CrossCuT Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Also, yes...I have smoked weed. Im also a student, a successful member of the professional world, and able to maintain relationships quite well. I also dont live in my parents basement. Does that ruin your perception of weed smokers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Also, yes...I have smoked weed. Im also a student, a successful member of the professional world, and able to maintain relationships quite well. I also dont live in my parents basement. Does that ruin your perception of weed smokers? You know, it's the undergrads at CalTech* who are most likely to use drugs and find a way to work with that because they are so smart. That does not mean it is wise in the long run to make a practice of it. *CalTech is the MIT of the West Coast for those not familiar with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Hmm someones bias is showing. I encourage you do read up on some scientific studies regarding cannabis. I think the biggest thing holding it back is that the previous lack if information has caused a lot of misconceptions. We still dont know a ton about its effects on the body but we are making strides. I even went to an expert conference on it. You want to talk like I never read up on it, get over yourself. You want to present research, that I respect. I will always think it is dumb to use a lot of excess chemicals in the body just to feel good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 The way you talk does not in any way express some deep understanding of the issue. Sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 The way you talk does not in any way express some deep understanding of the issue. Sorry. Not to be rude, but do you have an example? I haven't been able to find one in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Not to be rude, but do you have an example? I haven't been able to find one in this thread. An example of what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) The way you talk does not in any way express some deep understanding of the issue. Sorry. If you look at my recent post, I did not speak as though a small about would cause severe brain damage, but I merely made a warning about excessive quantities of the substance to the point of having a strong negative affect using an example of a person that in my experience, many of us have met. I invite you to educate me where you believe I am lacking. I prefer research, not just personal annecdotes. Single stories provide too much room for statistical outliers-the same thing that some very pro-pot people claim other people's doped out classmates were. Edited July 2, 2014 by Light and Truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 To find out why they're treated differently recreationally, simply spend and consume $5 dollars worth of marijuana (which from my street pharmacist apprenticeship days, should get you a bowls worth) on one day, and then $5 dollars worth of alcohol on another. If I looked around a bit I could probably find a mickey of some strong, cheap crappy alcohol for around $5. Easily if I could buy it illegally and therefore avoid taxes. :hehe: That much cheap whisky would put most people on the floor if you drank it in an evening. Drink it too quickly and you would easily be in alcohol poisoning territory. I could go online and buy $5 worth of caffeine pills, and that much would kill me a dozen times over, no problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossCuT Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 If you look at my recent post, I did not speak as though a small about would cause severe brain damage, but I merely made a warning about excessive quantities of the substance to the point of having a strong negative affect using an example of a person that in my experience, many of us have met. I invite you to educate me where you believe I am lacking. I prefer research, not just personal annecdotes. Single stories provide too much room for statistical outliers-the same thing that some very pro-pot people claim other people's doped out classmates were. I think its funny that in the same post you say "I warn people based off a personal anecdote" and then go on to say "single stories provide too much room for statistical outliers." Anywho Here are two links to articles on the IFLS webpage. They have links to all the studies they talk about and they put together some nice summaries of cannabis. Cannabis, Cannabinoids and Cancer – The Evidence So Far Medical Marijuana - What’s It Good For?Medical Marijuana Shows Promise Against Autoimmune Diseases On the con side (just to show how open minded and awesome I am) here is a link to the study Perigrina posted a week or so back: Study Finds Recreational Cannabis Use Is Associated With Abnormalities In The Brain There have been studies looking into the association of cannabis use and brain morphology in regards to schizophrenia and I found this study that discusses that: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3560946/ The take home message when running studies on brain morphology is this: these studies show an association but not conclusive evidence of a cannabis = morphological abnormalities. I mean, i COULD, I wouldnt doubt it, but there needs to be more research done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Credo in Deum Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 If I looked around a bit I could probably find a mickey of some strong, cheap crappy alcohol for around $5. Easily if I could buy it illegally and therefore avoid taxes. :hehe: That much cheap whisky would put most people on the floor if you drank it in an evening. Drink it too quickly and you would easily be in alcohol poisoning territory. Well I've had some really cheap whiskey before but never $5 dollars cheap. My point is that the substances are completely different and therefore cannot be treated equally, which is why they're treated differently from a moral standpoint. If your point is that you can magically find whiskey stronger than Everclear for $5 dollars which could do worse harm to you than marijuana, then you still haven't provided any information that is contrary to what I've already been saying, since not only would using such whiskey be considered gravely sinful; it would still not be treated the same as the marijuana, the caffeine pills, or even the majority of other alcohols available for purchase and consumption.I could go online and buy $5 worth of caffeine pills, and that much would kill me a dozen times over, no problem. Taking $5 dollars worth of caffeine pills would also be sinful, so I fail to see what you're getting at. Marijuana in and of itself is not inherently sinful. It is a plant which God made. What does render it's use sinful is our intentions for using it, how we use it, how much we use, and what duties and responsibilities we are sacrificing by using it. What most priests I have spoken with have said is, because of its potency marijuana can hardly be considered a legitimate recreational substance. Yet they would also say the same about your cheap whiskey, even though they wouldn't say the same about a can of Budweiser. This is because even in the world if alcohol, not all alcohols can be treated the same. Just because the church doesn't have a problem with you having a Budweiser during lunch does not mean the church does not have a problem with you having a glass of rubbing alcohol during lunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nihil Obstat Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 Well I've had some really cheap whiskey before but never $5 dollars cheap. My point is that the substances are completely different and therefore cannot be treated equally, which is why they're treated differently from a moral standpoint. If your point is that you can magically find whiskey stronger than Everclear for $5 dollars which could do worse harm to you than marijuana, then you still haven't provided any information that is contrary to what I've already been saying, since not only would using such whiskey be considered gravely sinful; it would still not be treated the same as the marijuana, the caffeine pills, or even the majority of other alcohols available for purchase and consumption. Taking $5 dollars worth of caffeine pills would also be sinful, so I fail to see what you're getting at. Marijuana in and of itself is not inherently sinful. It is a plant which God made. What does render it's use sinful is our intentions for using it, how we use it, how much we use, and what duties and responsibilities we are sacrificing by using it. What most priests I have spoken with have said is, because of its potency marijuana can hardly be considered a legitimate recreational substance. Yet they would also say the same about your cheap whiskey, even though they wouldn't say the same about a can of Budweiser. This is because even in the world if alcohol, not all alcohols can be treated the same. Just because the church doesn't have a problem with you having a Budweiser during lunch does not mean the church does not have a problem with you having a glass of rubbing alcohol during lunch. I am going by two things here. First, I think I could find a mickey (i.e. 375ml) of cheap, strong alcohol for around $5. I would have to look around a bit, but I do not think it would be impossible. $10, absolutely no problem. That is 12 shots worth, so if we are talking whisky that is serious alcohol poisoning therapy. Nothing controversial here. I agree that downing the whole thing would be objectively sinful. I do not really know how much marijuana $5 gets you. Not relevant per se, IMO. Scientifically speaking it is not enough to kill you, anyway. I am sure we agree on that. So, the second part of what I am trying to say: I can take this $5 of cheap whisky, but a bit in my soda, and enjoy it in a wholly legitimate manner. My intention is not sinful, and its use is not sinful. This is fine. So with this cheap whisky (or with those caffeine pills), I can legitimately enjoy a reasonable amount. BUT, speaking in terms of physiological effects, is it, or is it not possible to take a bit of marijuana, say we have found and cultivated a variety that is relatively low in THC, and use a reasonable amount to produce only a small effect? This is my question because as I said, I do not know and I have never found a straight answer to this. In short: Excessive alcohol use is sinful. Excessive marijuana use is sinful. Reasonable alcohol use is entirely possible, and is not necessarily sinful. Is reasonable marijuana use physiologically possible? -> If yes, is it necessarily sinful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 But just as a friendly note for people, there is no known physically attainable OD level for cannabis at the current time. Friendly reminder: don't become one of those spaced out people who has smoked a ton just because you can smoke a lot without dying. Our futures are meant to be brighter than that. I think its funny that in the same post you say "I warn people based off a personal anecdote" and then go on to say "single stories provide too much room for statistical outliers." Let me try again. Just because there is no OD level that causes death, it does not mean you should smoke high amounts without self-awareness to see how it is affecting you or without moderation lest the inconclusive research you cited prove there is damage, as often happens with excess and which the catechism warns us in the virtue of moderation. 2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) I think its funny that in the same post you say "I warn people based off a personal anecdote" and then go on to say "single stories provide too much room for statistical outliers." Anywho Here are two links to articles on the IFLS webpage. They have links to all the studies they talk about and they put together some nice summaries of cannabis. Cannabis, Cannabinoids and Cancer – The Evidence So Far Medical Marijuana - What’s It Good For?Medical Marijuana Shows Promise Against Autoimmune Diseases On the con side (just to show how open minded and amesome I am) here is a link to the study Perigrina posted a week or so back: Study Finds Recreational Cannabis Use Is Associated With Abnormalities In The Brain There have been studies looking into the association of cannabis use and brain morphology in regards to schizophrenia and I found this study that discusses that: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3560946/ The take home message when running studies on brain morphology is this: these studies show an association but not conclusive evidence of a cannabis = morphological abnormalities. I mean, i COULD, I wouldnt doubt it, but there needs to be more research done. Go back to my post 38 on this thread, http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/topic/134575-why-are-alcohol-and-cannabis-treated-differently/?p=2683682 I already distinguished between medical marijuana and recreational. This would also be recognized under the catechism paragraph that I cited, 2291. You're links on the merits of medical marijuana do not change anything. In fact, I already cited my awareness of medical research on THC drugs that would reduce other, less healthy, elements of marijuana. These other, less healthy elements of marijuana, you cited yourself need further research to be conclusive of their safety. As we said above, there is no good evidence that natural cannabinoids, at the doses present in simple cannabis preparations, can treat cancer in patients. It’s also completely unknown whether there may be any other chemicals in ‘street’ cannabis extracts that could be harmful to patients or even encourage tumour growth. Read more at http://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-%E2%80%93-evidence-so-far#rGK7MxzJgbVyL8p2.99 In summary, there is some evidence that chronic cannabis abuse could alter brain morphology in schizophrenia in patients continuing their cannabis consumption, but there is no convincing evidence that this alteration takes place before the onset of schizophrenia when looking at first-episode patients. There is some weak evidence that cannabis abuse could affect brain structures in high-risk subjects, but replication of these findings is needed. However, even if previous cannabis substance abuse seems not to lead to pronounced structural brain abnormalities in schizophrenia [66], it may cause functional changes on cortical inhibition processes and synaptic transmission involving mainly the GABAergic, glutamatergic and dopaminergic system in schizophrenia patients and unaffected cannabis consumers [64]. This effect of cannabis on distinct brain functions including regulation of cortical excitability [17] could be the reason why cannabis consumption is associated with a higher risk of developing schizophrenia and not primarily pronounced structural brain alterations. It is conceivable that this disinhibition following cannabis abuse might lead to a consecutive neurotoxicity leading to subtle alterations in brain structures. Well-designed studies and the combination of brain imaging and neurophysiological techniques will open the doors to new possibilities for the investigation of these important questions. Now there may be some dangers, and in fact, it does not seem completely harmless. So why do it when it is not medical but just recreational to feel good or be social? There are other ways to feel good, and feeling good is not as important as our health, and there are safer social activities? I do not believe that is the right choice. 2288 Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good. In fact, I am still waiting for a justification of non-therapeutic mind-altering substances from a Christian perspective. Edited July 2, 2014 by Light and Truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anastasia13 Posted July 2, 2014 Share Posted July 2, 2014 (edited) During prohibition, alcohol was illegal too thanks to the campaigning of certain protestant churches and civic groups. Having the Polish ancestry I do, you better believe I would be brewing my own if I was alive back then. Secular laws are a pretty bad litmus test for morality. Abortion is legal but but it's still murder. Law is not a litmus test of morality, but it is to be respected. God's laws, then secular law, then whatever you want. The question then would be, why would you be brewing your own? Christians may conscientiously object to civil laws if they infringe upon one or more of three things: (1) the law violates the moral order, that is, the natural moral law; (2) the law violates fundamental human rights; or (3) the law violates the teachings of the Gospel, which is to say the teachings of the Church. Laws that trespass against one or more of these three things may not be obeyed, and obedience to them must be refused. In fact, the Christian has both a duty and a right to refuse such a law. And though it may be unrecognized, it is a right that he must exercise regardless of the consequences to him. http://www.catholic.org/news/hf/faith/story.php?id=45255 I found this to be an interesting article. http://www.catholic.com/magazine/articles/when-is-it-okay-to-disobey Some related thoughts from the catechism: 1899 The authority required by the moral order derives from God: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore he who resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment."17 1900 The duty of obedience requires all to give due honor to authority and to treat those who are charged to exercise it with respect, and, insofar as it is deserved, with gratitude and good-will. Pope St. Clement of Rome provides the Church's most ancient prayer for political authorities:18 "Grant to them, Lord, health, peace, concord, and stability, so that they may exercise without offense the sovereignty that you have given them. Master, heavenly King of the ages, you give glory, honor, and power over the things of earth to the sons of men. Direct, Lord, their counsel, following what is pleasing and acceptable in your sight, so that by exercising with devotion and in peace and gentleness the power that you have given to them, they may find favor with you."19 2242 The citizen is obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel. Refusing obedience to civil authorities, when their demands are contrary to those of an upright conscience, finds its justification in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's."48 "We must obey God rather than men":49 When citizens are under the oppression of a public authority which oversteps its competence, they should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good; but it is legitimate for them to defend their own rights and those of their fellow citizens against the abuse of this authority within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.50 Edited July 2, 2014 by Light and Truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now