Sojourner Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 11 2005, 09:17 PM']Correct, if one is of legal age to consume said drug. [right][snapback]820883[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Hence the use of the word "properly." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I posted the last post before I read your last post, Cam. Anyway, I did like your last post. The only place we part company is where you say the strict breaking of the alcohol age-limit, even in private company, is immoral. I agree with you about every other sin accompanying drinking, drunkenness and drunk driving and causing your brother to stumble... but those are the privations of alcoholic consumption. there are many good social uses of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 If this thread devolves into a rehash of the other one, I'm closing it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Dec 11 2005, 10:51 PM']I know this is no longer supposed to be a debate, but this is really bothering me... if you're saying that alcohol is in the same category as drugs in the CCC quote you provided, then absolutely any use of it at any age would be immoral. we know this to not be what the Church teaches; I can respect the opinion that says drinking is moral except when you break the law (though I disagree with it), but I cannot respect the radically un-Catholic opinion that drinking alcoholic beverages is immoral in any way in and of itself remember, if alcohol falls under the category of drugs in the CCC as you say it does, then this is what you're saying about alcohol The use of drugs [alcohol] inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their [Its] use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs [alcohol] are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law [i.e. drinking alcohol]. "A modern vegetarian is also a teetotaler, yet there is no obvious connection between consuming vegetables and not consuming fermented vegetables. A drunkard, when lifted laboriously out of the gutter, might well be heard huskily to plead that he had fallen there through excessive devotion to a vegetable diet." -GK Chesterton [right][snapback]820993[/snapback][/right] [/quote] What does CCC #2290 say? It says: [quote]The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: 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] What does CCC #2291 say? It says: [quote]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] Now understanding this in the context of the conversation we see that you are committing yet another fallacy. You are committing a red herring. Please stop. If one is practicing the virtue of temperance, then one is to avoid every kind of excess which includes the abuse of alcohol. If one is drinking underage, which is contrary to the accepted civil law, then he is abusing alcohol. He is not being virtous. He is endangering his safety based upon the accepted judgment of society, in a just manner. However, CCC #2291 says that the use of alcohol/drugs if used therapeutic means (such as medicinally) then it is acceptable, if not then it is gravely sinful. This is based upon the criteria laid forth in CCC #2290. You are wrong. Your position is wrong. Your argument is a slippery slope, which is another fallacy. I have told you this, others have told you this. You have not listened. Perhaps now you will. What does CCC #2288 say? It says: [quote]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. Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.[/quote] Who is to be the judge? Society. We are to respect that. You have taken it upon yourself to (admittedly) disagree with it. Justify that. The Catechism does build upon itself and refer to itself; as in this case. Your position is full of fallacious notions. We have been saying this all along. What say you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Fallacies and red herrings belong on the debate table... so... back you go... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='homeschoolmom' date='Dec 11 2005, 11:06 PM']Fallacies and red herrings belong on the debate table... so... back you go... [right][snapback]821020[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And that is the reason that I put it there in the first place. I am getting dizzy from all the Regulators punting me around today. Sheesh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 I didn't see any debate. Everyone agreed it was a drug. So, it went to open mic. It appears to be going back to the topic of the old thread. Opening a new thread in an attempt to rehash a closed debate is not nice either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 11 2005, 10:05 PM']Your position is full of fallacious notions. We have been saying this all along. What say you? [right][snapback]821019[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I say we've been up and down this road ten times today. Time to let it go. Good day, sir. I would, however, be very interested in reading a discussion on this issue between Laudate_Dominom and JeffCR07, the two people I see to be the leading proponents of each side in this discussion so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theoketos Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 In before lock... Brother Love Each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Dec 11 2005, 11:17 PM']I say we've been up and down this road ten times today. Time to let it go. Good day, sir. I would, however, be very interested in reading a discussion on this issue between Laudate_Dominom and JeffCR07, the two people I see to be the leading proponents of each side in this discussion so far. [right][snapback]821040[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I say that you should respond to the catechetical position. You called for it and I gave a solid defense of it. And I would not say that JeffCR07 is the leading proponent. He was initially agreeing with my positioining on this, Al. It has been shown that the catechetical teaching is not consistent with your view. It has been shown that the virtue does not lie with your view. It is known that underage drinking is against the law. How can you show a contrary view to the systematic view presented to adequately defend your position? How do you respond? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philothea Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 Heh. I am trying to think how to phrase this debate so we can get somewhere and not get shut down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 good luck... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Posted December 12, 2005 Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Cam42' date='Dec 11 2005, 10:23 PM']I say that you should respond to the catechetical position. You called for it and I gave a solid defense of it. And I would not say that JeffCR07 is the leading proponent. He was initially agreeing with my positioining on this, Al. [right][snapback]821053[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I know he was agreeing with your position. That's why I'd like to see him argue this with L_D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 See, now I have been waiting for the popcorn.....HSMom, hot stuff told me you make the best popcorn in the Cities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted December 12, 2005 Author Share Posted December 12, 2005 [quote name='Aloysius' date='Dec 11 2005, 11:27 PM']I know he was agreeing with your position. That's why I'd like to see him argue this with L_D. [right][snapback]821059[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And I'd actually like to see you respond to my position. They are not posting on this thread at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts