeling. Not really all that different to the 2 or 3 glasses of wine people consume on a day to day basis after work.

 

[bingbang]

I just want to repeat that you have to consider your motivation. What is your motivation for wanting to smoke marijuana? I’m fairly certain you will find the sin of the thing there.

Well whats the motivation for drinking alcohol? Is it to calm down after a stressful day? Is it to enjoy the taste? Is it to socialize with friends? All of those things can be said for smoking marijuana as well.

 

[Spirithound]

And we also know that the quality of the wine that Christ gave them was stronger than the previous wine, because the wedding party notes that the master saves the good wine for the second round??!!

I must object! Quality of wine relates to taste, not alcohol content

 

[Spirithound]

Another objection - different things are illegal in different continents, countries, states, even cities! So if someone were to smoke pot in Amsterdam, would it all-of-a-sudden not be sinful just because there it is legal? Doesn’t make sense.

It is not “smoking pot” that is the sin, it is disobeying lawful authority. The government has the authority to legislate laws that do not contradict the Natural Law. Now the good news: Since it appears that marijuana can be used without a sin, it is within your God-given freedom to lobby the government to legalize it.

Caffeine also Impairs your mental state but Ive never herd of it being a sin? I am probably just misinformed.

When it impairs your physiology such that you can’t function in the morning without your cuppa joe, then yes, you are abusing your body and it is sinful.

 

[Spirithound]

In terms of morality marijuana is no different than alcohol. In excess, marijuana can be sinful, especially if it effects your life and how you treat others. In moderation it is perfectly acceptable. Other than the legality of it, there should be no reason why alcohol in moderation is ok and marijuana is not. Both have health risks and alcohol seems to be much worse on the body than marijuana.

And if you are worrying about the legality of weed and if it is sinful, is going over the speed or jaywalking sinful? QUOTE]

I agree. Regarding the last paragraph, I subscribe to the idea proposed by a recent poster that if you are willing to accept the possible consquences, then speeding and jaywalking are not sinful, illegal as they may be, by varying jurisdiction.

 

[nickybr38]

What is your motivation for a glass of wine? What is your motivation for a candy bar? What is your motivation for exercising? The answer is generally - it feels nice. Why did I smoke weed? Cos it felt nice. Not in a “woah dude totally nice so trippy so nice lets do more hits broooo” kinda way. Just, nice. Having smoked it recreationally for so long, I can still remember what it feels like. In small quantities, its relaxing, it doesn’t really make you laugh uncontrollably although in a social setting and right circumstances it would (terrible effect, I know, laughing is just way bad). It can make you think out the box (typical hippy answer but its true) and it generally is just a relaxing and warm feeling. Not really all that different to the 2 or 3 glasses of wine people consume on a day to day basis after work.

Exactly. And when you seek that pleasurable feeling above obeying the law it is no different then seeking your own pleasure in sex, seeking your own pleasure in life. You say you do not smoke anymore because the Church has forbidden it, good for you. There are others who seek their own pleasure above the law of the Church and the land… bad for them. :\

When God or Church asks strange things of us instead of saying; BUT it’s FUUUUN. pout and it doesn’t hurt me! So why God? WHY???, we should say; All right. This is clearly a test of my character and I will rise above it. If you say I cannot have sex outside marriage then I will obey you. If you say I cannot smoke marijuana then I will obey. If you say I cannot eat meat on Fridays then I will do as you say because you are the authority and I know you have my best interest at heart.

Don’t you think?

 

[bingbang]

Exactly. And when you seek that pleasurable feeling above obeying the law it is no different then seeking your own pleasure in sex, seeking your own pleasure in life. You say you do not smoke anymore because the Church has forbidden it, good for you. There are others who seek their own pleasure above the law of the Church and the land… bad for them. :\

When God or Church asks strange things of us instead of saying; BUT it’s FUUUUN. pout and it doesn’t hurt me! So why God? WHY???, we should say; All right. This is clearly a test of my character and I will rise above it. If you say I cannot have sex outside marriage then I will obey you. If you say I cannot smoke marijuana then I will obey. If you say I cannot eat meat on Fridays then I will do as you say because you are the authority and I know you have my best interest at heart.

Don’t you think?

I don’t accept the teachings of the church without question. If my conscience contradicts church teaching, I am going to go with my conscience. But then again I don’t really buy into the Catholic Church being the one true church.

 

[nickybr38]

I don’t accept the teachings of the church without question. If my conscience contradicts church teaching, I am going to go with my conscience. But then again I don’t really buy into the Catholic Church being the one true church.

Sorry, I must have mixed you up with someone else.

Are you a believer? Do you feel your conscience is your own god and can direct you on the right path? Is your conscience something supernatural or something changed by your upbringing?

I don’t trust myself, even my conscience, because my conscience is a product of my upbringing. I seek the direction of the authorities that God has put on this earth to direct me, and the Catholic Church is the only Church that has shown any true authority. In my opinion.

 

[bingbang]

Sorry, I must have mixed you up with someone else.

Are you a believer? Do you feel your conscience is your own god and can direct you on the right path? Is your conscience something supernatural or something changed by your upbringing?

I don’t trust myself, even my conscience, because my conscience is a product of my upbringing. I seek the direction of the authorities that God has put on this earth to direct me, and the Catholic Church is the only Church that has shown any true authority. In my opinion.

I think the Catholic Church has been wrong in the past and there is no proof that it is not wrong in the present. I believe that I have a level head and believe that the greatest two commandments are all we need when it comes to morality. Love God and love your neighbor. That is what is important. Treat others the way you want to be treated. I believe that is something doesn’t break this rule, than it probably isn’t wrong.

If the Catholic Church had a spotless record, then maybe I would believe it to be the one true authority, but the crusades, inquisition, etc have shown that the church is not free from error so why should I believe it is free from error now?

 

[nickybr38]

I think the Catholic Church has been wrong in the past and there is no proof that it is not wrong in the present. I believe that I have a level head and believe that the greatest two commandments are all we need when it comes to morality. Love God and love your neighbor. That is what is important. Treat others the way you want to be treated. I believe that is something doesn’t break this rule, than it probably isn’t wrong.

If the Catholic Church had a spotless record, then maybe I would believe it to be the one true authority, but the crusades, inquisition, etc have shown that the church is not free from error so why should I believe it is free from error now?

Did the CHURCH error? Or did members OF the Church error?

 

[bingbang]

Did the CHURCH error? Or did members OF the Church error?

The church is made up of its members. The crusades were started by the Pope Urban II I believe. So he supported it. The church was behind the crusades. Also, wasn’t the inquisition supported by the pope as well? And if it wasn’t, did the pope speak out about the inquisition?

 

[Monte_RCMS]

List all the chemicals found in marijuana.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

OK, what if I grow my own weed or buy it off my friend that grew it? Right from the plant into my lungs…is it OK then?

No. Already answered before. The Fifth Commandment still applies. What does your friend do, sell it to others as well? Minors? Sell it to people who then take it to countries where it is still illegal? Don’t know? Don’t care? Maybe those people would like to take over your friend’s business by arranging an unfortunate accident.

Those who deal in illegal substances tend to stay illegal because they are enslaved to Satan’s evil. Even if they have life-changing conversion and accept Turth and “go legit” there is the wreckage left behind.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

The church is made up of its members. The crusades were started by the Pope Urban II I believe. So he supported it. The church was behind the crusades. Also, wasn’t the inquisition supported by the pope as well? And if it wasn’t, did the pope speak out about the inquisition?

The Catholic Church, created by God is infallible. The Catholic Church contains people who are fallible (yes, even the Pope). However, the Pope, when Truth is revealed, can speak infallibly.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

I think the Catholic Church has been wrong in the past and there is no proof that it is not wrong in the present. I believe that I have a level head and believe that the greatest two commandments are all we need when it comes to morality. Love God and love your neighbor. That is what is important. Treat others the way you want to be treated. I believe that is something doesn’t break this rule, than it probably isn’t wrong.

If the Catholic Church had a spotless record, then maybe I would believe it to be the one true authority, but the crusades, inquisition, etc have shown that the church is not free from error so why should I believe it is free from error now?

People are fallible. That is why there is a church. The church as run by its members, can also be fallible. However, The Catholic Church as created by God is infallible. Any perceived error is the fault of people – not God. God knows Catholic Chuch members make mistakes – like everyone else.

If one loves God with all their heart, then they will adhere to and live His Commandments – all of them. All the Commandments point back to the first one. Only the misuse of Free Will permits one to “pick and choose”

No church run by people will have a spotless record. Take any church run by people and give it two thousand years and there will be errors and scandals. Two thousand years of human history makes it easy for detractors and The Decieved to “take shots” and ridicule.
Who ridicules God’s church?

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

I don’t accept the teachings of the church without question. If my conscience contradicts church teaching, I am going to go with my conscience. But then again I don’t really buy into the Catholic Church being the one true church.

One doesn’t “buy” The Catholic Church it is revealed and offered as if in a gift. One can accept the Gift or refuse it.

 

[Makarios]

How about medical marijuana?

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

If one isn’t doing something immoral in itself (like wreckless driving or getting drunk) then IMHO it is moral to break the law if you are capable of taking the risk of the civil penalties. This is why one may morally drive drive 70 mph on a road with a speed limit of 65 and risk getting a ticket if it’s safe to drive at that speed in that situation. On the other hand, if one has children who are dependent on him, one may not risk being put in jail (since doing so would be risking the welfare of the children), even for something that is not immoral in itself (unless it is a double effect situation).

The legitimate authority has set the speed limit. The legitimate authority also defines reckless driving and getting drunk. If one has been informed by the legitimate authority, knowingly weighing the civil penalties versus morality is placing the moral and civic judgment in one’s own hands. The situation where children are involved does not exclude the individual. If the child’s welfare is at risk in this situation, so is the individual’s. We have no moral authority to needlessly exceed speed limits. Is exceeding the speed limit morally good or morally neutral? Have legitimate means to raise the speed limit been attempted? If so, why wasn’t it approved? If not approved with no moral ground (keep in mind that speeding itself can damage roads), that’s the beginning of “civil disobedience” to correct something that is inherently wrong.

Moral relativism is a serious issue and so-called “changing with the times” have led to the widely accepted permission of abortion, contraceptives, same-sex “marriage”, liturgical abuses and various evils that plague the world today.

 

[cathdoki]

l.

So is making a turn across a double line, or going 55 in a 50 mph zone. Most (if not all) people would consider none of those things sinful. So I don’t understand the reasoning that just because something is illegal, it is automatically sinful.

Another objection - different things are illegal in different continents, countries, states, even cities! So if someone were to smoke pot in Amsterdam, would it all-of-a-sudden not be sinful just because there it is legal? Doesn’t make sense.

Now this to me seems like a better response. But how would you respond to someone who said that they could smoke just a little to the point where they felt good, but did not lose consciousness? This would be the equivalent of someone getting “buzzed” by drinking alcohol - which is not a sin.

Ah, his argument is flawed. Quite seriously. By the same token, abortion is not sinful since it’s legal.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

How about medical marijuana?

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a wonderful document that can provide many answers to moral questions. Even specific ones:

2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.

The first sentence: The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life.

Note that the sentence doesn’t state illegal drugs, recreational drugs, designer drugs, home-brew drugs, street drugs, legal drugs. Drugs.

The second sentence: Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.

This doesn’t mean “I need therapy (wink, wink)”. If the therapeutic grounds are misrepresented then then one has broken the Eighth Commandment (bearing false witness) as well as civil law (if applicable). Strictly therapeutic grounds

The third sentence: Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices.

The third sentence sates “drugs”. Again, not illegal, street, etc., drugs. Drugs That means one cannot produce AND distribute their own clandestine (secret, without legitimate authority) “aspirin” or aspirin. scandalous practices

The fourth sentence: They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.

The fourth sentence should not need explanation. If one is deceived that it’s OK or don’t-know-what-to think to have direct co-operation in evil and encourage practices gravely contrary to the moral law, then discuss the subject (including what evil, gravely and moral law mean) with an ordained priest or bishop. Or, look up the subjects in the Catechism, the subjects are there!