Legal Cannabis and Morality

[1Faith]

I think the conclusion of this discussion, based on sound moral theology, is that legitimate medical use is acceptable and recreational use is sinful. Which was pretty much my original position anyway. I've since posting this thread found better means of treating sleeping issues and have no desire whatsoever to use any form of marijuana ever again, though I do still use (isolated) cbd.

So yeah, don't do drugs. Marijuana is a drug. Unless you qualify for medical marijuana, it's legal in your state, and you have a legitimate health condition for which it would provide substantive relief of debilitating symptoms, stay away from it.

[Harryman9090]

Just as alcohol is not intrinsically evil, pot is not intrinsically evil. For all drugs, be they caffeine, alcohol, or pot, the same moral judgement applies. We are warned not to be in control of our faculties against overindulgence, and Catholics are bound to obey just laws. For weed, all of those are problematic. Doctrine being what it is, getting high is equal to getting intoxicated, and drinking alcohol is a sin.   Although I do admit I order weed online sometimes at Top Shelf BC.  You can't take one or two drinks equivalent to smoking weed because it's much more difficult to dose it... As for the laws, well, it's still not federally legal, no matter what the states say, and I have no idea if the hierarchy of laws has any catechism.

[Melkite]

Just as alcohol is not intrinsically evil, pot is not intrinsically evil. For all drugs, be they caffeine, alcohol, or pot, the same moral judgement applies. We are warned not to be in control of our faculties against overindulgence, and Catholics are bound to obey just laws. For weed, all of those are problematic. Doctrine being what it is, getting high is equal to getting intoxicated, and drinking alcohol is a sin. You can't take one or two drinks equivalent to smoking weed because it's much more difficult to dose it... As for the laws, well, it's still not federally legal, no matter what the states say, and I have no idea if the hierarchy of laws has any catechism.

I would agree that the normal conditions where use of marijuana is not sinful, because of the laws in place, are much narrower than its broad usage.  In those cases where it does provide a medical benefit that cannot be provided equally or easily by legal means, I would argue that the law banning its use is unjust and can be ignored.  I'd also argue that the moderate use of marijuana recreationally, where loss of faculties does not take place, can be no more than a venial sin, and only so because the law banning its use is not inherently unjust.

For those who are worried about using marijuana for medical reasons, that they may become intoxicated, there are many strains that are cultivated to have a high CBD content.  There are also strains that are CBD parallels of high THC recreational strains.  CBD blocks the neurotransmitters that THC attaches to, mitigating the intoxicating effects of THC by preventing the body from absorbing it as quickly as it would with no CBD present.  These high CBD strains could be a good moral alternative for those who want to avoid the intoxicating effects of THC while getting its medicinal benefits.

[Melkite]

I think you are refuting you own argument.  The intent of non-medical marijuana use is only intoxication, which you concede is sinful.

Do you believe the non-medical use of tobacco and alcohol are inherently sinful as well? If you believe the moderate consumption of marijuana for recreational purposes is inherently sinful, I'm not sure how you could logically hold the Catholic position that the moderate use of tobacco and alcohol are ever justifiable, either.

[FultonFan]

I think you are refuting you own argument.  The intent of non-medical marijuana use is only intoxication, which you concede is sinful.

Do you believe the non-medical use of tobacco and alcohol are inherently sinful as well?  If you believe the moderate consumption of marijuana for recreational purposes is inherently sinful, I'm not sure how you could logically hold the Catholic position that the moderate use of tobacco and alcohol are ever justifiable, either.

Probably already addressed, but it’s the THC/hallucinogenic effects that are the problem.
Even in seriously low “doses” (a few “passes” or “puffs”), one’s heart rate can increase quite dramatically, and one’s perceptions can get seriously messed up. There’s probably a lot of individual differences here in one’s genetic and psychological makeup, and how that plays into its effects, but there’s plenty of evidence that using weed can increase the likelihood of serious mental illness down the road. 
I hope it’s obvious that taking magic mushroom or LSD - even in “low doses” - would be serious sin. You’re opening up your brain chemistry and mind to a hellgate for demons.

[IudicaMe]

I think you are refuting you own argument.  The intent of non-medical marijuana use is only intoxication, which you concede is sinful.

Do you believe the non-medical use of tobacco and alcohol are inherently sinful as well?  If you believe the moderate consumption of marijuana for recreational purposes is inherently sinful, I'm not sure how you could logically hold the Catholic position that the moderate use of tobacco and alcohol are ever justifiable, either.

Probably already addressed, but it’s the THC/hallucinogenic effects that are the problem.
Even in seriously low “doses” (a few “passes” or “puffs”), one’s heart rate can increase quite dramatically, and one’s perceptions can get seriously messed up. There’s probably a lot of individual differences here in one’s genetic and psychological makeup, and how that plays into its effects, but there’s plenty of evidence that using weed can increase the likelihood of serious mental illness down the road. 
I hope it’s obvious that taking magic mushroom or LSD - even in “low doses” - would be serious sin. You’re opening up your brain chemistry and mind to a hellgate for demons.

But the problem is in the use of the word "inherently." If something can be sinful, then it cannot be inherently sinful.

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident]

Not all drugs are the same.

Moderate use of tobacco does not affect our ability to make decisions. Immoderate use of tobacco over the long-term might negatively affect health, so it could be sinful.

Moderate use of alcohol does not affect our ability to make decisions. Immoderate use of alcohol reduces or removes our ability to make decisions, so it is gravely sinful.

Moderate use of marijuana affects our ability to make decisions (as well as our ability to remember things or form complicated thoughts.)

[Marmot]

But the problem is in the use of the word "inherently." If something can be sinful, then it cannot be inherently sinful.

I disagree. All things that are inherently sinful can be sinful, in the same way that an elephant can be an animal.

[1Faith]

Not all drugs are the same.

Moderate use of tobacco does not affect our ability to make decisions. Immoderate use of tobacco over the long-term might negatively affect health, so it could be sinful.

Moderate use of alcohol does not affect our ability to make decisions. Immoderate use of alcohol reduces or removes our ability to make decisions, so it is gravely sinful.

Moderate use of marijuana affects our ability to make decisions (as well as our ability to remember things or form complicated thoughts.)

This gets a little tricky in modern legal markets where cannabis can be microdosed. An edible/beverage dose of 2mg thc isnt going to do much of anything beyond mildly relax you. Ill be honest, I dont see how something like that differs in any substantive way from having a glass of wine or two.

But, we dont rely on private judgement, the Church says no unless its used for medical purposes. So we need to submit to that judgement. But the issue of dosages and the morality of microdosing should be studied and addressed.

Sent from my SM-A015T1 using Tapatalk

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPresident]

But the problem is in the use of the word "inherently." If something can be sinful, then it cannot be inherently sinful.

I disagree. All things that are inherently sinful can be sinful, in the same way that an elephant can be an animal.

It's a statement that's technically true but conveys zero information, and it may cause the hearer to develop a false understanding.

"The temperature outside my house is greater than -273C."