My view on this matter is a little different from yours. First of all, let us assume (just for the sake of argument) that smoking Marijuana is a mortal sin. Would this fact alone require that it should be illegal or that Catholics should want it banned by the State? Not necessarily. After all, there are many actions which can send you to hell but which do not (and should not) send you to jail. Imagine a man or woman being arrested for adultery, masturbation or giving in to hateful thoughts. Are these matters of State? I do not think so. It seems to me that secular law (however it is construed) is not competent to judge all matters of morality but only those of a particular kind: Namely bodily aggression or acts of aggression against a person’s identity or property, which if permitted, would render social life impossible. But there are many ways in which a person could voluntarily misuse his freedom and yet not be guilty of a criminal act. I don’t think for example that teenagers who engage in premarital sex (which is surely more sinful than marijuana consumption) ought to be imprisoned. Only in some Christian police state (like Calvinist Geneva) have such things been contemplated. Thomas Aquinas himself pointed out that some evils (he listed prostitution as an example) ought to be tolerated for the greater good. I agree with him. Indeed, prostitution was tolerated throughout the middle ages. The idea of jack booted police officers tackling women of the street and putting handcuffs on them would likely have struck the medievals as ludicrous, not the mention cruel.
Now concerning the notion of “the greater social good”, drug prohibition (whether marijuana, alcohol or crack) is a great example of a “good intention” with very negative consequences. When a substance in demand is prohibited by law, the substance does NOT go away. On the contrary, both sound economic theory and the history of prohibition attest to the fact that the substance (if it can be easily and cheaply produced) proliferates even more under prohibition. The reasons for this have to do with risk premiums, the laws of supply and demand and other factors and monetary rewards of a black market, all of which drive up profits in the prohibited industry and encourage many people to enter it in order to make an easy buck. It is also a well established fact that under prohibition, both the potency of the drug in question and the number of people using it INCREASE. Alcoholism became a bigger problem during American prohibition for example than before it was illegal. So again, even if I conceded your claim that the Church specifically teaches (dogmatically) that Marijuana consumption is a mortal sin, that would hardly be enough to prove that one should want it made illegal.
However, let us address the question of whether it actually is sinful to smoke marijuana or whether the Church actually teaches this. Patently, the Church teaches no such thing. The catechism says that the consumption of harmful drugs is a sin, but does not list marijuana specifically. Even if it did, this statement could not be de fide, since the question of the harmfulness of marijuana is a technical scientific question (not a dogmatic question) and the Church enjoys no infallible protection on questions of science. In fact, scientists disagree about whether marijuana is harmful, with opinions ranging all over the map. Some claim that it is positively beneficial for one’s health (if smoked in moderation) and some that it is neither good nor bad. A tiny number (almost all of whom work for the State) claim that it is extraordinarily bad for you, and yet this seems to be an overstatement. How often do we hear about people dying from marijuana, being addicted to marijuana or killing each other because they were high on marijuana? Very rarely in the first and third cases and claims of physical addiction seem very implausible to me. Concerning the last point, consider the fact that alcohol, cigarette, meth, coke, crack and heroin users will often admit that they are addicted and cannot stop, but have you ever heard of someone being physically addicted to marijuana? I have not. At the very least, there is a relatively widespread consensus in the scientific community that marijuana had legitimate medical uses. And that brings me to my last consideration.
The idea that a plant (created by God) can be evil or ought to be made illegal strikes me as utterly preposterous and extraordinarily uncatholic. Do we not, as Catholics, accept a teleological view of nature, whereby every animal and plant has a purpose and is good? The notion of a “devilplant” (marijuana) or the devil’s drink (alcohol) is Manichean at best, no matter how many protestants (and protestantized American Catholics) may believe it. The fall in Eden did not turn nature evil, but rather effected man’s nature in such a way that his passions, intellect and will are no longer properly governed by the preternatural graces given to Adam and Eve, but are inclined toward disorder (Original Sin). However, the devil has no power to create and the notion that certain plants are “bad” and others “good” has no place in Christian thought. Certainly, a plant can have potential dangers if misused, but it must have proper uses as well and this is true even of the cocaine plant and of the chemicals used to construct crystal meth (although not necessarily crystal meth itself, which is artificial). Now marijuana seems obviously intended for consumption, at least in some circumstances, whether those be very narrow or more broad. However, the idea that Catholics must take the view that smoking marijuana is always sinful, much less a MORTAL sin, cannot in my opinion be reconciled with a Christian ontology of nature.
Me: