Sobriety

  • Thread starter Thread starter OpenSource
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OpenSource

Guest
Hello Everyone,

I have an interesting line of thought to throw your way:

As far as I can tell, it is not sinful to have a couple of beers and relax a bit.

Lets examine other things that would have a similar effect on your body:

-Smoking a little bit of weed. Not an excessive amount, just enough to wind down at the end of the day.

-Lets say that you have some Vicodin or some other medication you had for an old shoulder injury lying around. Take a couple because it is quite a pleasant feeling.

These things are pretty much giving someone the same effect as if another person were to have a couple glasses of wine or whatnot. It doesn’t impair your ability to reason.

Where do you draw the line?
 
So you’re comparing the use of illegal drugs and misuse of perscibed medications to having a couple of beers to wind down your day? :confused:You may be on the wrong site here.

Personally I draw the first line at what am I doing that is going to land me in jail. That could be a good start. And then: Is the reason I’m doing this a reason I am willing to go to jail for?
 
Well: “Smoking a little bit of weed” in Territories where doing so is against the Law, would be an offense against the State. Using Medication that is classified as “Controlled Substances” or “Prescription only” would be an abuse under law and medicine.

You ask: “Where do you draw the line?” Each decides for themselves, but I have found that I need to obey the law.
 
jeje831 said:
So you’re comparing the use of illegal drugs and misuse of perscibed medications to having a couple of beers to wind down your day? :confused:You may be on the wrong site here.
Click to expand...
Which site would you suggest? I think you’re taking my post out of context…perhaps the philosophy thread would be more appropriate if that’s what you mean. No need to be rude, or judgmental for that matter.

Actually, I think the ‘legalization of marijuana’ thread got me started on this topic, as I found it interesting to compare to. If I’m not mistaken, tribal cultures used to use marijuana and other opiates. Alcohol is a drug. Marijuana is a drug. Opiates are drugs. In which context would these be appropriate and where would one draw the line?

If jail is the answer because you’re violating man’s laws, then I’m satisfied with that response. I am simply looking for lines of thought such as: “if this is ok, then what makes that wrong?”
 
No, those examples are pretty much the same thing. Legality is a lesser factor in some cases. Christianity used to be illegal too, remember? So was passing gas in public.

Alochol has the same, if not more dangerous, impacts on the body than those other drugs listed. It’s also way more addictive.

As far as relaxing after work,
I’d draw the line when someone becomes impaired. Also, when it starts effecting other people, or effecting the overall quality of their life in a negative way (ie, becoming dispondent towards loved ones, shirking responsibilities, etc.)

A few beers after work (or whatever your choice is) would seem to me to be ok as long as it effects the overall quality of your life in a positive way…(ie reduce stress so that you are more able to tackle other challenges in life, be there for other people, feel less stressed for the next day of work, etc. etc.).

Just one opinion!
 
The effects are very similar. However, other aspects of the substances create real differences.

Alcohol is legal and socially acceptable and not immediately addictive.

Weed is illegal and therefore unacceptable in most social situations.

Using your own leftover medication is technically legal, but presents a real danger of addiction. In order to stay legal, you would have to indulge alone, which takes away the social aspect to a degree (unless the others were drinking or smoking).

Looks like a couple of beers are your best choice for Friday night. Besides, what does Vicodin do for pizza? 😃

Betsy
 
OpenSource said:
Hello Everyone,

I have an interesting line of thought to throw your way:

As far as I can tell, it is not sinful to have a couple of beers and relax a bit.

Lets examine other things that would have a similar effect on your body:

-Smoking a little bit of weed. Not an excessive amount, just enough to wind down at the end of the day.

-Lets say that you have some Vicodin or some other medication you had for an old shoulder injury lying around. Take a couple because it is quite a pleasant feeling.

These things are pretty much giving someone the same effect as if another person were to have a couple glasses of wine or whatnot. It doesn’t impair your ability to reason.

Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t know what to say about the Vicodin, but weed is illegal. That is a sin of disobedience right off the bat.

On anther note, I’m sure you know that drinking alcohol with the intention of getting a load on is also a sin. That is drinking to excess. If you only have a couple of beers to relax, that sounds harmless to me. Even Jesus drank wine. Although I don’t think he would have smoked weed or taken Vicodin. 😃 So I guess you could ask yourself, “WWJD”.
 
Andrew_Lorimer said:
Well: “Smoking a little bit of weed” in Territories where doing so is against the Law, would be an offense against the State. Using Medication that is classified as “Controlled Substances” or “Prescription only” would be an abuse under law and medicine.

You ask: “Where do you draw the line?” Each decides for themselves, but I have found that I need to obey the law.
Click to expand...
The Martyrs are puzzled by the assertion that breaking the law is a sin, as they clearly were the law-breakers of their day for refusing to lawfully worship Caesar. The U.S. government at the Nuremberg Trials clarified that one is to follow ones conscience above any merely human law.

Clearly there are laws which are a sin to obey, just as there are perfectly lawful things one can do which are immoral. Catholics need to make the choice on whether to follow God or human laws, and they are quickly diverging.

.
 
Andrew_Lorimer said:
Well: “Smoking a little bit of weed” in Territories where doing so is against the Law, would be an offense against the State. Using Medication that is classified as “Controlled Substances” or “Prescription only” would be an abuse under law and medicine.

You ask: “Where do you draw the line?” Each decides for themselves, but I have found that I need to obey the law.
Click to expand...
Stylites said:
The Martyrs are puzzled by the assertion that breaking the law is a sin, as they clearly were the law-breakers of their day for refusing to lawfully worship Caesar. The U.S. government at the Nuremberg Trials clarified that one is to follow ones conscience above any merely human law.

Clearly there are laws which are a sin to obey, just as there are perfectly lawful things one can do which are immoral. Catholics need to make the choice on whether to follow God or human laws, and they are quickly diverging.

.
Click to expand...
Hi Stylites, You make an important point.

Law however, is often framed with a high degree of care, taking into consideration many different views.

There are consequences to breaking the law: it would be a flight into contest with a country, and a potential loss of the freedom to engage calmly with one’s own affairs.

I think that tension between the individual and the state may promote better law and wisdom in the person.
 
Andrew_Lorimer said:
Hi Stylites, You make an important point.

Law however, is often framed with a high degree of care, taking into consideration many different views.

There are consequences to breaking the law: it would be a flight into contest with a country, and a potential loss of the freedom to engage calmly with one’s own affairs.

I think that tension between the individual and the state may promote better law and wisdom in the person.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, laws against cannabis were not drafted with any sort of care, such is the sorry state of do-gooder progressives who needed a new crusade after their failed alcohol prohibition, and racist-based eugenics was the motivation for acceptance according to the record.

You point out the corollary to following conscience, and that is to accept the consequences. Martyrs don’t complain, because the freedom of the spirit which they gain is so much greater than the freedom of the body which they lose. The bravery or cowardice of one’s actions reveal which is held in higher esteem.

For the spectators, though, we need to assure that people of conscience do not have to make such bargains, as therein is charity.

.
 
No need for the lectures, I haven’t smoked weed in 10 years (there’s a time and a place for everything…college :D)

My curiosity stems from the morality of recreational drug use. What is a drug? Why is alcohol (a drug) considered acceptable while others are not? So far what this is what I’ve gathered:

-They violate the laws of men.
-Because of the laws of men, they create scandal.
-Depending on the drug, there are varying degrees of impairment.
-Within a range of drugs that give you a degree of impairment, why is one considered acceptable and others are not? Hypocrasy? Politics? Status Quo? Corporations?

It would seem to me to be complete hypocrasy to have and to constantly change laws on all these different drugs. Whatever is ‘fashionable’ at the time is the rule.

But at it’s root source…is there really a difference?
 
What if your conscience tells you that the ban on marijuana is an unjust law, or the drinking age is unjust. Must we follow unjust laws?

I don’t smoke by the way.

Also, if one is drinking with friends and becomes impaired (to the point that they are a little more animated than usual and probably shouldn’t drive), are they drinking for the sole purpose of getting drunk, or is that just an unintended consequence of their social drinking? Is being ‘drunk’ (>.08, let’s say) a sin in and of itself?

Or when ‘drinking to excess’ is forbidden, is that referring to alcohol abuse or alcoholism, and not incidental inebriation?

I have never been clear on this.
 
erigby27 said:
What if your conscience tells you . . .

I have never been clear on this.
Click to expand...
It is always a beautiful thing to see people striving to do right, especially in a culture which is indifferent to this prudent discovery.

.
 
Ponyguy said:
Boy, oh boy, isn’t this the truth! http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v313/ponyguy/pissed-o.gif

Regards,
Ponyguy
Click to expand...
Yeah, this is another big argument. But why is the state picking and choosing? I think it’s all politics and money. Corruption.

In my opinion, people should be free to make their choices and follow their concience about these things, and subsequently accept the consequences. Not the state. But, that’s not the world we live in.
 
I don’t think a bowl of Marijuana is analogous to a beer or a glass of wine, just because the nature of the plant. I used to smoke a lot of pot, and I would say that there is almost a nonexistent threshold to the high you experience. You are either sober, a little high, or very high. I think your saying that a little pot use can “wind [one] down” should not be mistaken as the “little high” aforementioned. A bowl of pot will change you more than a glass of wine will. I am speaking from experience, I am still technically a MM patient who has stopped using altogether.

Like alcohol, marijuana is considered to be a psychoactive drug, but I think I would draw the line between the two substances because Marijuana cannot be used to get the modest sensations that are considered to be acceptable from light drinking and occasional tobacco use. Granted I would not consider using tobacco because it is very difficult to use just occasionally, and anything more than occasional is harmful.

I have never used Vicodin, but if you got it from a legitimate doctor to ease pain, then I would think that using it for any other purpose would be abuse. But I do not feel comfortable speaking on behalf of something I really don’t know much about. Take it easy 🙂
 
According to this “law-breaking is sinful” heresy, the Founding Fathers were all guilty of mortal sin for rebelling against a lawful king, and the king’s Redcoats were all martyrs for the faith if they died while trying to quell rebellion, and anyone who today pledges allegiance to the rebellion is guilty of encouraging mortal sin. 🤷

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top