Last Tradhican wrote: Whether something is a sin or not is not the final maker or breaker of almost anything that we do every day. It is not a sin for a family with children to have a pet rattle snake. It is not a sin to fix an appliance while it is plugged in. Just because it is not a sin for your daughters to smoke MJ recreationally does not mean that it is wise to allow it or encourage it. This thread (Is Marijuana use Sinful to Catholics?) is useless for the real world, it is only here for smokers of MJ to justify themselves, seeking teachers according to their own desire. Again, I am talking about recreational use of MJ among single young people, not medical use.

Your posting is that of a man filled with hate and envy. You are not physically well, do you think it is wise to be behaving as your are?

I judge the priests by their deeds (just like I judge a carpenter, plumber, doctor, engineer by the work they put out), the morality of the students that they taught in the schools, the young people that they counseled in confession, and the sermons that they gave in the pulpits. If the girls that were under these priests are now pregnant (I can see that), smoking grass and partying in clubs (they brag about it, tell other young people) , dressing provocative clothing like any girl of the world ( I see that myself in town and mass)  and I never saw the priests say anything to the girls while they were still going mass wearing inappropriate clothes, never heard them give a sermon on immodesty, moreover, they had teachers in the schools that went around in short shorts in front of the priests and they never said anything. That is how I judge.

I lived that life of partying till I came back to the Church when I was 40. I can tell when someone is a "partier" and dope smoker. I can tell when a girl has changed from innocence to experienced. The change is striking to me.

Nobody is ignoring your point, but rejecting your foolish generalization, projection of your own disorder, and denial of Catholic moral theology.

THE POINT
Marijuana, Cocaine, Hashish, Quaaludes and the like, they all were the high waving red flag that the female users were promiscuous ("they liked to party"). There was no moderation about it. All MJ smokers were promiscuous. I do not see why it would be any different today, especially since MJ is more potent.

The term "leg spreader" is kind of scandalizing, just saying. (You are 100% correct, I cringed every time I wrote it, but sometimes one has to be blunt. You will not see me use it again)

That aside, I essentially agree with you, with the caveat that we cannot also generalize recreational use as inherently directed towards hedonism and abuse (I always put recreational use among young people, and specifically young girls and I state my personal experience that it was and is a certain sign that they "Party". A girl that tries MJ just to see what its like and never does it again is not going to turn into a slave to Satan. I am not talking about older couples who smoke MJ by themselves at home. I have no experience there) . Mark has provided solid evidence to the contrary (no M79 has not, he has provided information about medical use, and his recreational use is not about young daughters, so his evidence has NOTHING to do with MY POINT), and others have shown that morally-speaking you have just as much of a risk of MJ abuse amongst some dispositions as you would alcohol or tobacco (Moral Theology has nothing to do with MY POINT, and they have not shown that young girls reaction to use of MJ is the same as alcohol or tobacco. In my experience, alcohol (and of course tobacco) did not result in the same reaction as MJ, not even close. Neither did Cocaine. Quaaludes did though.)


We all have different backgrounds, especially those of us who came from the world to Catholicism. I've seen it, I'm sure just about everyone here has too in their personal lives. The problem here is why you feel the need to "shout it from the rooftops" so often on CI, where many are already well aware of the dangers of the modern world? Your audience, and scope, is limited to Catholics who are like-minded in that matter. (If they were likeminded,  this thread would have not made it past my first posting.)

So, I see it as a futile exercise that serves to reveal your own morbid fixation on the subject of licentiousness and the possibility of a hidden (or explicit) pride on your part to condescend your virtue to others (as evidenced by both yours and Meg's replies in these threads). (Speak for yourself. Obviously you are not like minded, you have a horse in the race, and a chip on your shoulder.)

Quote

I quoted St. Remigius saying it is THE sin that takes almost all adults. It's from the 5th century. I could post many more such quotes. Were all the saints that taught about THE sin that takes the most adults to hell also "revealing their own morbid fixation on the subject of licentiousness and the possibility of a hidden (or explicit) pride"? If it disturbs you just ignore it.

Thank you for bumping the thread and placing me in such distinguished company of the "morbid fixated prideful" saints.

Among adults there are few saved because of the sins of the flesh....With exception of those who die in childhood, most men will be damned. (St. Remigius of Rheims)