Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI  (Read 6332 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mark 79

  • Supporter
  • *****
  • Posts: 12909
  • Reputation: +8524/-1611
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
« Reply #90 on: April 01, 2022, 11:13:31 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0

  • You have an agenda to promote the use of pot among trads. I do have a problem with that. You make being stoned seem completely normal. The medical use of pot is limited. It doesn't matter how many papers you cite. How many of the authors of your studies are traditional Catholics?

    There you go again—lying.

    I/we promote the appropriate and judicious medical use of MJ for people suffering serious, even life-threatening, diseases.

    I/we tolerate the appropriate and judicious social use of MJ according to established moral theology principles.

    I/we have been quite clear from my/our earliest posts that there are some people for whom MJ use is inappropriate (e.g., schizophrenics, people with susceptibility to substance abuse).

    I have never, nobody here has ever,
    made "being stoned seem completely normal."

    Quite the contrary to your layers of lies, I/we have consistently and repeatedly stated that to lose one's inhibition or reason is objectively sinful (except as moral theology allows for treatment of severe pain, etc.).

    Instead of addressing these carefully circuмscribed positions, you have raged with bizarre caricatures as now, claiming I/we promote global use of MJ as the norm.

    That is just a lie.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #91 on: April 01, 2022, 11:15:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2

  • There you go again—lying.

    I promote the appropriate and judicious medical use of MJ for people suffering serious, even life-threatening, diseases.

    I tolerate the appropriate and judicious social use of MJ according to established moral theology principles.

    I have been quite clear from my earliest posts that there are some people for whom MJ use is inappropriate (e.g., schizophrenics, people with susceptibility to substance abuse).

    I have never, nobody here has ever,
    made "being stoned seem completely normal."

    Quite the contrary to your lie, we have consistently and repeatedly stated that to lose one's inhibition or reason is objectively sinful (except as moral theology allows for treatment of severe pain, etc.).

    Instead of addressing these carefully circuмscribed positions, you have raged with bizarre caricatures as now, claiming I/we promote global use of MJ as the norm.

    That is just a lie.


    It is obvious that you do not limit your support to just the so-called medical use of pot. You are not being honest. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29


    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #92 on: April 01, 2022, 11:18:25 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • It is obvious that you do not limit your support to just the so-called medical use of pot. You are not being honest.

    Quote verbatim such unlimited "support" or be known for the hysterical and hypocritical liar you are.

    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #93 on: April 01, 2022, 11:24:42 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Quote verbatim such unlimited "support" or be known for the hysterical liar you are.

    Do you remember how this whole thing got started? Someone started a thread about pot, and I posted the situation about my brother, and how pot has ruined his life. He doesn't use pot for medicinal reasons. I also said that pot is a bad thing, because of my personal observation (I didn't include at that time the observations of what pot did to my friends in high school).

    Well, you got quite upset that I would think that there is something bad/wrong with the non-medicinal use of pot. It had nothing to do with the medical aspect. You would not allow me to judge the use of pot for non-medical reasons (being used by a stoner), even though I have witnessed first-hand the damage that it can do. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #94 on: April 01, 2022, 11:32:06 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • So you cannot quote verbatim even a single instance of me or anyone promoting unlimited "support" for use of marijuana.


    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #95 on: April 01, 2022, 11:33:01 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • So you cannot quote verbatim even a single instance of me or anyone promoting unlimited "support" for use of marijuana.

    No, I'm not going to go and look up your posts. You obviously support potheadism. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #96 on: April 01, 2022, 11:34:33 AM »
  • Thanks!2
  • No Thanks!0
  • You are objectively a liar.

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #97 on: April 01, 2022, 11:34:55 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • There you go again—lying.

    I/we promote the appropriate and judicious medical use of MJ for people suffering serious, even life-threatening, diseases.

    I/we tolerate the appropriate and judicious social use of MJ according to established moral theology principles.

    I/we have been quite clear from my/our earliest posts that there are some people for whom MJ use is inappropriate (e.g., schizophrenics, people with susceptibility to substance abuse).

    I have never, nobody here has ever,
    made "being stoned seem completely normal."

    Quite the contrary to your layers of lies, I/we have consistently and repeatedly stated that to lose one's inhibition or reason is objectively sinful (except as moral theology allows for treatment of severe pain, etc.).

    Instead of addressing these carefully circuмscribed positions, you have raged with bizarre caricatures as now, claiming I/we promote global use of MJ as the norm.

    That is just a lie.



    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #98 on: April 01, 2022, 11:36:08 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!2
  • You are objectively a liar.

    You can keep calling me a liar, but it does not change your obvious support of potheadism.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #99 on: April 01, 2022, 11:38:48 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • If my alleged "support" for unqualified use of MJ was as "obvious" as you claim, it would take less than 1 minute to provide a verbatim quote.

    You are a habitual liar.

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #100 on: April 01, 2022, 11:40:23 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • There you go again—lying.

    I/we promote the appropriate and judicious medical use of MJ for people suffering serious, even life-threatening, diseases.

    I/we tolerate the appropriate and judicious social use of MJ according to established moral theology principles.

    I/we have been quite clear from my/our earliest posts that there are some people for whom MJ use is inappropriate (e.g., schizophrenics, people with susceptibility to substance abuse).

    I have never, nobody here has ever,
    made "being stoned seem completely normal."

    Quite the contrary to your layers of lies, I/we have consistently and repeatedly stated that to lose one's inhibition or reason is objectively sinful (except as moral theology allows for treatment of severe pain, etc.).

    Instead of addressing these carefully circuмscribed positions, you have raged with bizarre caricatures as now, claiming I/we promote global use of MJ as the norm.

    That is just a lie.



    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #101 on: April 01, 2022, 11:41:46 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • If my alleged "support" for unqualified use if MJ was as "obvious" as you claim, it would take less than 1 minute to provide a verbatim quote.

    You are a habitual liar.

    I'm not going to look up your posts. I provided the example from memory (about my brother), and you chose to ignore it. I don't have to play by your rules. 
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #102 on: April 01, 2022, 11:47:29 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • I'm not going to look up your posts. I provided the example from memory (about my brother), and you chose to ignore it. I don't have to play by your rules.
    So your post about your brother is your "proof" of what I think?

    Such insanity only demonstrates how deeply disordered you are in projecting your insanities and sins on others.

    Offline Mark 79

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12909
    • Reputation: +8524/-1611
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #103 on: April 01, 2022, 11:47:53 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0

  • There you go again—lying.

    I/we promote the appropriate and judicious medical use of MJ for people suffering serious, even life-threatening, diseases.

    I/we tolerate the appropriate and judicious social use of MJ according to established moral theology principles.

    I/we have been quite clear from my/our earliest posts that there are some people for whom MJ use is inappropriate (e.g., schizophrenics, people with susceptibility to substance abuse).

    I have never, nobody here has ever,
    made "being stoned seem completely normal."

    Quite the contrary to your layers of lies, I/we have consistently and repeatedly stated that to lose one's inhibition or reason is objectively sinful (except as moral theology allows for treatment of severe pain, etc.).

    Instead of addressing these carefully circuмscribed positions, you have raged with bizarre caricatures as now, claiming I/we promote global use of MJ as the norm.

    That is just a lie.


    Offline Meg

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 6791
    • Reputation: +3468/-2999
    • Gender: Female
    Re: Ban Marijuana Discussions from CI
    « Reply #104 on: April 01, 2022, 11:51:33 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
  • So your post about your brother is your "proof" of what I think?

    Such insanity only demonstrates how deeply disordered you are in projecting your insanities and sins on others.

    Reported to moderator.
    "It is licit to resist a Sovereign Pontiff who is trying to destroy the Church. I say it is licit to resist him in not following his orders and in preventing the execution of his will. It is not licit to Judge him, to punish him, or to depose him, for these are acts proper to a superior."

    ~St. Robert Bellarmine
    De Romano Pontifice, Lib.II, c.29