Pot? Mortal sin? Sin at all?
#41
(07-11-2010, 07:35 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: Maybe you'll find Popes Urban VII and Urban VIII there to stamp it out. They banned it and even threatened to excommunicate because of it.

Good lord, calm down and eat a brownie.
Reply
#42
(07-11-2010, 07:37 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote:
(07-11-2010, 07:17 AM)Arun Wrote: Where is your proof? Can you demonstrate statistical evidence of illness/mortality rate (for tobacco-related illnesses only) in Native American, English, European or other heavy tobacco consumers within the given time frame?

I do not have any and I do not intend to prove it. It is not my intention to combat all harmful cultural elements. As I said, due to the extreme cultural influence, I think the sinful nature of it is mitigated for most users.

And getting "proof" about something in such a varied and widespread demographic is impossible except by giving statistics.

For the record, China and India are also have many heavy users.

Well without proof, your opinion is nothing more than that - opinion.

Why waste time arguing invalid points which you are unable to substantiate.

China and India are largely irrelevant, due to the specific timeframe referred to in earlier posts and reference to James I.
Reply
#43
(07-11-2010, 10:02 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(07-10-2010, 11:45 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: It is only used because it is addicting. All else is after the fact justification.

You can't get addicted to marijuana.  You can become psychologically dependent, but you can't become chemically dependent on it.

I was not talking about marijuana there.
Reply
#44
(07-11-2010, 10:13 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(07-11-2010, 08:06 AM)voxpopulisuxx Wrote: yes but isnt ingestion by inhalation through the lungs UN AVOIDABLY physically damaging...no matter how natural or pure the leaf being burned?

Ingestion of a pint by drinking is UNAVOIDABLY physically damaging to the brain and the liver.  Lifting weights is UNAVOIDABLY physically damaging to the muscle fibers being exercised.  The issue here is not that physical damage occurs, but the level to which it occurs.  Neither in moderate weight lifting, nor in moderate drinking, nor in moderate tobacco smoking, nor in moderate marijuana smoking are the various forms of physical damage irreversible.  The body's natural ability to heal itself quickly recovers from any damage caused by these activities, done in moderation of course.

There is a difference between "stressing" and "damaging". What about moderate masturbation? That causes no damage or even stress at all. This seems too lukewarm.

Reply
#45
(07-11-2010, 10:18 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(07-11-2010, 07:35 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: Maybe you'll find Popes Urban VII and Urban VIII there to stamp it out. They banned it and even threatened to excommunicate because of it.

Good lord, calm down and eat a brownie.

Only half a one...moderation you know.

I think you have an unhealthy view of "moderation".

Reply
#46
(07-11-2010, 10:05 PM)Melkite Wrote:
(07-11-2010, 02:49 AM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: Cigarettes and the like do not make people feel good unless it is sating an addiction.

Tobacco in moderation offers a pleasant buzz.  You don't need to be addicted to nicotine to enjoy that.

Tobacco is a plant. Nicotine is a drug, a stimulant. Is using nicotine for its effects wrong? I do not know. I have no idea what it feels like or what it does by itself. Is inhaling burning particles of a variety of substances in an effort to get this drug wrong? Probably. It would be like eating glass shards to eat a brownie. Is compulsively using this substance at great cost and harm to oneself wrong? Definitely. Would encouraging others to use it or trying to downplay its bad effects in effort to convince oneself of it being ok, or even to convince others of it be wrong? Most certainty.
Reply
#47
(07-11-2010, 10:38 PM)Arun Wrote: Well without proof, your opinion is nothing more than that - opinion.
What is proof? That is the problem with such discussions. Logic and proof do not exist. For every study or statistic, one could pull up another to counter it.

Choices are made by humans. That is free will. I cannot interfere with it. Sure, it is just an opinion. But that doesn't mean it isn't right.

Quote:Why waste time arguing invalid points which you are unable to substantiate.
I am not arguing. I stated my views briefly, addressed a statement and then answered some questions. I already stated: "I do not intend to prove it. It is not my intention to combat all harmful cultural elements.".

No matter how much evidence I put forth showing its harmful effects in history, it wouldn't matter.

Quote:China and India are largely irrelevant, due to the specific timeframe referred to in earlier posts and reference to James I.
So? It doesn't matter to me. I do not have substantial exposure to tobacco (in any form) so I really don't care what others do themselves, especially if they should know (or do know) what they are doing.

So, in closing, I'll just state for those who care:

* Not smoking or using a substance not needed for life is never a sin.
* If you use it, don't complain or take other people's money because of it. It is YOUR choice.
* Ignorance is no excuse if you choose it.
Reply
#48
(07-11-2010, 10:49 PM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote: There is a difference between "stressing" and "damaging". What about moderate masturbation? That causes no damage or even stress at all. This seems too lukewarm.

Have you ever taken an anatomy class?  Alcohol, even in minor amounts, does not merely "stress" brain and liver cells, it destroys them.  Tobacco and Marijuana smoke don't merely stress lung cells, they destroy them.  Lifting weights doesn't merely stress muscle fibers, it destroys sections of them.  Muscles don't get strong because of the working of the fibers, but by the build up of scar tissue in them.  In moderation, this isn't a big deal because you never destroy more than your body can easily replace in a short period of time - probably no more than are dying off and being replaced naturally anyway.  The difference between these and masturbation is that the Church has officially taught it to be an objective, serious sin.  As far as I'm aware, it has never taught this of tobacco or marijuana use, and certainly doesn't teach this of alcohol use.  The *only* sin in smoking marijuana moderately is that you are breaking a just law by doing so.  But even this, I'm pretty sure, would only be venial in most if not all cases.  One also has to question how much venial sin is involved if someone is smoking marijuana in a jurisdiction where there is a law prohibiting it on the books, but the law enforcement of that jurisdiction sees no need in enforcing it, like in California or Canada.
Reply
#49
(07-12-2010, 12:58 AM)Melkite Wrote: Lifting weights doesn't merely stress muscle fibers, it destroys sections of them.  Muscles don't get strong because of the working of the fibers, but by the build up of scar tissue in them. 
That is false.

Muscles get strong for a variety of reasons, the first being neuro-muscular efficiency. Actual increase in muscle fibre size does happen, but as a response to only certain stimuli, some of which being caloric excess, proper hormone environment and sufficient volume of activity. Scar tissue reduces strength drastically.

Quote: In moderation, this isn't a big deal because you never destroy more than your body can easily replace in a short period of time - probably no more than are dying off and being replaced naturally anyway.
Actually, the number of muscle cells we have does not change normally.

Quote:  The difference between these and masturbation is that the Church has officially taught it to be an objective, serious sin.  As far as I'm aware, it has never taught this of tobacco or marijuana use, and certainly doesn't teach this of alcohol use.
No, like I said, they are plants. They can't be objective sins. Using drugs however: Here is the Catechism of the Catholic Church
Quote:2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.

Quote: The *only* sin in smoking marijuana moderately is that you are breaking a just law by doing so.
Marijuana contains substances which are drugs, which can cause various effects on the mind and body.

You are wrong. The governments of this world do not define what is good and evil.

Reply
#50
(07-11-2010, 12:19 AM)Herr_Mannelig Wrote:
(07-10-2010, 11:52 PM)DrBombay Wrote: What are we, Puritans?  Bah.  Next you'll be telling me gambling is a sin. Bah.  Bah, I say.   :bronxcheer:

Yeah, and a quick masturb isn't a problem either.

While we are at it, let us watch Twilight.

I mean, why not, right?!  ::)

I don't get it. Anytime someone takes a stand against something that could very well be immoral, that person is labeled as a Puritan. What is wrong with traditional Catholics these days?

In this new spirit of labeling - in the spirit of Vatican II - I'm going to start labeling these people as Modernists.

It's only fair, right?
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)