T
typewriterman1
Guest
Smoking always damages the smoker’s body and the bodies of those around him. There is no such thing as harmless moderate smoking.
- Status
T
typewriterman1
Guest
Indulging in sports or other dangerous activities does include a risk to one’s well being. Just as walking across the street includes a risk. Smoking is not the same kind of activity. Medicine and science have proven that smoking always harms one’s body. It’s not a risk it is a proven fact. To engage in an activity which will always result in the harm of One’s Own body and possibly the bodies of others, is certainly a disordered action.
E
edward_george1
Guest
Please show me a quotation from the Catechism or anywhere in the moral teaching of the Church that classes tobacco use as an intrinsically disordered act.
K
Kei
Guest
Yes, father, but the Catechism while perhaps in a sense authoritative as a summary or compendium of teaching can have little oversights here and there open to amendments, no?
And there are ways of partaking of tobacco that do not include smoking, like chewing tobacco. And cigarettes (if I recall correctly) have a lot more in them nowadays than just tobacco.
Not that I agree with the OP, but I do feel like it is an interesting question. We haven’t always known just how bad smoking (ie cigarettes) can be, though I think cigars may not be as bad.
And there are ways of partaking of tobacco that do not include smoking, like chewing tobacco. And cigarettes (if I recall correctly) have a lot more in them nowadays than just tobacco.
Not that I agree with the OP, but I do feel like it is an interesting question. We haven’t always known just how bad smoking (ie cigarettes) can be, though I think cigars may not be as bad.
Last edited:
E
edward_george1
Guest
I think if smoking were always and everywhere disordered, the Catechism would have already said that, and it wouldn’t need “amending.” It’s quite a leap to go from the implication that something can be done in moderation to saying that it is intrinsically disordered. Not only a leap, but a contradiction.
S
Socrates92
Guest
Why an entirely separate thread? That seems like a very inefficient way of discussing the same issue. Are you dodging the question because you don’t have an opinion, or because that opinion is logically inconsistent with your opinion on smoking?
K
kapp19
Guest
The body doesn’t exist for its own sake, you know… it exists for the whole person. Case in point, DNR orders are also “always bad for the body” but are perfectly acceptable in mainstream Catholic bioethics, given certain parameters. Physical penances can also mildly harm the body. Over time, this too can be deadly, and even without guilt. The example that comes to mind is St. Joseph Cafasso… but he also prayed for an early death and that nobody would remember him except to pray for him, so…
Last edited:
L
lwest
Guest
Then why did God create the tobacco plant?
po18guy
Well-known member
- Mod
- er
- a
- tion
Should you chain smoke? Well, duh! I quit smoking at age 7, so I guess that you could call me a non-smoker. I quit drinking in 1972. On my 10th anniversary with my hematologist in 2018, I had a glass of wine. Did the same in 2019. The Corona virus has interrupted my addiction, or I would have had a third glass this year.
Moderation.
T
typewriterman1
Guest
It has only been recently shown by science that smoking tobacco is gravely injurious to one’s health. Even when the CCC was written, there was much controversy. But today, we all know how harmful it is. The World Health Organization gives this fact: “[Tobacco is the] Leading cause of death, illness and impoverishment. The tobacco epidemic is one of the biggest public health threats the world has ever faced, killing more than 8 million people a year around the world. More than 7 million of those deaths are the result of direct tobacco use while around 1.2 million are the result of non-smokers being exposed to second-hand smoke. All forms of tobacco are harmful, and there is no safe level of exposure to tobacco.”
So to deliberately partake of a substance known to always be harmful such as inhaling tobacco smoke seems to be disordered.
The CCC article as follows seems to be relevant.
2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.
It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.
We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.
We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.
It is not ours to dispose of.
So to deliberately partake of a substance known to always be harmful such as inhaling tobacco smoke seems to be disordered.
The CCC article as follows seems to be relevant.
2280 Everyone is responsible for his life before God who has given it to him.
It is God who remains the sovereign Master of life.
We are obliged to accept life gratefully and preserve it for his honor and the salvation of our souls.
We are stewards, not owners, of the life God has entrusted to us.
It is not ours to dispose of.
Last edited:
C
Cruciferi
Guest
C
Cruciferi
Guest
You’re probably the first person here to link smoking with masturbation and sexual sins. Out the door, you’re not going to convince anyone with an argument like this.
The Catechism is clear that moderate smoking is not sinful. There are quite a few Priests that smoke Pipes and Cigars. Myself, I have a modest pipe collection and enjoy a smoke every couple of weeks.
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
I’ve been enjoying cigars and pipes for 10 years now. I’m also a long distance runner and completed a 30 mile race back in September. Moderate tobacco use has had zero detectable impact on my physical performance or health.
Last edited:
B
Beryllos
Guest
Please refer to the title of the thread, and the original post.
And how dare you suggest that I am “dodging” or “logically inconsistent.” I am neither.
B
Beryllos
Guest
In that picture, is it an enormous pipe collection standing on the floor 
or a modest pipe collection standing upon the table? 
or a modest pipe collection standing upon the table? 
You did WHAT?
I gave up smoking, in favor of vaping, in 2014, and never looked back. Then in 2019, my tyrannical insurance company came down with a ukase that vaping was tobacco use, and if I continued, I would have to pay a $200/month subsidy. I cannot afford $200/month, so I gave it up. To this very day, I can smell the smoke from someone else’s cigarette, or even see it being done in an old movie, and it makes me crave.
When I turn 65 (5 more years), and Medicare kicks in (assuming Medicare has no such rule, and by that point, they may just be hoping people will die sooner, ergo no more medical expenses…), I have promised myself that the first thing I’m going to do, is to go out and buy a pack of Camel straights (non-filtered), and at least at that moment, smoke to my heart’s delight. (That is, assuming they will even still exist in 2025! You can always snap off the filter and light the ragged end, I’ve done that before.) I did try zero-nicotine tobacco-flavored vape fluid, but there is no sensate pleasure to that whatsoever, don’t waste your money.
Nobody should ever start smoking. That said, moderate use, hard to see as even venially sinful. Inveterate, constant chain-smoking over time, especially if your family has a history of health problems from it (and mine does), might be slow suicide, might be mortal sin. Hard to say. I would defer to one’s confessor on that one.
Last edited:
K
kapp19
Guest
You know that tanning has the same kind of danger, right??? Better buy tons of sunscreen…
The body exists to be used for the sake of the whole person. There are excesses to danger and damage, but… what you are suggesting as a principle (“anything which harms the body is automatically bad”) is just not well-grounded in Catholic ethics.
-K
The body exists to be used for the sake of the whole person. There are excesses to danger and damage, but… what you are suggesting as a principle (“anything which harms the body is automatically bad”) is just not well-grounded in Catholic ethics.
-K
In my part of the country, where there is a lot of sun and people spend a lot of time out in it, you will see many people of a certain age and older, whose skin is so desiccated, they look like dried seahorses! Wretched sight. I spent basically 30 years of my life in an office, so I wasn’t out in it that much. That may prolong my life. Skin cancer is a thing.
C
Cruciferi
Guest
I wish!In that picture, is it an enormous pipe collection standing on the floor
It’s actually a corner shelf/pipe rack that’s meant to be hung. Originally, it was unfinished so I sanded everything, applied some wood filler, and spray painted it. I still need shelving for my tobacco though. I have too many jars
C
Cruciferi
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
I wear sunscreen… :crossed_fingers:
Last edited:
S
Socrates92
Guest
I read it. I’m not sure what point you’re making.
The argument made in the original comment was that smoking was grave matter because it abuses the health of the body for the purpose of pleasure. If that is a valid criteria, it should apply across circumstances, like the ones I mentioned. If it applied merely to smoking, and not these other things, there has to be some distinguishing characteristic that makes smoking different. I raised this question, and for some undisclosed reason you didn’t deem the point worth addressing. Which would seem odd if you were genuinely interested in the question. I’m not sure what term you would like me to use other than “dodging”.
- Status