smoking

[CatholicSheila]

Smoking a cigarette will never have a positive impact on one’s health.
…

Anyone with a conscience should refrain from smoking. It’s really that simple.

The problem I have with the anti-smoking crowd is that they are so black and white.

I smoke. I’m not ashamed of it, and I’m not making excuses for it. I would like to quit - I wouldn’t mind having that $30 wk I spend to put somewhere else.

The reason I don’t? My doctor said no. It would be bad for my health.

I have had severe mental health problems in the past, and whilst I am doing very well I need to be cautious around managing them. My psychiastrist has made it very clear to me that I am not to quit smoking because of the negative impact that would have on my mental health.

So, yes, smoking can be good for you.

In the very least, I have bigger problems to deal with before I worry about my smoking.

 

[Paleocon]

Of course smoking cigarettes is a grave sin. To knowingly engage in behavior that is seriously destructive to one’s health (and could potentially lead to death) is without a doubt a sin. The blessings of life and good health are a gift from God, and to squander it by regularly partaking in such a disgusting habit is like spitting in God’s face.

Plus, smoking can expose innocent bystanders to harmful effects, whether it is through impacting immediate company with second-hand smoke, or contaminating a room with tobacco/nicotine residue which leads to third-hand smoke. The harm is not confined to the smoker, but rather it spreads and lingers. It’s basically a poison to society.

Also, purchasing cigarettes directly funds the tobacco industry, which is responsible for hundreds of thousands of death each year… which kinda makes all smokers complicit in the devastation wrought by these vile corporations that profit off the slow decay of their customers.

Doing something that poses harm to oneself and others is clearly a sin, plain and simple. And I don’t say this to be judgmental or anything, but rather to emphasize the seriousness of this sin. We should condemn smoking and pity the smoker. We should be putting some effort toward freeing smokers from this habit. I’d even assert that combatting smoking should be more of a priority for religious folk, rather than some of the more innocuous distractions that attention is wasted on (because seriously, there are way too many Christians who smoke and think nothing of it, so clearly some better messaging is required to get followers of the faith back on track).

It breaks my heart to see people slowly kill themselves with those death sticks, not realizing the gravity of their poor decisions. They become trapped by their addiction, trying desperately to rationalize the necessity or innocence of their vice. Don’t fall into that mentality. Don’t even question if smoking is a grave sin, because it obviously is. The only question is this: What will smokers do to combat this horrible habit? The path to healing begins with a single step, and we should urge people to take that step.

It’s a good thing that the Church has you around, to correct its official teachings.

 

[Jack007]

theguardian.com/world/2004/dec/31/smoking.catholicism

 

[GenerationZ]

It’s a good thing that the Church has you around, to correct its official teachings.

I can’t imagine that the Church is okay with people who essentially help finance corporations or organizations that are inherently sinful and destructive. If someone sent $5000 a month to ISIS, I’m sure that would be considered a sin. In many instances, aiding evil is committing evil.

Do you happen to be a smoker? Or maybe you just know someone who is a smoker, but you want to wash your hands clean of any responsibility when it comes to discouraging their spiritually and physically destructive behavior. That’s just the impression I get from most people who downplay the seriousness of smoking.

This is an awesome link. I recommend the pro-smoking crowd to give this a read and then deeply reflect on their “moral responsibility” in the eyes of the Church.

 

[Paleocon]

I can’t imagine that the Church is okay with people who essentially help finance corporations or organizations that are inherently sinful and destructive. If someone sent $5000 a month to ISIS, I’m sure that would be considered a sin. In many instances, aiding evil is committing evil.

Cigarette companies are not the same as ISIS. If you can’t see the difference then you’re beyond help.

Do you happen to be a smoker? Or maybe you just know someone who is a smoker, but you want to wash your hands clean of any responsibility when it comes to discouraging their spiritually and physically destructive behavior. That’s just the impression I get from most people who downplay the seriousness of smoking.

I am not a smoker. I know smokers. Do you happen to be illogical?

logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/

 

[Scottgun]

Unwritten article III of the neo-pagan religion is that pleasure is the greatest good and suffering the greatest evil, with the understanding that pleasure is to be had in this life only. Thus, bodily health is an absolute value, a “cult of the body” as the CCC puts it. So smoking is elevated to the gravest of sins. The exception of course is sexual pleasure. There, it’s understand that one is allowed to do all manner of nasty things no matter how unhealthy.

 

[GenerationZ]

Cigarette companies are not the same as ISIS. If you can’t see the difference then you’re beyond help.

I’m remarking in the striking similarities, but obviously there are some fundamental differences.

ISIS kills people with bullets. Cigarette companies knowingly kill hundreds of thousands of people every year without bullets. That’s one key difference.

Oh, and the overall death toll committed by cigarette companies is over a thousand times more than ISIS could every hope to achieve.

But hey, if you want to give money to cigarette companies, go right ahead. Just keep in mind that they have more blood on their hands than ISIS, so it might be morally reprehensible to do so.

Cigarette companies base their entire business off the slow decay of their costumers. The destruction they wreak is intrinsic to their industry. The disregard for human life on a mass scale is astonishing. Hopefully, moral people will refuse to be accomplices to that vile industry of death.

I am not a smoker. I know smokers.

So you do know smokers that you’re just making excuses for? I thought so.

I hope you have made at least some small effort to get those people to quit.

 

[Jack007]

This is an awesome link. I recommend the pro-smoking crowd to give this a read and then deeply reflect on their “moral responsibility” in the eyes of the Church.

Thank you.

 

[Paleocon]

I’m remarking in the striking similarities, but obviously there are some fundamental differences.

ISIS kills people with bullets. Cigarette companies knowingly kill hundreds of thousands of people every year without bullets. That’s one key difference.

Oh, and the overall death toll committed by cigarette companies is over a thousand times more than ISIS could every hope to achieve.

But hey, if you want to give money to cigarette companies, go right ahead. Just keep in mind that they have more blood on their hands than ISIS, so it might be morally reprehensible to do so.

Cigarette companies base their entire business off the slow decay of their costumers. The destruction they wreak is intrinsic to their industry. The disregard for human life on a mass scale is astonishing. Hopefully, moral people will refuse to be accomplices to that vile industry of death.

Consequentialism.

So you do know smokers that you’re just making excuses for? I thought so.

I hope you have made at least some small effort to get those people to quit.

Ad hominem.

 

[Jamma]

Consequentialism.

Ad hominem.

Ad hominem attacks violate forum rules as well.

I am not sure whether consequentialism is the correct word to describe that, nor whether moderate consequentialism is wrong.

I am Jack007.

 

[andrewstx]

I’m remarking in the striking similarities, but obviously there are some fundamental differences.

ISIS kills people with bullets. Cigarette companies knowingly kill hundreds of thousands of people every year without bullets. That’s one key difference.

Oh, and the overall death toll committed by cigarette companies is over a thousand times more than ISIS could every hope to achieve.

But hey, if you want to give money to cigarette companies, go right ahead. Just keep in mind that they have more blood on their hands than ISIS, so it might be morally reprehensible to do so.

Cigarette companies base their entire business off the slow decay of their costumers. The destruction they wreak is intrinsic to their industry. The disregard for human life on a mass scale is astonishing. Hopefully, moral people will refuse to be accomplices to that vile industry of death.

So you do know smokers that you’re just making excuses for? I thought so.

I hope you have made at least some small effort to get those people to quit.

Remember GenerationZ who you are talking with Mr. PaleoCon. As I read it AND I could be wrong, Paleo means as conservative as it is possible to be.

I think that too highly conservative people making profits is first priority. In this case profits for cigarette companies.

In this case profits come first, and the preservation of human lives comes as a distant second. I am not saying this as an absolute truth< I am just going by other ultra conservatives and their observed motives.

If people die of cancer, or emphasema, or COPD it is regarded by some as just a “cost of doing busisness” and it seems secondary to making profit. Or in the vernacular ‘making A buck’.

 

[mikekle]

Cigarette companies are not the same as ISIS. If you can’t see the difference then you’re beyond help.

I am not a smoker. I know smokers. Do you happen to be illogical?

logicalfallacies.info/relevance/ad-hominem/

I certainly understand where he is coming from, in fact it makes alot of sense. These tobacco companies have been in business for a long long time, they know how deadly their products are, the Govts do too, but they continually produce and sell them, IMO, this is a very very grave sin, and I would imagine all involved in making and keeping them available to the public, will probably have to answer for this when they die.

Then we have our DEA, FDA, etc who supposedly are tasked with protecting the general health of the public, they create new laws, regulations to deal with street drugs all the time, yet with tobacco, its all OK, year after year…??? something very strange about that to me. I would not be surprised if Govts are in league with some shady people/ groups, but it basically all boils down to GREED, they know how much money is raked in from tobacco sales, they also have SIN TAXES on them…that is curious in itself!

Also, keep in mind, these tobacco companies purposely add many other chemicals to cigarettes and other tobacco products to make them very addictive, to make sure their customer MUST keep coming back…this is above and beyond the sinful act they are doing by simply making sure tobacco products are available to anyone 18 yrs and up.

But I do not understand why Govts act so serious about street drugs…?? they are already in the business of making deadly products available, so no reason why they should be vigilant regarding street drugs, but the recent HUGE increases in heroin supply almost everywhere in the US, I believe the US Govt is probably making money from this somehow, after 9-11, our borders were supposedly tightened up, but oddly, literal tons and tons of heroin and other drugs make it in every day, and make it to their destination…to keep all the addicts supplied…?? something seems very strange about that fact to me.

 

[Paleocon]

Remember GenerationZ who you are talking with Mr. PaleoCon. As I read it AND I could be wrong, Paleo means as conservative as it is possible to be.

I think that too highly conservative people making profits is first priority. In this case profits for cigarette companies.

In this case profits come first, and the preservation of human lives comes as a distant second. I am not saying this as an absolute truth< I am just going by other ultra conservatives and their observed motives.

If people die of cancer, or emphasema, or COPD it is regarded by some as just a “cost of doing busisness” and it seems secondary to making profit. Or in the vernacular ‘making A buck’.

I certainly understand where he is coming from, in fact it makes alot of sense. These tobacco companies have been in business for a long long time, they know how deadly their products are, the Govts do too, but they continually produce and sell them, IMO, this is a very very grave sin, and I would imagine all involved in making and keeping them available to the public, will probably have to answer for this when they die.

Then we have our DEA, FDA, etc who supposedly are tasked with protecting the general health of the public, they create new laws, regulations to deal with street drugs all the time, yet with tobacco, its all OK, year after year…??? something very strange about that to me. I would not be surprised if Govts are in league with some shady people/ groups, but it basically all boils down to GREED, they know how much money is raked in from tobacco sales, they also have SIN TAXES on them…that is curious in itself!

Also, keep in mind, these tobacco companies purposely add many other chemicals to cigarettes and other tobacco products to make them very addictive, to make sure their customer MUST keep coming back…this is above and beyond the sinful act they are doing by simply making sure tobacco products are available to anyone 18 yrs and up.

But I do not understand why Govts act so serious about street drugs…?? they are already in the business of making deadly products available, so no reason why they should be vigilant regarding street drugs, but the recent HUGE increases in heroin supply almost everywhere in the US, I believe the US Govt is probably making money from this somehow, after 9-11, our borders were supposedly tightened up, but oddly, literal tons and tons of heroin and other drugs make it in every day, and make it to their destination…to keep all the addicts supplied…?? something seems very strange about that fact to me.

Regarding my political ideology, see the Wikipedia article on paleoconservativism.

Regarding smoking, the Church does not consider it sinful if done in moderation (see Catechism 2290), so neither do I.

 

[Jamma]

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoconservatism

Oh, thats how you got your username!

 

[freeRadical]

To knowingly engage in behavior that is seriously destructive to one’s health (and could potentially lead to death) is without a doubt a sin.

Well, a lot of activities fall under that definition:

Driving
Flying
Taking a shower
Climbing a ladder
Dancing
Drinking
Walking across a street
etc.

Basically, being alive is hazardous to one’s health and can potentially lead to death.

 

[freeRadical]

The problem I have with the anti-smoking crowd is that they are so black and white

The problem I have with the anti-smoking crowd is that when it comes to drinking they are ususally pro-drinking or indifferent. They are a bunch of hypocrites.

 

[andrewstx]

Regarding my political ideology, see the Wikipedia article on paleoconservativism.

Regarding smoking, the Church does not consider it sinful if done in moderation (see Catechism 2290), so neither do I.

Who can smoke with “moderation”? No one, that is just not how smoking works. Smoking is highly addictive, more than any other drug. You start by asking for a smoke when you have a beer then progress to packages and soon cartons. That is how it works for the overwhelming majority.

People in AA often succeed in getting off booze, but never cigarettes. Visit a meeting sometime and you soon notice that EVERYONE is smoking. Take a gas mask!

Personally I think that much conservatism is immoral and selfish, no matter how it is prefixed.

Several Popes now have condemned laissez faire capitalism, yet they are ignored in the mindless quest for profit and walking all over the poor. They do not choose to be poor. I am poor myself due to stroke and the inability to work.

 

[andrewstx]

Well, a lot of activities fall under that definition:

Driving
Flying
Taking a shower
Climbing a ladder
Dancing
Drinking
Walking across a street
etc.

Basically, being alive is hazardous to one’s health and can potentially lead to death.

You have to do many of those things to survive. No one has to smoke to survive. It is the exact opposite. You have to smoke to die.

 

[GenerationZ]

Well, a lot of activities fall under that definition:

Driving
Flying
Taking a shower
Climbing a ladder
Dancing
Drinking
Walking across a street
etc.

Basically, being alive is hazardous to one’s health and can potentially lead to death.

What in the world could you be doing in the shower that is seriously causing harm to your health every time you use it?

I’m not saying smoking sinful because it “can cause death”. Anything and everything can lead to death.

But, smoking is ALWAYS destructive to one’s health to some meaningful degree. The harm it causes is not a risk, it is an intrinsic and inescapable inevitability of the sinful habit. To engage is smoking is to knowingly cause harm to oneself in the pursuit of chemical induced sensations or to satisfy a fixation of some sort. But again, EVERY puff stains the lungs as it stains the soul. Cigarettes are so inherently destructive without any redeemable benefits that I believe it is nearly impossible (or at least exceedingly rare) for the act to be considered anything less than a grave sin under most any circumstances.

And that’s not even getting into the harm smoking causes others or how it financially fuels an industry that peddles death and decay on a mass scale.

 

[Paleocon]

Who can smoke with “moderation”? No one, that is just not how smoking works. Smoking is highly addictive, more than any other drug. You start by asking for a smoke when you have a beer then progress to packages and soon cartons. That is how it works for the overwhelming majority.

People in AA often succeed in getting off booze, but never cigarettes. Visit a meeting sometime and you soon notice that EVERYONE is smoking. Take a gas mask!

Personally I think that much conservatism is immoral and selfish, no matter how it is prefixed.

Several Popes now have condemned laissez faire capitalism, yet they are ignored in the mindless quest for profit and walking all over the poor. They do not choose to be poor. I am poor myself due to stroke and the inability to work.

I’m going to assume the the Church knows what it’s talking about and didn’t waste space in a catachetical document discussing impossible hypotheticals.

Jamma posted a link in the thread and you didn’t even bother to read it. Wow.

You have to smoke to die.

Why do I suspect that you’re a hopeless ideologue?