The Legalistation/decriminalisation Of Cannabis.

[ParadiseFound]

I was just wondering what the general consensus among the people of this site is.

EDIT: The poll isn't very well thought through. Sorry about that.

Edited February 5, 2011 by ParadiseFound

[Nihil Obstat]

I see nothing within Catholic morality that precludes the morality of recreational marijuana as long as it is not taken to excess. I don't believe there is an essential difference between marijuana use and alcohol use.

[rhetoricfemme]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1296930905' post='2209042']
I see nothing within Catholic morality that precludes the morality of recreational marijuana as long as it is not taken to excess. I don't believe there is an essential difference between marijuana use and alcohol use.
[/quote]
Yeah, pretty much.

Amongst other things, having marijuana manufactured in a way that has it put onto store shelves (not all stores, but you know, shops that specialize in such things) would cut down on dealers who may 'trademark' their drugs with other drugs laced into them. Two of my husband's friends growing up were put in prison for something like ten years after they smoked some pot that they didn't know was laced with something stronger. They ended up high, throwing large rocks at cars off of an overpass. They managed to strike two different vehicles, killing both drivers.

I also imagine that if taxed properly, selling marijuana could help America with some of that trillion dollar debt we're sitting on...

[Groo the Wanderer]

I am completely against the legalization of cannibalism, no matter the reason.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1296938837' post='2209066']
I am completely against the legalization of cannibalism, no matter the reason.
[/quote]
Edit for teh lulz.

Edited February 5, 2011 by Nihil Obstat

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1296938837' post='2209066']
I am completely against the legalization of cannibalism, no matter the reason.
[/quote]

Even if the cannibal has glaucoma?

~Sternhauser

[MIKolbe]

i'm rather gamey.

[MithLuin]

[quote name='Groo the Wanderer' timestamp='1296938837' post='2209066']
I am completely against the legalization of cannibalism, no matter the reason.
[/quote]

When I first glanced at the thread title, that's what I thought too!

"Hello, Clarisse...."

[Mark of the Cross]

[b][url=""]CCC 2290[/url][/b] The virtue of temperance disposes us to [b][i]avoid every kind of excess[/i]:[/b] the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others' safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.

[b]CCC 2291 [/b]The [i]use of drugs[/i] inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. [b]Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense.[/b] 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.

There seems to be a little conflict here, but it could be that the bold type 2291 is the qualifier for 2290.

It's one of those things that has some grey area's. We had a Priest, a Brother and two Seminarians for tea (we fed them, not ate them) we all drank some alcohol and had a good talk and a great time. I see no error in what we did. However the drinking of red wine which is a nutrient is different from the inhalation of smoke which is an abuse of the respiratory function. One may argue that some of Mary Jane's cookies are Okay but one would expect the use to be for the relief of pain.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1297030801' post='2209421']
[b][url=""]CCC 2290[/url][/b] The virtue of temperance disposes us to [b][i]avoid every kind of excess[/i]:[/b] the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others' safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.
[/quote]

Irrelevant. We're not talking about excess versus temperance. That's an individual responsibility, not something to be legislated.

[quote]CCC 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. [/quote]

How does the CCC define drugs? Alcohol is a drug, is it not? Caffeine? I'm not willing to argue that when I have a glass of scotch or cup of coffee that I'm using those drugs one strictly therapeutic grounds. Are you? Jesus drank wine. I don't think it was strictly therapeutic.

[quote] However the drinking of red wine which is a nutrient is different from the inhalation of smoke which is an abuse of the respiratory function.[/quote]

The Church has never condemned smoking. In fact the wording of 2290 appears to give approval within reason to the use of tobacco. You're attempting to impose your opinion in areas the Church has not (and will not) already pronounce.

[quote] 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]

Wouldn't be relevant if marijuana were legalized.
Do you think it was mortal or immoral to smuggle alcohol during Prohibition?

[Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam]

It seems to me to be a non-issue. I look at it in a similar manner that I do alcohol, though in a very different way than most people use the analogy of the two substances. It is right that a government place restrictions on alcohol and make sure that alcohol not be consumed by certain parts of society (such as minors). It is just then that alcohol should be a controlled/monitored substance. However, part of this control will inherently be arbitrary and not mandated at a certain age by justice (such as placing the limit between 18 or 21. Such distinction is made with reasons but is ultimately a prudential decision on the part of rightful authority-such authority could include parents, a fact which many alcohol laws make allowances for and rightfully so). Therefore, since it is just to have alcohol laws, and assuming such laws were made by rightful authority and were promulgated, one should follow them. Similarly with cannabis, like tobacco and alcohol, it should be regulated. I can imagine a society that does in fact wish to have tobacco and alcohol and other such things and wishes to regulate them in a certain way and I can imagine other societies that choose to ban them as a form of regulation, a right that the people have in forming their society. It does not seem to me to be against justice that, when forming a society, the people can include or exclude what they want concerning such things deserving of regulation by authority. As such, it does not seem to me to be against justice for a people to decide to not allow cannabis but to allow such things as alcohol or tobacco, but rather follows the mores and preferences of the people as they create society.

[sixpence]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1297032036' post='2209426']

How does the CCC define drugs? Alcohol is a drug, is it not? Caffeine? I'm not willing to argue that when I have a glass of scotch or cup of coffee that I'm using those drugs one strictly therapeutic grounds. Are you? Jesus drank wine. I don't think it was strictly therapeutic.

The Church has never condemned smoking. In fact the wording of 2290 appears to give approval within reason to the use of tobacco. You're attempting to impose your opinion in areas the Church has not (and will not) already pronounce.

Wouldn't be relevant if marijuana were legalized.
Do you think it was mortal or immoral to smuggle alcohol during Prohibition?
[/quote]

agree-y-ness

[Ephrem Augustine]

There are people throughout california who would be ready to turn it into a private business. The thing is with that, at least you take marijuana out of the hands of criminals and into the hands of wealthy businessmen. For their part, I know drug cartels are making children into their assassins. So, if criminals couldn't get benefit for a drug like marijuana they would lose their power.

Decriminalized and legalized marijuana would still carry certain restrictions. It may be outlawed in certain states and accepted in others? It may be restricted on age. It may be restricted out of bars or public places, in some instances, or some states. I favor a prudent legalization of marijuana. Perhaps there could even be a criminalization for possession of a large amount of marijuana, or growing marijuana without a permit.

I do find the absolute position we are in inadequate.

In addition, my experience with most marijuana smokers is not that it is a gateway drug (although very rarely it is). Neither does it lead to more crime, except the illegal possession and use of a drug. For the most part it just turns them into droopy harmless puddles. Most of whom I saw as losers. I think that more marijuana smokers, who smoke legally will cause no harm to anyone else.

Theologically speaking, it is another matter. At this point, the illegal use of it is immoral. It is not like we need it for sacred purposes (as in the case of real wine that we use in Mass during the time of the Prohibition.) Should it become legal, then it would no longer carry the same immorality. Not only would legal weed be more morally permissible, so would the business behind it. The only moral question that would occur would be the matter of temperance and responsible use.

Further, should it actually be legal, I would still discourage the frequent use of it. Just like if it were Facebook or something.

[Winchester]

I don't think we should eat each other, period.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1297032036' post='2209426']
Irrelevant. We're not talking about excess versus temperance. That's an individual responsibility, not something to be legislated.
[/quote]
Agreed! Why so touchy? We've had an argument over this before, so I'm not about to enter into that again. I don't like conflict especially with people I consider my friends. I was merely opening this up for discussion. I believe 2290 was your argument that's why I brought it up.

[quote]How does the CCC define drugs? Alcohol is a drug, is it not? Caffeine? I'm not willing to argue that when I have a glass of scotch or cup of coffee that I'm using those drugs one strictly therapeutic grounds. Are you? [b]Jesus drank wine[/b]. I don't think it was strictly therapeutic.
[/quote]
Like I said there are grey area's. A priest, non Catholic (CofE) told me that the wine of Jesus day would have been non alcoholic and he would not use alcoholic wine for the Eucharist . I'm not interested enough to verify that, because I'm happy to use the alcoholic wine for it's therapeutic value. That is it reduces the risk of the spread of disease.

[quote]The Church has never condemned smoking. In fact the wording of 2290 appears to give approval within reason to the use of tobacco. You're attempting to impose your opinion in areas the Church has not (and will not) already pronounce.[/quote]
The use of tobacco also must include chewing it. I don't know anything about that and I'm not arguing against it. 2290 leaves open the possibility of this. This thread asks for [b]an opinion[/b], I'm giving mine. My opinion is that any kind of smoking is so dangerous to health and well being that it should not be [b]recommended for use[/b] at any level. I'm applying the line [i]'The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life'[/i] as a qualifier of[b] My opinion[/b]. Nobody is compelled to take notice of me, in fact from what I have seen nobody will. I am not seducing anyone into something that could have a bad outcome for them. I just feel it a responsibility as does my (OZ) government and society to warn people that smoking of any substance is unwise.


[quote]Wouldn't be relevant if marijuana were legalized.
Do you think it was mortal or immoral to smuggle alcohol during Prohibition?
[/quote]
I didn't comment on that or intend too. It was part of the CCC, I didn't want to be guilty of the error of omission as far as the CCC is concerned.

It's sometimes difficult to discern what a given text means, but if I can't use the CCC as a [b]guide[/b], what do you propose I use, someone's opinion on a forum? When searching for Catholic truths I invariable ignore forums for the reason that they are hopelessly unreliable. In the past I was advised to stay away from forums but I'm a little recalcitrant. No malice intended.