The pro-life Church and attitudes to dangerous things like motorcycle riding, mountain climbing and smoking

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

Instead of being the universal hall monitor go volunteer at the soup kitchen, or something meaningful instead of inserting yourself as super Catholic nagging mother.

Sheesh :roll_eyes:

Meanwhile I’ll be riding my Harley, and smoking my cigars, drinking my whiskey.
 
Last edited:
I don’t know if I’d go that far but certainly focusing too much on others can be a hindrance to one’s own growing in sanctity.
 
God follows surprisingly predicable patterns then, based partly on what people do during their lives. I have no objection to people shortening their lives if they wish to do so and do not impose risk or costs on others. But the Church does and I am wondering about the issue of consistency across the different pro-life issues. To repeat - I’m not a Catholic and don’t mind what you do to yourself, only to others. But I am interested in CAtholic belief so ask questions about it.
 
Well for one thing, I can’t help but notice that euthanasia and abortion kill someone else, not one’s own self, unlike if someone manages to unintentionally kill themselves through smoking, mountain climbing, or motorcycle riding.
 
Last edited:
27lw said:
Well for one thing, I can’t help but notice that euthanasia and abortion kill someone else, not one’s own self, unlike if someone manages to unintentionally kill themselves through smoking, mountain climbing, or motorcycle riding.
Click to expand...
Well I’ve seen many, many stories about people dying from the effects of second-hand smoke, including babies who suffer sudden infant death syndrome, people killed by other drivers and people killed in rescue missions trying to save missing climbers.
 
Are people irresponsible if they smoke and make innocent bystanders breathe their smoky air? Yes. Is it done to purposefully kill someone? I doubt it, it’s inconsiderate and harmful to health, but not intended to kill someone (immediately) like abortion or euthanasia.
Same with extreme sports - the intent is not to kill.
Do you see a difference there @FiveLinden?
 
StudentMI said:
Oh no I just had a cigarette?
Click to expand...
Hmmm… I had a pipe last night…

We must repent.
FiveLinden said:
What were you going to do with the 11minutes which, on average, you have just removed from your life?
Click to expand...
Same as everyone else, YOUTUBE :iphone:
FiveLinden said:
Smokes who live until 90 often die of smoking-related issues too.
Click to expand...
Well, something is gonna kill you. I’m not advocating chain smoking but I’ve seen plenty of people get sick and die yet they lived a perfectly healthy lifestyle.

All things in moderation.

Magical divination is my guess…

All the guys in my family live to about 80. If I exceed that, I’m doing pretty good.
 
27lw said:
Are people irresponsible if they smoke and make innocent bystanders breathe their smoky air? Yes. Is it done to purposefully kill someone? I doubt it, it’s inconsiderate and harmful to health, but not intended to kill someone (immediately) like abortion or euthanasia.
Same with extreme sports - the intent is not to kill.
Do you see a difference there @FiveLinden?
Click to expand...
Indeed I do see the difference clearly. But is the Church only concerned with direct intent? Is not not pro-life but rather anti-intentional killing?
 
So for the Church it wouldn’t include, for example, urging pregnant women not to drink or smoke or engage in full contact martial arts? That wouldn’t be prolife? Only opposition to abortion and euthanasia? Again does the Church itself teach what you are saying?
 
Last edited:
FiveLinden said:
Reading that thread it occurred to me that I could not recall the Church making stands against activities which posed significant threats to life.
Click to expand...
The Church doesn’t make a list of things you can and cannot do in this manner.

The Church provides the moral framework. Things like this are prudential judgments.
 
Exactly. When a woman goes in for an abortion, or a patient goes in for euthanasia, or a convict gets sent to the death chamber, they are being sent there with the intention of a person being killed. (The Church considers the baby in utero a person and that’s not negotiable.)

It is not a matter of them being sent in there for some other purpose and there’s an X percent risk of a person dying as a result. That’s the difference.

Furthermore, I don’t think the OP is asking these questions because he’s really concerned about the people experiencing the risks and thinks the Church should be more protective of their lives. He’s trying to undermine the Church’s viewpoint on abortion and attack the Church.
 
Last edited:
StudentMI said:
Familiar with those stats. Don’t trust them considering I knew a priest whose dad was a chain smoker and lived til he was 90.
Click to expand...
Not lecturing you, but c’mon dude. You’re smart enough to know that anecdotes are anecdotes. People have also survived being shot in the head. I wouldn’t take those individual cases and conclude that being shot in the head is probably fine.
 
My mom is about to turn 91. Still smokes 2 cigarettes daily.
My ex-husband died of lung cancer at 63. Never smoked in his life.

Statistics can be misleading.
 
stpurl said:
My mom is about to turn 91. Still smokes 2 cigarettes daily.
My ex-husband died of lung cancer at 63. Never smoked in his life.

Statistics can be misleading.
Click to expand...
In the US 82% of people who die from lung cancer are smokers, 13% die from radon gas, and 5% die from secondhand smoke.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top