Legalized marijuana

[CopticChristian]

In which case State Law trumps Federal Law. So who has the higher trump card? as far as coordination between States and the Fed, there’s less then you’d expect unless driven by the media. In the case of gun control, there have been State Law Enforcement Agencies that have publicly stated they would not enforce laws they deemed unconstitutional. As Catholics, one we seem to support and one we don’t. I believe the basis of this question should be debated from a moral standpoint and not a legal one.

What you are saying is that State Law trumps Federal Law, not so. Federal law is the minimum and the states are more stringent. In another State that is less stringent then Federal law would be the minimum and has nothing to do with trumping anything.

In the case of abortion, many States have circumvented the Roe v. Wade decision by banning clinics that perform abortions.

This is true. Making it difficult does not obviate Federal Law. Federal Law prevails. Making it easier to comply with Federal Law and making it difficult to comply with Federal Law does not negate Federal Law.

Does the DEA control guns? Does the DEA classify guns as controlled or not?

 

[R1ch4rd]

What you are saying is that State Law trumps Federal Law, not so. Federal law is the minimum and the states are more stringent. In another State that is less stringent then Federal law would be the minimum and has nothing to do with trumping anything.

The Constitution and federal law are the supreme law of the land, thus preempting conflicting state and territorial laws in the fifty U.S. states and in the territories.[3] However, the scope of federal preemption is limited, because the scope of federal power is itself rather limited. In the unique dual-sovereign[4] system of American federalism (actually tripartite[5] because of the presence of Indian reservations), states are the plenary sovereigns, while the federal sovereign possesses only the limited supreme authority enumerated in the Constitution.[6] Indeed, states may grant their citizens broader rights than the federal Constitution as long as they do not infringe on any federal constitutional rights.[7][8] Thus, most U.S. law (especially the actual “living law” of contract, tort, property, criminal, and family law experienced by the majority of citizens on a day-to-day basis) consists primarily of state law, which can and does vary greatly from one state to the next.[9][10]

Bolding mine
Now all we have to do is find where in The Constitution pot is deemed illegal.Then there’s the question of the Indian Reservations who enforce their own laws.

 

[LaSainte]

So, what you are saying is that there is a state law that is outdated and therefore you don’t need to follow it. Is there a Federal Law concerning wire cutters? If not then it is up to you to decide what to do about wire cutters because if you get picked up and charged State law prevails as there is no Federal law.

What I am asking is whether or not it is ever ok to disobey a law that the government (state or local) has no intention of enforcing if the action in itself is not intrinsically immoral.

 

[R1ch4rd]

Does the DEA control guns? Does the DEA classify guns as controlled or not?

This is irrelevant as both DEA and ATF are Federal Government agencies and each have laws and by your statement, Federal Law must be obeyed. Not sure who regulates wire cutters but I’m sure there’s a Government agency that does

Oh, except on an Indian Reservation. If I hunt ducks, I need a Federal duck stamp…unless I’m hunting by invitation on a reservation. Then, I don’t even need a license, State or Federal.

 

[JamesCaruso]

Well then, that depends on whether or not you need someone to have a law that declares something to be illegal to be immoral…

I believe that it is immoral the way the food industry propagagates Unhealthy Food down everyone’s throat…

I doubt many know how much Protein they need in a day
I doubt many know how much Carbohydrate they need in a day
I doubt many know why some fat is needed in the diet and why fat is necessary and how difficult it is to eliminate fat from the diet and that is why you don’t need to add fat to your diet…

I believe it is immoral that people are obese when they should be healthy…

and not one State or Federal law against French Fries…or Cinnabun…

A law against Cinnabon would be immoral!!!

 

[CopticChristian]

This is irrelevant as both DEA and ATF are Federal Government agencies and each have laws and by your statement, Federal Law must be obeyed. Not sure who regulates wire cutters but I’m sure there’s a Government agency that does

Oh, except on an Indian Reservation. If I hunt ducks, I need a Federal duck stamp…unless I’m hunting by invitation on a reservation. Then, I don’t even need a license, State or Federal.

Can you snort a gun and impair your mind?

 

[CopticChristian]

What I am asking is whether or not it is ever ok to disobey a law that the government (state or local) has no intention of enforcing if the action in itself is not intrinsically immoral.

What you are asking is to rationalize drug use.

 

[LaSainte]

What you are asking is to rationalize drug use.

No, drug use IS acceptable, with regards to alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, etc.
We have already established I think that marijuana is not objectionable in and of itself for the same reasons that make alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, sugar, etc. morally acceptable. At least, nobody here has given a sound theological or logical argument as to why those things are acceptable and marijuana is not.

Now, I am asking if it is ever ok to break an unenforced law if the thing itself is not immoral. My husband has a Leatherman Multi-tool that has wire-cutters on it that he takes everywhere. Is it immoral for him to carry it in Texas because of the old cattle-rustling law?

 

[JamesCaruso]

We have gone off in different directions. What I would like to know is:

1. 
   *]Is the use of marijuana immoral in and of itself without respect to the legal question?
   *]Is the use of marijuana illegal everywhere in the U.S. or just where state law has not approved its use?
   *]Where it is illegal, does violating the law make it rise to the level of being immoral?
   
   On item #3, I personally do not believe that every violation of lawful authority is necessarily immoral. We all know that certain cases of civil disobedience for a just cause or in protest of unjust laws or policies is not immoral. But I also do not believe that some other cases of disobedience rise to the level of immorality or confessable sins, such as whether you wear a seatbelt.

 

[R1ch4rd]

Can you snort a gun and impair your mind?

Irrelevant. We both know you can do more damage to your brain with a gun then with pot.Your wandering. Prove it’s immoral because you’ll not convince me it’s illegal when two states say otherwise and the Feds are wavering.

 

[R1ch4rd]

We have gone off in different directions. What I would like to know is:

1. 
   *]Is the use of marijuana immoral in and of itself without respect to the legal question?
   *]Is the use of marijuana illegal everywhere in the U.S. or just where state law has not approved its use?
   *]Where it is illegal, does violating the law make it rise to the level of being immoral?
   
   On item #3, I personally do not believe that every violation of lawful authority is necessarily immoral. We all know that certain cases of civil disobedience for a just cause or in protest of unjust laws or policies is not immoral. But I also do not believe that some other cases of disobedience rise to the level of immorality or confessable sins, such as whether you wear a seatbelt.

1. 
   
   Answer these questions and we can all go to bed.

 

[CopticChristian]

LaSainte:

No, drug use IS acceptable, with regards to alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, etc.

and they are legal.

We have already established I think that marijuana is not objectionable in and of itself for the same reasons that make alcohol, tobacco, caffeine, sugar, etc. morally acceptable. At least, nobody here has given a sound theological or logical argument as to why those things are acceptable and marijuana is not.

Now, I am asking if it is ever ok to break an unenforced law if the thing itself is not immoral. My husband has a Leatherman Multi-tool that has wire-cutters on it that he takes everywhere. Is it immoral for him to carry it in Texas because of the old cattle-rustling law?

Marijuana is illegal based on Federal Statute. Laws concerning wire cutters have nothing to do with drugs.

 

[CopticChristian]

We have gone off in different directions. What I would like to know is:

1. 
   *]Is the use of marijuana immoral in and of itself without respect to the legal question?
   *]Is the use of marijuana illegal everywhere in the U.S. or just where state law has not approved its use?
   *]Where it is illegal, does violating the law make it rise to the level of being immoral?
   
   On item #3, I personally do not believe that every violation of lawful authority is necessarily immoral. We all know that certain cases of civil disobedience for a just cause or in protest of unjust laws or policies is not immoral. But I also do not believe that some other cases of disobedience rise to the level of immorality or confessable sins, such as whether you wear a seatbelt.

1. 
   In November, Washington voters passed Initiative 502 with a 56% margin to make legal small amounts of marijuana-related products for adults. Similarly, Colorado passed Amendment 64 by 55% to allow the use, cultivation, manufacture and sale of small amounts.
   
   Now we are back to post 75
   
   ncregister.com/daily-news…r-not-to-puff/
   
   To Puff or Not to Puff
   
   NEWS ANALYSIS: Catholic experts weigh in on the morality of legalized marijuana.
   

   Yet federal law hasn’t changed.

   Marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug by the Controlled Substances Act, meaning its possession, use, purchase and sale is illegal because of its high potential for abuse.

   Observing the Law

   Even when laws are in conflict, Catholics are morally obligated to observe them. St. Thomas Aquinas said being a good citizen means recognizing the government’s authority and following just laws.

 

[CopticChristian]

Irrelevant. We both know you can do more damage to your brain with a gun then with pot.Your wandering. Prove it’s immoral because you’ll not convince me it’s illegal when two states say otherwise and the Feds are wavering.

You are correct gun laws have nothing to do with Drug laws and the legalization of marijuana. To bring in laws for anything but the topic at hand is not relevant except to rationalize its use.

Federal Law. Marijuana is illegal
Some states declare Marijuana legal
Some states have not declared Marijuana legal

Federal law is the law of the land until all states have laws that legalize marijuana and Federal law changes. End of story. Go to bed.

 

[JamesCaruso]

You are correct gun laws have nothing to do with Drug laws and the legalization of marijuana. To bring in laws for anything but the topic at hand is not relevant except to rationalize its use.

Federal Law. Marijuana is illegal
Some states declare Marijuana legal
Some states have not declared Marijuana legal

Federal law is the law of the land until all states have laws that legalize marijuana and Federal law changes. End of story. Go to bed.

It is bedtime, but none of the basic questions have been answered to my satisfaction, only broad statements that may or may not apply in a given circumstance. I’ll continue to wear my seatbelt, but if I don’t, I won’t tell it in confession either. I feel sure that the saints and doctors who said we must obey the laws of the state were not talking about laws of little consequence. I will still jaywalk from time to time, and do not feel I will have sinned. And if I don’t wear my helmet while bicycling in the park, I will not lose any sleep over it.

If I knew Marijuana was as dangerous as the Federal agencies portray it, I would say that it is immoral to use it. But if moderate use is as innocuous as many others say, I would neither believe it to be immoral to smoke nor immoral to break the Federal law, especially where the state has legalized it. Never having smoked, I have no idea where the truth lies. Some who have smoked came to bad ends, and it appears so from their misuse or overuse. Others have had no problem. If it can cause suspension of good judgment as with alcohol, then that level of use is immoral for sure. Whether “stoned” equates to “drunk” I don’t know, but if it does, getting stoned is immoral.

 

[CopticChristian]

It is bedtime, but none of the basic questions have been answered to my satisfaction, only broad statements that may or may not apply in a given circumstance. I’ll continue to wear my seatbelt, but if I don’t, I won’t tell it in confession either. I feel sure that the saints and doctors who said we must obey the laws of the state were not talking about laws of little consequence. I will still jaywalk from time to time, and do not feel I will have sinned. And if I don’t wear my helmet while bicycling in the park, I will not lose any sleep over it.

If I knew Marijuana was as dangerous as the Federal agencies portray it, I would say that it is immoral to use it. But if moderate use is as innocuous as many others say, I would neither believe it to be immoral to smoke nor immoral to break the Federal law, especially where the state has legalized it. Never having smoked, I have no idea where the truth lies. Some who have smoked came to bad ends, and it appears so from their misuse or overuse. Others have had no problem. If it can cause suspension of good judgment as with alcohol, then that level of use is immoral for sure. Whether “stoned” equates to “drunk” I don’t know, but if it does, getting stoned is immoral.

It matters not whether the Feds are right on whether it is dangerous or not. They say it is illegal. The truth lies in the fact that everyone wants to ignore.

 

[JamesCaruso]

It matters not whether the Feds are right on whether it is dangerous or not. They say it is illegal. The truth lies in the fact that everyone wants to ignore.

I do not contest the illegality under Federal law. I question whether the subject matter of the illegality is significant enough to mean that violation of the law is immoral. I do not buy the contention that every violation of a law constitutes immoral behavior, as I explained before.

 

[CopticChristian]

I do not contest the illegality under Federal law. I question whether the subject matter of the illegality is significant enough to mean that violation of the law is immoral. I do not buy the contention that every violation of a law constitutes immoral behavior, as I explained before.

Then we are back to post 75 and post 133…

Yet federal law hasn’t changed.

Marijuana is classified as a Schedule I drug by the Controlled Substances Act, meaning its possession, use, purchase and sale is illegal because of its high potential for abuse.

Observing the Law

**Even when laws are in conflict, Catholics are morally obligated to observe them. **St. Thomas Aquinas said being a good citizen means recognizing the government’s authority and following just laws.

 

[Casey123]

Then we are back to post 75 and post 133…

Yet federal law hasn’t changed.

So the question is whether or not the federal law prohibiting marijuana is just. I certainly don’t believe it is, and I’m sure you’ll disagree with me, but I can tell you that the consequences in many cases of violating this law most definitely and certainly are.

18 year old kids becoming lifelong felons because they tried a joint one summer afternoon, permanently barred from federal money for school, business, current or future employment placed in jeopardy. Cancer patients facing legal charges for using marijuana to get relief from the effects of devastating chemotherapy. People that face up to 15 years in prison or longer for having tried even the smallest amount.

In an earlier post I stated the reasons why marijuana originally became, and remains, illegal. It has nothing to do with health nor science nor safety; it has to do with money. That said, even if we cannot agree that the law is just or not, then surely, we can agree that the repercussions for people that are caught using marijuana in many instances is like fining someone $10,000 for a $10 crime; something that is, of itself, unjust.

I use marijuana under my state’s medical laws, and have recreationally in the past, as well. So have 52% of Americans, as well as the past three presidents, including the incumbent. If I am indeed immoral for using marijuana, I’m certainly in good company.

 

[Fairwinds]

Then we shall ignore anything you say relevant to this statement and say…

Federal Law trumps State law.

giving yourself an thumbsup isn’t even an argument.

do you know what preemption is?