FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Why claim that smoking is not a sin?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Monsanto has changed all of the seeds that grow the things we eat. The seeds in the vegetables and fruits are incapable of growing the next crop, making it necessary to but more Monsanto seeds. What I question is all of the health idolaters promote eating vegetables instead of meat, anything white, which will bring you to everlasting progressive life. Yet it's Monsanto's seeds, and I wonder if they are brained washed to extol the virtues of solyent green. This is way more dangerous than smoking cigs.

My several Doctor have been after me to quit, and I now smoke e-cigs and they, the current two, are ecstatic. Problem is it hasn't helped my asthma one iota. I have spent the last month on a nebulizer with steroids and albuterol, four times a day.Plus they have added an oral steroid for 3 weeks. They put me on drugs for emphysema, to the tune of $400.00 per month.You see they believed I had emphysema and I said no it's asthma.

I guess I should be a doctor. You see even Doctors have taken leave of their senses. They find no contradiction in my current health problem. You see they are progressive and smoking is the root of evil for myriad health problems, and a tenet of their religion, and it matters little how it manifests itself in the patient..

I find the massive anti-smoking rhetoric of groups like the WHO to be over the top. It takes a truly sick mind to see the puffing of a cigarette as immoral but the termination of third trimester pregnancies as a-okay.
Am I the only one who finds this obsessive concern with bodily health that we can see in the anti-smoking movement slightly atheist in tone and rhetoric? 

(not directed at you Jayne)
No, you're not Brus. I'm not including Jayne either, but it is a idolatry, which is gaining momentum. In my other post I mention all things white as dangerous for your health, and I forgot sugar. I was told by a devotee that it's an easy way to remember what's good. To me this appears to be a manifestation of white self hatred. At Holiday family dinners, the food is rushed off the table, and then all of the spouses form up ranks and all of them take a mandatory walk, at a minimum of an hour. They return triumphant, mentioning others out there walking, and wondering why certain neighbors that are overweight are not out there, as a pointed remark aimed at me. It's part of the new progressive religion.

Go outside and have a smoke, or stay inside and rage on my tell me which one sounds more sinful.
I was always under the impression that caffeine and nicotine diminish stress in the short term but in the long term your brain's natural stress inducers diminish because of the new chemical presence and you become more stressed than before. I don't have the impression that smokers are calmer people.

Addictions are sinful in the sense that God doesn't want us to be enslaved by anything. So being addicted to drugs like nicotine, caffeine or cocaine is not exactly an aspect of righteousness.

Before non-smoking laws, it was virtually impossible to find proper restaurants that had a zero smoke policy. As addicts, smokers hold on to their acquired rights tooth and claw and are very difficult to reason with. So the government clamps down, that is a reasonable use of government power. I can see to my own personal hygiene (DK) but the few times I've told a smoker that they ain't allowed to smoke in the subway, I got angry and rude responses like "who the hell do you think you are, a policeman?" unbelievable disdain or hatred emanating from them. Hence, government has to step in cos smokers, by their addictive nature, are unreasonable.

Cigarette smoke is just plain gross. Who wants to step out of mass and smell that crap?

My dad smoked a pipe when I was a kid and I loved its sweet fragrance. So, by the church's teachings, if it's non-addictive smoking it's permitted.

Again it should be left t the owners of the property. Even more so now sice the majority do not smoke. Rather then forcing all to your cultish way
my o2
but I can't stand  gov encroachment so that's just ne
dk, I did detect a note of anti-government bias in your posts. Capitalism is based on greed in many ways, I don't think it's a good way to solve public health issues. Smoking rates go down after restaurant bans, that's good thing, it motivates the addicted to seek solutions. My rights to eating a meal with reasonable breathable air trump the rights of a nicotine junkie who reduces himself to a disgraceful living smokestack.
Hardly. U would have a poin if yo culd onl eat your meal at one place. But don't. Itsvlike fling to a pub thas plays shirt tunes. Ok if u don't like it go to a different pub. Wha gives? NO one is forcin u to eat at a given place. U laud the gov forcing owners to bow to your cultish ideas
It's simple if I don't like a certain pub for whateer the reasons I'll just go to a differnet one or one that's suits me
rather then make a pouting stink to have the gov enforce my ideas on owners
Quote: Addictions are sinful in the sense that God doesn't want us to be enslaved by anything. So being addicted to drugs like nicotine, caffeine or cocaine is not exactly an aspect of righteousness.

This is true, but one could say that earthly attachments of any kind, even those that are not physically harmful, are to be discarded. No one is saying that smoking isn't harmful, or that addiction is good, but SIN involes full consent of the will. It may have been initially sinful to "experiment" with smoking and drugs, and to the point of getting addicted, but once addiction occurs the culpability lessens. Further, IF these are sins, then they are sins of weakness and not malice. Jesus said:

Mark Wrote:Hear ye me all, and understand. There is nothing from without a man that entering into him, can defile him. But the things which come from a man, those are they that defile a man. So are you also without knowledge? Understand you not that every thing from without, entering into a man cannot defile him: Because it entereth not into his heart, but goeth into the belly, and goeth out into the privy, purging all meats? But he said that the things which come out from a man, they defile a man. For from within out of the heart of men proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and defile a man.

So while cigarette smoking might defile a man physically, it does not in and of itself corrupt him spiritually or morally. Saints have smoked and sniffed tobacco, it did not cloud their reasoning to continue seeking God. St. Bernadette took snuff for her asthma, and was criticized by a few of her nuns, who told her she would never be canonized due to the snuff. She asked them if they thought she would become a saint if she didn't take snuff? Insinuating that one has nothing to do with the other.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28