H
hu324b
Guest
Being sober is best if you can handle it - moderation - famous last words before a fall.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
S
Secant
Guest
What no one seems to want to say in these discussions is that even minimal use of marijuana dampens the desire (drive, ambition, pick your term) to act. This means that even those who use just a little medical marijuana have a lessened desire to work, go to church, get stuff done around the house, etc. Does this necessarily mean that they do not function - no. But this is pretty much going to put marijuana in a category of at least near occasion of sin for everyone (40% chance that you would neglect a responsibility). Without sufficient reason (I am not qualified to determine if the medicinal use is sufficient reason), marijuana would need to be avoided.
As a side note, legalization of marijuana in a nearby state just killed a kid at school recently near my home due to a belief that he could fly. We are seeing a great increase in children getting marijuana, and the drug dealers are still just as, if not more, present when dealing marijuana due to the legalization.
As a side note, legalization of marijuana in a nearby state just killed a kid at school recently near my home due to a belief that he could fly. We are seeing a great increase in children getting marijuana, and the drug dealers are still just as, if not more, present when dealing marijuana due to the legalization.
B
Boy_Wonder
Guest
It didn’t work the last time we tried it. What makes you think it will work now?So my question is: should alcohol be forbidden?
B
Boy_Wonder
Guest
Moderation doesn’t work with people who have an addictive personality. I drank alcoholically for 30+ years. I was never able to take one or two drinks. I had to “finish the job” each time I picked up. Moderate consumption of alcohol or other intoxicants is impossible for some people. For me and other like me, abstinence is the only path.ANY drug can be used in moderation…I know quite a few people who use Heroin in moderation, they get up, use a small amount, then go to work/school, and are fully able to maintain their days and lives with no problems. The key word is moderation.
4
4love2God
Guest
Secant spouts the usual Fallacies about the effects of Pot on a particular person** : “What no one seems to want to say in these discussions is that even minimal use of marijuana dampens the desire (drive, ambition, pick your term) to act. This means that even those who use just a little medical marijuana have a lessened desire to work, go to church, get stuff done around the house, etc.”**
This is NOT True.
Instead, this is a Stereotype of “THE Average Person” who smokes Marijuana.
Some people lose Drive and Ambition, especially for many of the Recreational Users (which, is THE Feeling they wish to be experiencing anyway) . . . A little Vacation from Stress.
So, IF the ENTIRE Population felt this way, when under its influence, you would be Right.
But, MANY Medicinal Pot Users have much MORE Drive to do things, and more Ambition to get things done.
If you take an average AIDS sufferer, this is person who has had most of his Life dampened.
Food is not even exciting . . . to think about, OR (especially) to eat.
Many of these people will (one day) start suffering from AIDS Wasting … i.e., wasting away pounds, and desire.
Enter some THC into their system, the Depression lifts a little, and Food looks like a Friend they want to invite to a Meal, instead an Enemy (that MUST be eaten, because it is The Law).
Take a person with severe Arthritis.
They’ve tried all of the Pain Pills (which can help you feel Pain-free, but doesn’t help you feel like doing anything).
They’ve taken all of the anti-Arthritis Drugs, which have side effects, and only slow down the progression of the Disease.
One of these people ingests some THC.
The Pain lessens, the swelling can go down.
And, the THC can also provide the Stimulus to go out into the World, even it’s only JUST enough to smell a few Roses.
I know a Couple in their late 70s, and they use their Medicinal Pot to feel good enough to go to Daily Mass, and the Park, and other places they would NOT have gone without their potent Pain Relief, and their Stimulation to “Use” that pain relief.
As a side-Benefit, when used before Church, they get much more INTO THE SERVICE (and, I think that God WANTS us to feel more excited in Church).
And, many old people take a few Puffs, so that they can Sleep well.
The Pain quiets down, their Mind quiets down, and ZZZ ZZZ.
Proper Sleep is important (especially when older) to feel Alive, and to be able to Focus their Attention.
I could go on-and-on with how different people, who have different Conditions, use Pot to Live Life again.
They had been Unable to get out there, AND didn’t have the ability to Enjoy anything when they got there.
And, there are many Doctors and Lawyers out there who smoke Pot.
It helps relieve their Stress, so they can put in all of those 12-hour days.
So, SOME People may end-up Worse-off when using Pot.
But, every other Pot smoker is Better-off because of their Medicine of choice.
This is NOT True.
Instead, this is a Stereotype of “THE Average Person” who smokes Marijuana.
Some people lose Drive and Ambition, especially for many of the Recreational Users (which, is THE Feeling they wish to be experiencing anyway) . . . A little Vacation from Stress.
So, IF the ENTIRE Population felt this way, when under its influence, you would be Right.
But, MANY Medicinal Pot Users have much MORE Drive to do things, and more Ambition to get things done.
If you take an average AIDS sufferer, this is person who has had most of his Life dampened.
Food is not even exciting . . . to think about, OR (especially) to eat.
Many of these people will (one day) start suffering from AIDS Wasting … i.e., wasting away pounds, and desire.
Enter some THC into their system, the Depression lifts a little, and Food looks like a Friend they want to invite to a Meal, instead an Enemy (that MUST be eaten, because it is The Law).
Take a person with severe Arthritis.
They’ve tried all of the Pain Pills (which can help you feel Pain-free, but doesn’t help you feel like doing anything).
They’ve taken all of the anti-Arthritis Drugs, which have side effects, and only slow down the progression of the Disease.
One of these people ingests some THC.
The Pain lessens, the swelling can go down.
And, the THC can also provide the Stimulus to go out into the World, even it’s only JUST enough to smell a few Roses.
I know a Couple in their late 70s, and they use their Medicinal Pot to feel good enough to go to Daily Mass, and the Park, and other places they would NOT have gone without their potent Pain Relief, and their Stimulation to “Use” that pain relief.
As a side-Benefit, when used before Church, they get much more INTO THE SERVICE (and, I think that God WANTS us to feel more excited in Church).
And, many old people take a few Puffs, so that they can Sleep well.
The Pain quiets down, their Mind quiets down, and ZZZ ZZZ.
Proper Sleep is important (especially when older) to feel Alive, and to be able to Focus their Attention.
I could go on-and-on with how different people, who have different Conditions, use Pot to Live Life again.
They had been Unable to get out there, AND didn’t have the ability to Enjoy anything when they got there.
And, there are many Doctors and Lawyers out there who smoke Pot.
It helps relieve their Stress, so they can put in all of those 12-hour days.
So, SOME People may end-up Worse-off when using Pot.
But, every other Pot smoker is Better-off because of their Medicine of choice.
S
Secant
Guest
My apologies, 4love2God, my post should have said, any use of even a minimal amount of medical marijuana causes dampens the desire to act, as compared to a healthy, non-medicated state. I occasionally get lazy with the assumptions in my statements.
As for the people who have been able to live better on marijuana, I believe that was covered in the second half of my post, about near occasion of sin. I stated that sufficient reason was required for marijuana. Many people may find they have sufficient reason, but that is something they need to discern.
I will only say that stress release seems to me not to be a good reason. As a previous refinery engineer (now Mom), if you have to take pot for 7-16s, much less 7-12s (though to be truthful, I tried really hard to go home at 14), you need a new job. Doctors and lawyers don’t have stress comparatively. One bad judgement on their part kills or changes the lives of a few people, one bad judgement on mine kills or changes the lives of up to thousands. I, and others like me, had final say on things that make the Hindenburg look like a gas stove. We are routinely drug tested and cannot have alcohol in our system, and most tobacco is prohibited too because the possibility of impaired judgement is considered more important than stress. Doctors should be under the same requirements.
As for the answer to the original question, again, I assumed I was clear, but as I did not make my earlier assumption clear, alcohol should not be forbidden because it is a near occasion to sin for less people, but I believe that there should be a certain amount of restriction on its use for certain people, depending on near occasion to sin.
As a further note, the restrictions on alcohol should not be federal, but local. Our local restrictions do pretty well with systematic abusers and kids. Our local restrictions on marijuana have never saved the kids, and the relaxing of such strictures on adults has made kids use and fatalities sky-rocket.
As for the people who have been able to live better on marijuana, I believe that was covered in the second half of my post, about near occasion of sin. I stated that sufficient reason was required for marijuana. Many people may find they have sufficient reason, but that is something they need to discern.
I will only say that stress release seems to me not to be a good reason. As a previous refinery engineer (now Mom), if you have to take pot for 7-16s, much less 7-12s (though to be truthful, I tried really hard to go home at 14), you need a new job. Doctors and lawyers don’t have stress comparatively. One bad judgement on their part kills or changes the lives of a few people, one bad judgement on mine kills or changes the lives of up to thousands. I, and others like me, had final say on things that make the Hindenburg look like a gas stove. We are routinely drug tested and cannot have alcohol in our system, and most tobacco is prohibited too because the possibility of impaired judgement is considered more important than stress. Doctors should be under the same requirements.
As for the answer to the original question, again, I assumed I was clear, but as I did not make my earlier assumption clear, alcohol should not be forbidden because it is a near occasion to sin for less people, but I believe that there should be a certain amount of restriction on its use for certain people, depending on near occasion to sin.
As a further note, the restrictions on alcohol should not be federal, but local. Our local restrictions do pretty well with systematic abusers and kids. Our local restrictions on marijuana have never saved the kids, and the relaxing of such strictures on adults has made kids use and fatalities sky-rocket.
S
SecretCatholic
Guest
I don’t see why any substance that can be used in moderation should be banned. I don’t see any inherent evil in alcohol nor in cannabis. I would think that sin would depend upon the intention and use of the substance. Of course, even over-eating healthy food is a sin, even though neither eating nor food is sinful.
The “war on drugs” seems to have to do more with economic and political control than any real concern for citizens.
I am not a fan of banning anything unless it presents some kind of enormous imminent risk to others. Adults should be able to decide what they consume. If they become a risk to themselves or to others, than they can be restrained and helped in the most humane way possible.
These puritan thoughts on banning this or that do not sit well with me. I do not pretend to know the intimate thoughts of God, but it seems to me that he gave us the free will to choose- even to sin, and he does not restrain our wills. So it seems to follow that we should have a system where we have the maximum freedom to choose as we wish without violating others rights to life and liberty.
I find drug testing to be an affront to human privacy and dignity. If you’re incompetent on the job, you should be reprimanded, sent home, or fired. But what you have in your body and your fluids are your own business and shouldn’t be violated with the exception of a very special circumstance, such as being a recovering addict or being on probation, etc. How many of us accept these invasions, especially on a regular basis, is beyond me.
This is how you treat a criminal or an addict, not your average employee or citizen. Of course, I subscribe to this quaint notion of “innocent unless proven guilty” and the idea that one’s body should not be the subject of search, touching or extraction of fluids or tissues to any employer, no matter how “important” one’s work is.
That’s not to say that everybody should do whatever they want, or that there’s no room to discuss whether there should be a porn store near the school yard, but that we shouldn’t try to take away people’s ability to sin and make their choices for them. If we don’t take a relatively “hands off” approach to personal choices (legally, not necessarily socially) then what type of government are we leaning towards? Clearly, it would have to be a totalitarian-type system where anything that COULD POSSIBLY be abused is banned. That would be horrible and in my view, not what God would want for us.
The “war on drugs” seems to have to do more with economic and political control than any real concern for citizens.
I am not a fan of banning anything unless it presents some kind of enormous imminent risk to others. Adults should be able to decide what they consume. If they become a risk to themselves or to others, than they can be restrained and helped in the most humane way possible.
These puritan thoughts on banning this or that do not sit well with me. I do not pretend to know the intimate thoughts of God, but it seems to me that he gave us the free will to choose- even to sin, and he does not restrain our wills. So it seems to follow that we should have a system where we have the maximum freedom to choose as we wish without violating others rights to life and liberty.
I find drug testing to be an affront to human privacy and dignity. If you’re incompetent on the job, you should be reprimanded, sent home, or fired. But what you have in your body and your fluids are your own business and shouldn’t be violated with the exception of a very special circumstance, such as being a recovering addict or being on probation, etc. How many of us accept these invasions, especially on a regular basis, is beyond me.
This is how you treat a criminal or an addict, not your average employee or citizen. Of course, I subscribe to this quaint notion of “innocent unless proven guilty” and the idea that one’s body should not be the subject of search, touching or extraction of fluids or tissues to any employer, no matter how “important” one’s work is.
That’s not to say that everybody should do whatever they want, or that there’s no room to discuss whether there should be a porn store near the school yard, but that we shouldn’t try to take away people’s ability to sin and make their choices for them. If we don’t take a relatively “hands off” approach to personal choices (legally, not necessarily socially) then what type of government are we leaning towards? Clearly, it would have to be a totalitarian-type system where anything that COULD POSSIBLY be abused is banned. That would be horrible and in my view, not what God would want for us.
M
mikekle
Guest
You should look at the statistics concerning young people that die from alcohol use/abuse, either in DUIs, or drinking too much, or something happening due to them drinking. These numbers trump ALL illegal drug deaths…still, no one has suggested banning it, or even creating new laws regarding its sale, distribution, use!!! That is what amazes me…If a state sees a slight uptick in street drug crimes or death, they rush out to create new laws to combat it, but alcohol seems to get a free pass year after year, tobacco is the same too, that kills and damages so many young people, the numbers are staggering, but again…no new laws or even a suggestion to ban it…???What no one seems to want to say in these discussions is that even minimal use of marijuana dampens the desire (drive, ambition, pick your term) to act. This means that even those who use just a little medical marijuana have a lessened desire to work, go to church, get stuff done around the house, etc. Does this necessarily mean that they do not function - no. But this is pretty much going to put marijuana in a category of at least near occasion of sin for everyone (40% chance that you would neglect a responsibility). Without sufficient reason (I am not qualified to determine if the medicinal use is sufficient reason), marijuana would need to be avoided.
As a side note, legalization of marijuana in a nearby state just killed a kid at school recently near my home due to a belief that he could fly. We are seeing a great increase in children getting marijuana, and the drug dealers are still just as, if not more, present when dealing marijuana due to the legalization.
It really looks like the big alcohol and tobacco companies have a solid lock on their market, I think they are the main reason why no new laws are ever created for these 2 things, plus, too much tax revenue coming in.
If they truly cared about public health and safety, as they claim they do whenever they talk about street drug laws and/or abuse, then they would be banning alcohol and tobacco tomorrow, but they dont, its only a tactic to confuse the public.
G
GoldenLight
Guest
Wasn’t the first recorded miracle of Jesus Christ was changing water into wine, for people to drink ?Today I watched a podcast made by a brazilian priest and he was talking about the legalization of marijuana. He pointed out that this shouldnt happen because the use of it causes loss of conscious, diminishing the human dignity. This made me think: alcohol also does this. So my question is: should alcohol be forbidden?
Jesus Christ drank wine, not only at the Passover observance but stated at other times too.
R
RC_Sojourner
Guest
The government is different than the Church.ANY drug can be used in moderation…I know quite a few people who use Heroin in moderation, they get up, use a small amount, then go to work/school, and are fully able to maintain their days and lives with no problems. The key word is moderation.
No matter what the drug happens to be, someone can choose whether to abuse it or use in moderation, alcohol, Heroin, pot, etc. Why would this kind of usage be looked at differently, its the exact same thing…whats the difference in someone choosing to have one glass of wine with a nice dinner and the person who chooses to use a small amount of another drug that only comparably effects them (same as the person who has one glass of wine at dinner)
I think its very strange that in our world, they seem to worry about whether a substance CAN be abused, and they rush to create new laws to combat it, yet alcohol, tobacco…CAN be abused with lethal results and no one is rushing to enact prohibition again…?? Seems like there is a double standard.
This whole post that I’m quoting responded to the simple claim that drug use is SIN. SIN!
Nothing about government going after anyone. Its about it being immoral. … Even if drugs are legalized, they will still be immoral, they will still be sinful!
That is what the Catholic Church says, that is what it will always say. The Catholic Church contains the fullness of truth, and good Catholics will never accept societies redefinition of sins as acceptable.
Sin does not change. There are many sins, but can you name me one that the Church used to denounce, and now no longer denounces?
That’s right, you can’t.
A
adawgj
Guest
Tried and failed. It’s too difficult to enforce and if it did come back expect organized crime and alcohol consuming to go up.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.