Morality of Legalizing Drugs

[AlwaysCurious]

How do you think this issue should factor into a discerning Catholic’s “voting consciousness”?

Allow me to come clean here: I really like Ron Paul. I can get on board with much of what he says, and I am sick of the polished, drift-along-with-the-polls establishment candidates. And since it would probably be a miracle if he won the primary, this may be a moot point.

Still, I keep running this issue through my mind. Paul had a really funny episode in one debate (I think this past May) in which he made fun of the commentator for implying that legalizing heroin would result in everyone using heroin. I’m guessing the only people who would use it are the ones who would have used it when it was illegal anyway. It seems to me that the War on Drugs is every bit the failure that Prohibition was. Maybe we could just tax it to high heaven and end the reign of the cartels.

But, in legalizing drugs, would we be sending the message that using drugs is morally acceptable?

 

[Catholic90]

Maybe we could just tax it to high heaven and end the reign of the cartels.

But, in legalizing drugs, would we be sending the message that using drugs is morally acceptable?

I’ve often debated this with myself as well. By putting high taxes on the stuff, the government could certainly raise some money.

Tobacco and Alcohol are legal, but highly taxed. I feel they could be taxed even more than they are, simply because they are not required for anyone to ingest and are not necessary for a body’s survival.

In my own family, I saw first hand the destruction alcohol can cause (it was the cause of DH’s death and ran us far into debt), and we also saw the damage tobacco can cause (MIL had a quadruple bypass years ago and quit her 3 pack a day smoking habit over night).

So I wonder if they legalized the hard stuff, then set up shops where users could go to buy and use it, but tax it very highly and make sure the facilities are safe, clean, etc…would that help? I don’t know.

Drugs are very destructive, legal or illegal, so it is a problem.

Prohibition on alcohol did not work, so maybe legalize it, but then tax it at 100%.

But what do I know?

 

[JRKH]

Saying that the only ones who would use heroin are the ones who use it anyway is, frankly, naive. the same mistake was made when Abortion was made legal.

That said, the legalization of drugs is a very complex issue. Currently, certain drugs are legal OTC, certain drugs are legal but controlled, and certain drugs are completely illegal. Determining just how to adjust the legal aspects of drug manufacture, distribution and use is far more complex than simply making “illegal drugs” legal.
For instance, if heroin is “legal” is it then “controlled” by the FDA? Or is the idea that it should simply be legal and uncontrolled?
If drugs currently illegal are legalized without control, what about currently legal but controlled drugs?

These are all questions from the legal standpoint. It’s much simpler from the moral standpoint…

Whether legal or not, the misuse of drugs is immoral.

Peace
James

 

[The_Joe]

Drugs are very destructive, legal or illegal, so it is a problem.

:

Humanism is more destructive then drugs. Instead of raising taxes and promoting more irresponsible spending, the government should get out of the way of small business as well as stop purposely dumbing down the education system. However, if they did this then there would be no way for false profits to get elected and people would realize that they can actually do things for themselves. Plus, an educated individual will probably head to church when problems do arise instead of relying on a socialist government program.

As a cigarette smoking pothead, I’m all for keeping these things illegal. Our populace is way to fat and dumb to handle these things responsibly. I may be a smoker, but I also an avid runner.

 

[Inthemountains]

This is baloney. He is not a racist. He has answered these attacks numerous times.

 

[philial]

There is a middle way with the drugs issue. It can be possible to de-criminalize it’s possession ( for personal use), but enforce with rigor the laws for possession (with intent to supply). Set reasonable limits of what amount constitutes ‘personal use’, so there can be no doubting the intent to supply charge (what those limits would be would differ from drug to drug, but I’m sure a working list can be drawn up by experienced bodies).

 

[philial]

As an avid ciggie user, whilst not disagreeing with your basic thrust, feel that I can justify my habit socially, in that I have always worked, can drive safely after smoking, look after my children, etc etc. However, I have yet to meet anyone who drinks alcohol for breakfast who is able then to drive to work safely. And regular heroin use has its downfalls as well…

 

[JRKH]

There is a middle way with the drugs issue. It can be possible to de-criminalize it’s possession ( for personal use), but enforce with rigor the laws for possession (with intent to supply). Set reasonable limits of what amount constitutes ‘personal use’, so there can be no doubting the intent to supply charge (what those limits would be would differ from drug to drug, but I’m sure a working list can be drawn up by experienced bodies).

Since this thread is about the “morality” of legalizing drugs, there is a moral issue that arises from your proposal. Since most “users” will need to get from a “supplier” what would be the morality of supporting an illegal practice (selling certain drugs)?

Now granted a simple drug like pot can be grown by just about anybody and the law could stipulate a set amount under cultivation, but other drugs require processing and said processing can be quite dangerous. (Meth labs blowing up…)

So the “decriminalizing possession” is not as easy as it might seem at first glance from either the legal standpoint (the manufacture issue) or the Moral standpoint (support of an illegal enterprise.

Peace
James

 

[philial]

De-criminalisation is not the same as legalisation. It’s simply a mechanism so more resources can be put into closing down supply, rather than *****-footing about with the bits and pieces a user might have. I just dont see any connection with encouraging meth labs, blown up or otherwise, as a cosequence of de-criminalisation of possession (personal use) when it remains illegal to supply.

Meth labs blowing up sounds O.K. to me…

 

[JRKH]

De-criminalisation is not the same as legalisation. It’s simply a mechanism so more resources can be put into closing down supply, rather than *****-footing about with the bits and pieces a user might have. I just dont see any connection with encouraging meth labs, blown up or otherwise, as a cosequence of de-criminalisation of possession (personal use) when it remains illegal to supply.

Meth labs blowing up sounds O.K. to me…

But you are not addressing the moral issue that I mentioned.

Is it moral to support an illegal activity (selling drugs) even if the possession of that drug is NOT illegal??

Peace
James

 

[philial]

The selling of the drug (possesion with intent to supply) remains illegal - how can that be supporting it?

 

[JRKH]

The selling of the drug (possesion with intent to supply) remains illegal - how can that be supporting it?

OK - let me clarify…

The moral question is this, Is it moral for the user to purchase from the seller when that purchase supports an illegal activity (selling drugs)?

Does that help clarify?

 

[WarriorSheep]

But, in legalizing drugs, would we be sending the message that using drugs is morally acceptable?

It probably will send that message to some people. If such a measure were passed though, by Paul or a similarly minded movement, the very vocal motivation is not to legalize drugs because their use is morally acceptable, it is for a much more complicated set of reasons, that (in their view) override the immorality of their use. So I don’t think this particular point should be of much concern, because it doesn’t reflect the truth.

If you are a voter, I’d say you must weight whatever set of reasons you have for the legalization of drugs against the immorality of their use. If this leads you to believe that legalizing drugs is a lesser evil than keeping them illegal, your conscious should be fine.

 

[WarriorSheep]

Saying that the only ones who would use heroin are the ones who use it anyway is, frankly, naive. the same mistake was made when Abortion was made legal.

This comparison is fair to draw your stated point.

I don’t think you are going here, but too many people would read this and quickly draw the conclusion that since abortion should be illegal to minimize abortions, drugs should be illegal to minimize drug use, as if its all that simple. The morality of the two are very different though. Abortion directly infringes on others’ rights (the right of the child to live), but drug misuse doesn’t necessarily infringe on others’ rights, and often doesn’t at all. The morality of allowing others to have abortions is thus very different from whether or not you should let someone choose to abuse drugs. Since the morality of legalizing each is different, the actual choice of how to write the laws had better be thought about differently too.

 

[philial]

OK - let me clarify…

The moral question is this, Is it moral for the user to purchase from the seller when that purchase supports an illegal activity (selling drugs)?

Does that help clarify?

Basically, No! However…(there’s often a ‘however’)… it is well to remember that many drugs are low-count addictive. Crack & heroin has cause addiction after just a few hits. Being unwise to immorally use drugs is one thing, but for an addict, purchasing, however illegal or (objectively) immoral, can be a necessity akin to purchasing medication.

BTW, I’m not justifying drug useage here, just trying to be realistic abut addiction & human nature.

 

[Inthemountains]

There is far more harm done from the “war on drugs” than from drugs themselves. The immorality I see here stems from our enforcement actions. Our so called “war” has wreaked havoc internationally in, for example, in Mexico, Columbia and Afghanistan. The “war” also fuels profits for our enemies in another “war” that we are fighting- the war against terrorism. The war on drugs has also laid waste to our inner cities which necessitates another war, the “war on poverty”. It goes on and on. As I see it the reason the government engages in the war on drugs is not because our overlords are concerned about our well being, but because war is the health of the state.