Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => Catholic Living in the Modern World => Topic started by: AnthonyPadua on February 28, 2025, 08:26:55 PM
-
I have been wondering about the more precise understanding of drunkenness/intoxication for alcohol and other drugs. To preface, we know that alcohol cheers the heart of man according to scripture, and we know that God makes no useless things, so even extreme drugs like opium have their medicinal use.
The question becomes what level of alcohol/drug use is not sinful. For alcohol there is a scientific measure, (see image 1)
The Dubowski alcohol table is the most widely used table to identify the stages of alcohol intoxication. The table was created by Professor Kurt M. Dubowski of the University of Oklahoma.
The stages of intoxication are:
- Subclinical intoxication: Also known as sobriety, this is the first stage of intoxication.
- Euphoria: Also known as being "tipsy", this stage occurs when a person's blood alcohol content (BAC) is between 0.03 and 0.12.
- Excitement: This stage occurs when a person's BAC is between 0.09% and 0.25%.
- Confusion: This stage occurs when a person's BAC is between 0.18% and 0.30%.
- Stupor: This stage occurs when a person's BAC is between 0.25% and 0.49%.
- Coma: This stage can occur as a result of intoxication.
- Death: This stage can occur as a result of intoxication.
(https://i.imgur.com/nDf88sE.png)
So at what levels roughly would these correspond to Catholic teaching on sinfulness? Also how does this work for other drugs, eg; marijuana, as there is a big difference in the types of intoxication between substances.
For example, a small amount of marijuana could make you feel high yet not make you lose control, (also anxiety with weed can effect behaviour and judgement which is why some people chose to mix weed with either alcohol or nicotine in order to remove the anxiety). While a small amount of alcohol could also make you feel something yet not lose control, though the type of 'feeling' from each substance can different as it's a different chemical effect on your body.
There is also a difference between CBD and THC in cannabis.
CBD in very high concentrations is reported to produce an uplifting effect, but not a ``buzz''. CBD may help you feel relaxed or less anxious
Cannabidiol (CBD) is one of the main active compounds in cannabis. It's a psychoactive chemical, but it doesn't cause an intoxicating “high” the way that tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) does. That's because CBD interacts differently than THC with the receptors (binding sites) in your brain.1
Over the last decades there has been growing recreational and medicinal use of cannabis, some stating that if low dosages of alcohol is fine and not a sin then low doses of THC can be fine and not a sin. Common arguments including "it's a natural plant"
What is a reasonable Catholic perspective on this? I do like to hear from those with theologian training as they can give a more level and less biased take, and I think there is also a lot of bias from older people due to proper-gander "weed = le bad coz tv said so" which leads to extremism, "oh you can't have this drug at all but you can have alcohol/nicotine in a reasonable amount" which honestly doesn't sound reasonable to me, if someone needs to relax and cope with low doses of alcohol or smokes should it not be expected that other 'low impact' drugs can also be used in a reasonable amount to cope/relax? (I am not suggesting extreme drugs like meth as those are well extreme, also I am unsure about how 'hard' cocaine is, and of course there are opioids and even caffeine is a drug, which some people are dependant on)
-
Any amount (everyone's different) where you start to loose your inhibitions is too much.
If you can feel the affects it's too much.
Unfortunately anyone who has imbibed is not a good judge of their condition.
People say they take it to relax, starting to relax is starting to loose your inhibitions.
One or two drinks is probably enough.
-
I would think somewhere within the 0.09-0.25 range would be "complete drunkenness"
(https://i.imgur.com/ewfDl3M.png)(https://i.imgur.com/gtAGNSI.png)
(https://i.imgur.com/IVsGkcK.png)
So I think other drug use may not necessarily be mortally sinful considering what the malice of drunkenness is, namely depriving yourself of moral judgement/reason. You can smoke cannabis and still retain reason, you can use cocaine and still retain reason. (I don't do either, nor do I drink :laugh1:)
-
I’ve been subclinically intoxicated my entire life with one exception as a college freshman. Do not drink two mugs full of “trash bin gin” on an empty stomach in a darkened room full of secondhand marijuana smoke while watching a bootlegged VCR of Blazing Saddles.
-
I’ve been subclinically intoxicated my entire life with one exception as a college freshman. Do not drink two mugs full of “trash bin gin” on an empty stomach in a darkened room full of secondhand marijuana smoke while watching a bootlegged VCR of Blazing Saddles.
:confused::confused::confused:
-
You can smoke cannabis and still retain reason, you can use cocaine and still retain reason. (I don't do either, nor do I drink :laugh1:)
It's obvious you don't do either otherwise you'd know how silly that statement is.
About 45 years ago my cousin and I went to an early movie. This was a time when smoking was allowed in movie theaters. All through the movie I kept thinking someone must be smoking american cigarettes as canadian cigarettes smelled distinctly different.
Well I was driving home and although I tend to have a slightly heavier foot, I kept slowing the car down as I was really speeding except when I looked at the speedometer I was going 10 MPH. I told my cousin there must be something wrong with the car as I was really having to concentrate to drive.
Thankfully we made it home OK but now looking back (I was so clueless about drugs back then) I was totally stoned.
-
It's obvious you don't do either otherwise you'd know how silly that statement is.
About 45 years ago my cousin and I went to an early movie. This was a time when smoking was allowed in movie theaters. All through the movie I kept thinking someone must be smoking american cigarettes as canadian cigarettes smelled distinctly different.
Well I was driving home and although I tend to have a slightly heavier foot, I kept slowing the car down as I was really speeding except when I looked at the speedometer I was going 10 MPH. I told my cousin there must be something wrong with the car as I was really having to concentrate to drive.
Thankfully we made it home OK but now looking back (I was so clueless about drugs back then) I was totally stoned.
So you got high off the second hand smoke? But you were still fine to drive despite feeling 'heavier'. Also if you were 'totally stoned' then wouldn't you have struggled a lot more than a heavier foot?
-
So you got high off the second hand smoke? But you were still fine to drive despite feeling 'heavier'. Also if you were 'totally stoned' then wouldn't you have struggled a lot more than a heavier foot?
Yeah I got high from second hand smoke but I don't know what they were smoking.
No I wasn't fine to drive. My perception of space and speed were way off.
As that was my one and only experience with weed/hash oil what ever, there's no way of knowing if I should or shouldn't have struggled more.
-
It's obvious you don't do either otherwise you'd know how silly that statement is.
About 45 years ago my cousin and I went to an early movie. This was a time when smoking was allowed in movie theaters. All through the movie I kept thinking someone must be smoking american cigarettes as canadian cigarettes smelled distinctly different.
Well I was driving home and although I tend to have a slightly heavier foot, I kept slowing the car down as I was really speeding except when I looked at the speedometer I was going 10 MPH. I told my cousin there must be something wrong with the car as I was really having to concentrate to drive.
Thankfully we made it home OK but now looking back (I was so clueless about drugs back then) I was totally stoned.
This:
You can smoke cannabis and still retain reason, you can use cocaine and still retain reason
Is a factual statement
This:
You can smoke cannabis and deprive yourself of reason, you can use cocaine and deprive yourself of reason
Is also a factual statement
Your personal experience does not represent everyone who has ever used cannabis recreationally. I say again, considering the malice of the sin of drunkenness (depriving yourself of reason), using cannabis or cocaine is not necessarily a mortal sin
-
If you can feel the affects it's too much.
No.
-
I have never been drunk or done any drug in my life, but, from what I've read, cocaine is a far more dangerous drug for both for society and for the individual than cannabis.
Cocaine makes people feel powerful and do dangerous and harmful things. This can be done even without complete loss of reason. Of course cannabis is also bad, but it makes you just stupid and groggy, not dangerous, as far as I know.
Cocaine is also dangerous for your heart, and will leave you paranoid and depressed after the effects go away.
If you must use something, do legal drugs. A nice pipe filled with tobacco and one or two glasses of wine won't do you harm. I don't drink alcohol at all, but I will smoke a pipe on occasion.
-
So, as per Jone and others, obviously the criterion for grave sin is when you lose control of your rational faculties to the that you'd be inclined to commit a grave sin that you would not have without said impairment. Now, this may vary from one individual to another, as there are angry drunks who will become violent and thrash their family, for instance, and there are immoral drunks who will commit sins against purity ... but there are also some who would not react that way. Finally, there may be proportionately-grave reasons to justify being intoxicated to the point of losing control of your faculties, e.g. serious pain (getting drunk to undergo surgery, no different than if you were taking morphine or something similar).
Similarly, lesser degrees of intoxication may be sinful if there's no (less grave) proportionate reason, i.e. you're just doing it for the euphoria, in that this can lead to a certain amount of dissolution (even if not grave sin) where you're in a condition where you lack serious and reverent thoughts about God and the Catholic faith ... but if you have reasons such as being prone to anxiety and need to relax after stress (vs. euphoria for euphoria's sake), or even just to be social (some people become more social when slightly intoxicated), etc. ... just something that's conducive to the good of your nature and therefore your soul, it can certainly be without any sin whatsoever to become slightly intoxicated.
Precisely which substance you're talking about doesn't figure in per se, but it can be accidentally more grave. So, for instance, certain drugs are very likely to get you hooked for life even with a single use, and risking becoming an addict would be a grave sin, where addicts often end up in lives of crime and sin, where they need to steal or prostitute themselves in order to finance their habit, and they can lose their jobs and their ability to provide for their family, and that's even if it's not super-addictive but simply illegal where if they got caught (with some random drug test at work) or else were caught in possessions, and therefore risked getting fired, that would be a grave sin just on those grounds. So, for instance, in my case, even though I see no moral problem per se with a tiny bit of micro-dosing THC (you could microdose to relieve anxiety without any highs or danger of losing control of your rational faculties), it would still be grave sin per accidens for me because my job does random drug tests and if any showed up in my system I'd be terminated immediately, and I would then be unable to provide for my family. Finally, it's sinful also to not obey just laws, so if there's a just law in place regarding drugs and you disobey it without proportionate justification, that could be a sin on its own right. But these last considerations render it immoral on other grounds extrinsic to the actual effects of the drugs themselves.
-
I have never been drunk or done any drug in my life, but, from what I've read, cocaine is a far more dangerous drug for both for society and for the individual than cannabis.
As mentioned, THC is more likely to constitute grave sin by itself since it does very quickly and easily render individuals bereft of control via their higher faculties, whereas cocaine is far more dangerous per accidens in that even if you don't lose control of your faculties, it's incredibly addictive where often people get hooked for life just trying it once, and from there it quickly degenerates into losing your job and then committing crimes and sins to feed the habit. Those types of "instant addiction" drugs are mortal sin per se, unless perhaps administered in a medical context and you're properly weened off of them. So trying even a small amount even once of those types of highly-addictive substances would IMO constitute grave sin even if you don't end up losing control of your faculties or even getting hooked, due to the high chance that you MIGHT get hooked on those drugs.
-
BTW, for anyone who's addicted to various opioids or even other similar things, look into a substance called kratom, which results in absolutely no impairment of the faculties but nevertheless does bind to the opioid receptors, blunting the withdrawal symptoms of not having opioids. Scuм Big Pharma have been attempting to demonize it, but it's great stuff. It can relieve pain and anxiety, without impairing faculties, but there is a danger of a lower level of addiction, similar to how people might be addicted to coffee.
Similarly, there's a medicine from Eastern Europe that enabled me to quit tobacco very quickly that binds to nicotine receptors that takes that "edge" of quitting nicotine where you don't get irritable or angry, and you can get this stuff on Amazon despite evil Big Pharma trying to ban it and coming up with their own versions that had to be pulled from the market due to horrific side effects. But the safe drugs with decades of safety profile from Europe they try to suppress. Just an aside thinking about binding to receptors. I have been a solid and consistent nicotine user since about the mid-1990s, so for nearly 30 years, but this stuff let me kick the habit quickly and with very little duress.
https://tinyurl.com/5dwp6fwh
-
Pain killers (for example, the epidural) can derrive from opium, fentanyl, and morphine. And meth is in drugs to treat ADHD.
-
Any amount (everyone's different) where you start to loose your inhibitions is too much.…
Even as regards alcohol, this statement is seriously deficient because it fails to address the intended purpose of consumption.
Consider the agonizing pain of malignant bone metastases. The amount of opioids necessary to kill such pain is "disinhibitory," yet such use is well protected in Catholic moral theology.
The application of the principle to the use of alcohol is outdated, but still worth mentioning. Alcohol was used medically to inhibit premature labor. Such use was also well-protected in Catholic moral theology. There are more efficacious alternative drugs available today, but, hypothetically, if such drugs were not timely available, a disinhibitory dose of alcohol would still be protected in Catholic moral theology.
The principle can also be appropriately applied to the use of disinhibitory doses of marijuana (see the knock-down-drag-out thread from years ago on MJ medical and recreational use).
Shocking to some, the case can also be made for disinhibitory doses of cocaine. Cocaine is the local anesthetic par excellence for surgical procedures on mucous membranes because not only is it an excellent local anesthetic, but is also an efficacious vasoconstrictor that reduces bleeding during the surgery).
-
This:
You can smoke cannabis and still retain reason, you can use cocaine and still retain reason
Is a factual statement
This:
You can smoke cannabis and deprive yourself of reason, you can use cocaine and deprive yourself of reason
Is also a factual statement
Your personal experience does not represent everyone who has ever used cannabis recreationally. I say again, considering the malice of the sin of drunkenness (depriving yourself of reason), using cannabis or cocaine is not necessarily a mortal sin
You nailed that.
Some folks fools think their anecdotal experiences are the supreme measure of all truth.
-
The principle can also be appropriately applied to the use of disinhibitory doses of marijuana (see the knock-down-drag-out thread from years ago on MJ medical and recreational use).
Is this the thread?
https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/what's-the-purpose-of-smoking-marijuana-for-recreation/
-
Regarding laws. Personally I think cannabis laws banning the substance is unjust, mainly due to pharmaceutical lobbying.
Also in Australia cannabis is illegal in all states except for Canberra (the captial ) which is where all the politicians live, really makes you think 🤔
In the Australian Capital Territory (ACT), adults over 18 can possess up to 50 grams of dried cannabis and 150 grams of wet cannabis. They can also grow up to two plants per person and four per household. However, it's illegal to sell recreational cannabis, including seeds and extracts, for personal or commercial gain.
Possession limits
Residents over 18 can possess up to 50 grams of dried cannabis and 150 grams of wet cannabis.
They can grow up to two plants per person and four per household.
Sale restrictions
It's illegal to sell recreational cannabis, including seeds and extracts, for personal or commercial gain.
Other restrictions
The sale of recreational cannabis, including seeds and extracts, is illegal
Related information
The ACT was the first Australian jurisdiction to outlaw cannabis in 1926.
Cannabis was grouped with morphine, cocaine, and heroin, even though it was used as a medicine or remedy in Australia at the time.
Also even alcohol testing is very strict over here, you can't even have more than 2 drinks before you are over the limit for driving laws, and those laws also include riding bicycles and push scooters...
Also they recently banned vaporisers even though smoking is worse than using a dry herb vape. Though nicotine vapes can be an issue, not due to the device itself but rather the nicotine liquids tend to have other chemicals in them due to them being sold "off market".
-
Even as regards alcohol, this statement is seriously deficient because it fails to address the intended purpose of consumption.
Consider the agonizing pain of malignant bone metastases. The amount of opioids necessary to kill such pain is "disinhibitory," yet such use is well protected in Catholic moral theology.
The application of the principle to the use of alcohol is outdated, but still worth mentioning. Alcohol was used medically to inhibit premature labor. Such use was also well-protected in Catholic moral theology. There are more efficacious alternative drugs available today, but, hypothetically, if such drugs were not timely available, a disinhibitory dose of alcohol would still be protected in Catholic moral theology.
The principle can also be appropriately applied to the use of disinhibitory doses of marijuana (see the knock-down-drag-out thread from years ago on MJ medical and recreational use).
Shocking to some, the case can also be made for disinhibitory doses of cocaine. Cocaine is the local anesthetic par excellence for surgical procedures on mucous membranes because not only is it an excellent local anesthetic, but is also an efficacious vasoconstrictor that reduces bleeding during the surgery).
Also didn't one of the Pope use cocaine? Pope Leo 13, he used cocaine wine.
-
Is this the thread?
https://www.cathinfo.com/catholic-living-in-the-modern-world/what's-the-purpose-of-smoking-marijuana-for-recreation/
Not really the thread I had in mind. There were a handful of marijuana-related threads. That thread was more vituperation than factual.
I think this thread was more data-driven and actually addressed (yet some avoided avoided addressing) the research:
https://www.cathinfo.com/fighting-errors-in-the-modern-world/marijuana-use-sinful-for-catholics/
-
No matter where you go either to the supermarket, church, apartments or a hike in the woods, there is the smell of marijuana.
There are more people getting high than the 1960’s.
Many are dying because of the fetanyl in the marijuana. Many people are becoming mentally ill because it’s really strong.
-
There you go again! To make a rational assessment of the liceity of medicinal or recreational use of marijuana requires an honest assessment of all the potential benefits and all the potential risks and to apply knowledge on a case-by-case basis. It's been three years since the data were put before you, yet here you are again employing factoids, falsehoods, emotionalism, and Geremia-like autistic one-liners.
No matter where you go either to the supermarket, church, apartments or a hike in the woods, there is the smell of marijuana.
There are more people getting high than the 1960’s.
There are more people in 2025 USA (roughly 330,000,000) than in 1960 USA (roughly 180,000,000) .
The percent of alcohol related fatalities has decreased about 50% since 1960.
Try to make an honest effort of determining the net benefit to society and the application to specific cases.
Many are dying because of the fetanyl [sic] in the marijuana.
"Many"? Some have died from fentanyl-laced marijuana, Fewer have died in alcohol-related fatalities. What is the net outcome for society?
If you want to be taken seriously, make real comparisons of real trends, not just exaggerations, falsehoods, and factoids (sound like facts, but are misleading).
Many people are becoming mentally ill because it’s really strong.
Your statement is nonsense. Nobody "became" mentally ill due to marijuana. There is no causal connection between marijuana and mental illness. Certain mentally ill people (e.g., schizophrenics, schizoaffective disorder, and manic phase bipolars) can become worse, more disorganized, when they use marijuana. Other mentally ill people (e.g., anxiety, depression) can become better, more organized and happier, when they use marijuana.
As I have stated DOZENS of times to you here: the liceity of medicinal and recreational use of marijuana must be made on a case-by-case basis using knowledge, not nonsense.
-
Fact: I shouldn’t have to be exposed to pot while I’m in public.
-
“1. Opens the soul to demonic influence.
2. Weakens moral judgement
3. Promotes immorality
4. Fosters narcissism
5. Leads to moral pessimism
6. Is socially and morally divisive
7. Promotes laziness toward Catholic works
8. Promotes disobedience to priests and the Church
9. Promotes disobedience to secular authority
10. Is a safety issue for children who's parents use.
11. Causes neglect, and abuse of children by parents who use
12. Dulls sense of guilt and is counter to Sacrament of Confession
13. Profanes the reception of the Eucharist
14. Is falsely equated with moderate use of alcohol
15. Often leads to use of other drugs
16. Promotes secrecy and leads to animosity
17. Promotes other crime
18. Often destroys relationships
19. Impedes the desire to attain heaven
20. Leads to a liberal and worldly mindset
21. Retards emotions
22. Wastes opportunities for good
23 Impedes Christ's mandate to evangelize
24 Denies Scripture's command to stay sober
25 Denies the modest conduct of Our Lady
26 Leads to the unforgivable sin of despair
27 Is often its own object of worship
28. Causes certain kinds of brain damage
29. Often leads to other addictions
30. Inhibits holiness
31. Is well founded in paganism, abhorred in Christendom
32. Is proven by all the above to be a "sacrament" of the diabolic“
Posted by Tradman
-
Your "facts" are merely foolish opinions that cannot be suported by any objective evidence.
Recreational use of Marijuana
1. Opens the soul to demonic influence.
2. Weakens moral judgement
3. Promotes immorality
1-3: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
4. Fosters narcissism
5. Leads to moral pessimism
4-5: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
6. Is socially and morally divisive
6: Freeing slaves was socially and morally divisive and it was the right thing to do.
7. Promotes laziness toward Catholic works
7: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
8. Promotes disobedience to priests and the Church
8: Rubbish. There is no authoritative proscription explicit to MJ. MJ must be considered under the same moral theology as alcohol.
9. Promotes disobedience to secular authority
9: What part of "increasingly legalized" and "no longer a gateway to criminal world" don't you understand?
10. Is a safety issue for children who's parents use.
11. Causes neglect, and abuse of children by parents who use
10-11: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject. Cf. alcohol.
12. Dulls sense of guilt and is counter to Sacrament of Confession
12: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
13. Profanes the reception of the Eucharist
13: If an honest risk/benefit assessment makes its use sinless, there is no profanation.
14. Is falsely equated with moderate use of alcohol
14: CORRECT! Medically, alcohol is much less beneficial and much more toxic.
15. Often leads to use of other drugs
15: Long argued. Largely related to an illegal substance being obtained from criminals.
16. Promotes secrecy and leads to animosity
17. Promotes other crime
18. Often destroys relationships
19. Impedes the desire to attain heaven
20. Leads to a liberal and worldly mindset
21. Retards emotions
16-21: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
22. Wastes opportunities for good
22: Using a beneficial medicine increases opportunities for good.
23 Impedes Christ's mandate to evangelize
23: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
24 Denies Scripture's command to stay sober
24: As with alcohol.
25 Denies the modest conduct of Our Lady
26 Leads to the unforgivable sin of despair
27 Is often its own object of worship
25-27: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
28. Causes certain kinds of brain damage
28: Benefits certain types of "brain damage," e.g., multiple sclerosis, dystonias, et al.
29. Often leads to other addictions
25: see #15. Argument from Repetition.
30. Inhibits holiness
30: see #'s 1-3, 7-8, 12-13, 22-27. Argument from Repetition.
31. Is well founded in paganism, abhorred in Christendom
31: Pagans also breathe air and eat food. Ad hominem/guilt by association.
32. Is proven by all the above to be a "sacrament" of the diabolic
32: see #'s 1-31
This list is by no means exhaustive, barely even scratches the surface. After it exceeded 21, I figured this was enough to get the picture. If anyone disagrees, present your argument. Whatever you do, don't smoke weed, rather, do penance for the salvation of souls.
No. Your list is not exhaustive, just exhausting in its repetition of logical fallacies and utter lack of evidence.
Yes. Do penance.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/IGqVFkG.png)
-
Your "facts" are merely foolish opinions that cannot be suported by any objective evidence.
Recreational use of Marijuana
1. Opens the soul to demonic influence.
2. Weakens moral judgement
3. Promotes immorality
1-3: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
4. Fosters narcissism
5. Leads to moral pessimism
4-5: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
6. Is socially and morally divisive
6: Freeing slaves was socially and morally divisive and it was the right thing to do.
7. Promotes laziness toward Catholic works
7: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
8. Promotes disobedience to priests and the Church
8: Rubbish. There is no authoritative proscription explicit to MJ. MJ must be considered under the same moral theology as alcohol.
9. Promotes disobedience to secular authority
9: What part of "increasingly legalized" and "no longer a gateway to criminal world" don't you understand?
10. Is a safety issue for children who's parents use.
11. Causes neglect, and abuse of children by parents who use
10-11: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject. Cf. alcohol.
12. Dulls sense of guilt and is counter to Sacrament of Confession
12: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
13. Profanes the reception of the Eucharist
13: If an honest risk/benefit assessment makes its use sinless, there is no profanation.
14. Is falsely equated with moderate use of alcohol
14: CORRECT! Medically, alcohol is much less beneficial and much more toxic.
15. Often leads to use of other drugs
15: Long argued. Largely related to an illegal substance being obtained from criminals.
16. Promotes secrecy and leads to animosity
17. Promotes other crime
18. Often destroys relationships
19. Impedes the desire to attain heaven
20. Leads to a liberal and worldly mindset
21. Retards emotions
16-21: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
22. Wastes opportunities for good
22: Using a beneficial medicine increases opportunities for good.
23 Impedes Christ's mandate to evangelize
23: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
24 Denies Scripture's command to stay sober
24: As with alcohol.
25 Denies the modest conduct of Our Lady
26 Leads to the unforgivable sin of despair
27 Is often its own object of worship
25-27: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
28. Causes certain kinds of brain damage
28: Benefits certain types of "brain damage," e.g., multiple sclerosis, dystonias, et al.
29. Often leads to other addictions
25: see #15. Argument from Repetition.
30. Inhibits holiness
30: see #'s 1-3, 7-8, 12-13, 22-27. Argument from Repetition.
31. Is well founded in paganism, abhorred in Christendom
31: Pagans also breathe air and eat food. Ad hominem/guilt by association.
32. Is proven by all the above to be a "sacrament" of the diabolic
32: see #'s 1-31
This list is by no means exhaustive, barely even scratches the surface. After it exceeded 21, I figured this was enough to get the picture. If anyone disagrees, present your argument. Whatever you do, don't smoke weed, rather, do penance for the salvation of souls.
No. Your list is not exhaustive, just exhausting in its repetition of logical fallacies and utter lack of evidence.
Yes. Do penance.
Post is by Tradman. Not me. I thought he made great points from a Catholic view.
-
That post isn’t mine. It is Tradman’s.
-
Fact: I shouldn’t have to be exposed to pot while I’m in public.
-
That post isn’t mine. It is Tradman’s.
You posted his meme with exactly the same content.
Do you think that every time you post silly opinions that you deserve a new personalized response?
Your "facts" are merely foolish opinions that cannot be supported by any objective evidence.
Recreational use of Marijuana
1. Opens the soul to demonic influence.
2. Weakens moral judgement
3. Promotes immorality
1-3: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
4. Fosters narcissism
5. Leads to moral pessimism
4-5: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
6. Is socially and morally divisive
6: Freeing slaves was socially and morally divisive and it was the right thing to do.
7. Promotes laziness toward Catholic works
7: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
8. Promotes disobedience to priests and the Church
8: Rubbish. There is no authoritative proscription explicit to MJ. MJ must be considered under the same moral theology as alcohol.
9. Promotes disobedience to secular authority
9: What part of "increasingly legalized" and "no longer a gateway to criminal world" don't you understand?
10. Is a safety issue for children who's parents use.
11. Causes neglect, and abuse of children by parents who use
10-11: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject. Cf. alcohol.
12. Dulls sense of guilt and is counter to Sacrament of Confession
12: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
13. Profanes the reception of the Eucharist
13: If an honest risk/benefit assessment makes its use sinless, there is no profanation.
14. Is falsely equated with moderate use of alcohol
14: CORRECT! Medically, alcohol is much less beneficial and much more toxic.
15. Often leads to use of other drugs
15: Long argued. Largely related to an illegal substance being obtained from criminals. It is not marijuana itself that "leads to stronger stuff," but the exposure to immoral profit-seeking criminals due to the illegality of marijuana.
16. Promotes secrecy and leads to animosity
17. Promotes other crime
18. Often destroys relationships
19. Impedes the desire to attain heaven
20. Leads to a liberal and worldly mindset
21. Retards emotions
16-21: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
22. Wastes opportunities for good
22: Using a beneficial medicine increases opportunities for good.
23 Impedes Christ's mandate to evangelize
23: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
24 Denies Scripture's command to stay sober
24: As with alcohol.
25 Denies the modest conduct of Our Lady
26 Leads to the unforgivable sin of despair
27 Is often its own object of worship
25-27: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
28. Causes certain kinds of brain damage
28: Benefits certain types of "brain damage," e.g., multiple sclerosis, dystonias, et al.
29. Often leads to other addictions
29: see #15. Argument from Repetition.
30. Inhibits holiness
30: see #'s 1-3, 7-8, 12-13, 22-27. Argument from Repetition.
31. Is well founded in paganism, abhorred in Christendom
31: Pagans also breathe air and eat food. Ad hominem/guilt by association.
32. Is proven by all the above to be a "sacrament" of the diabolic
32: see #'s 1-31
Evidently your mother did not teach you: You are welcome to your own opinions, but not your own "facts."
-
(https://i.imgur.com/IGqVFkG.png)
Anecdotal.
Even if true, this is not a legitimate reason to deny pain relief and other medical benefits to people who suffer from a wide spectrum of diseases.
Even if true, this is not a legitimate reason to deny judicious recreational use to people who do not experience adverse symptoms.
It's pathetic that you "double down" on your fallacies of logic and subjective opinions.
Your illogic is analogous to insisting that a single motor vehicle accident is reason to insist that nobody drive. Your illogic is analogous to claiming that fentanyl abuse is reason to deny suffering and dying patients any access to narcotics.
-
While anecdotes and sensationalized "news" may suggest matters worthy of research, anecdotes, "news," and unsupported opinions do NOT trump honest research.
Marijuana is more studied than any drug in any pharmacy, including aspirin.
Important reviews
University of California Center for Medical Cannabis Research—2010 Report to the Legislature
http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf (http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf)
Review on clinical studies with cannabis and cannabinoids 2005-2009. Hazecamp A and Grotenhermen F. Cannabinoids 2010;5(special issue):1-21.
www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/en_2010_01_special.pdf (http://www.cannabis-med.org/data/pdf/en_2010_01_special.pdf)
Cannabinoids in medicine: A review of their therapeutic potential. Amar MB. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 105 (2006) 1–25.
http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf (http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf)
Emerging Clinical Applications for Cannabis and Cannabinoids: A Review of the Recent Scientific Literature, 2000 – 2010. Armentano P. NORML Foundation, Washington DC 2010.
http://norml.org/pdf_files/NORML_Clinical_Applications_for_Cannabis_and_Cannabinoids.pdf (http://norml.org/pdf_files/NORML_Clinical_Applications_for_Cannabis_and_Cannabinoids.pdf)
Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine, 1999
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6376 (http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6376)
popularized in: Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=R1 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=R1)
AIDS/HIV
University of California Center for Medical Cannabis Research—2010 Report to the Legislature
http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf (http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf)
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7485 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7485)
“Marijuana and AIDS” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=86 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=86)
ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Lou Gehrig's Disease)
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7004 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7004)
Alzheimer's Disease
Alzheimer's Disease
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7003 (http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7003)
Cachexia. Wasting syndrome
See sections 3.1 and 3.2 of Cannabinoids in medicine: A review of their therapeutic potential. Amar MB. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 105 (2006) 1–25.
http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf (http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf)
Cancer
Gliomas/Cancer
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7008 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7008)
“Marijuana and Cancer” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=95 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=95)
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®). National Cancer Institute. 2011.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page1 (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/cannabis/healthprofessional/page1)
Cardiovascular disease
The Potential for Clinical Use of Cannabinoids in Treatment
of Cardiovascular Diseases. Durst R and Lotan C. Cardiovascular Therapeutics 2011 Feb;29(1):17-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-5922.2010.00233.x. Epub 2010 Oct 14.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20946323 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20946323)
The emerging role of the endocannabinoid system in cardiovascular disease. Pacher P, Steffens S. Semin Immunopathol. 2009 Jun;31(1):63-77. Epub 2009 Apr 9.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/a04103g160h16450/fulltext.pdf (http://www.springerlink.com/content/a04103g160h16450/fulltext.pdf)
Cannabinoid receptors in atherosclerosis. Steffens S, Mach F. Curr Opin Lipidol. 2006 Oct;17(5):519-26.
http://journals.lww.com/co-lipidology/Abstract/2006/10000/Cannabinoid_receptors_in_atherosclerosis.5.aspx (http://journals.lww.com/co-lipidology/Abstract/2006/10000/Cannabinoid_receptors_in_atherosclerosis.5.aspx)
Cannabinoid receptors in acute and chronic complications of atherosclerosis. Mach F, Montecucco F, Steffens S. Br J Pharmacol. 2008 January; 153(2): 290–298.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2219535/pdf/0707517a.pdf (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2219535/pdf/0707517a.pdf)
Endocannabinoids and cannabinoid receptors in ischaemia-reperfusion injury and preconditioning. Pacher P, Haskó G. Br J Pharmacol. 2008 Jan;153(2):252-62. Epub 2007 Nov 19.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/sj.bjp.0707582/pdf (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/sj.bjp.0707582/pdf)
The role of the endocannabinoid system in atherosclerosis. Mach F, Steffens S. J Neuroendocrinol. 2008 May;20 Suppl 1:53-7.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2826.2008.01685.x/pdf (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1365-2826.2008.01685.x/pdf)
Cardiovascular Effects of Cannabis | Medicinal Cannabis Information. Independent Drug Monitoring Unit, United Kingdom, undated
http://www.idmu.co.uk/canncardio.htm (http://www.idmu.co.uk/canncardio.htm)
Crohns Disease
Gastrointestinal Disorders
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7009 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7009)
Endocannabinoid sysytem
The Endocannabinoid System as an Emerging Target of Pharmacotherapy. National Institute of Health: Pacher P, Bátkai S, Kunos G. Pharmacol Rev. 2006 Sep;58(3):389-462.
http://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/58/3/389.full.pdf (http://pharmrev.aspetjournals.org/content/58/3/389.full.pdf)
Endocrine disease, diabetes
The emerging role of the endocannabinoid system in endocrine regulation and energy balance. Pagotto U, Marsicano G, Cota D, Lutz B, Pasquali R. Endocr Rev. 2006 Feb;27(1):73-100. Epub 2005 Nov 23.
http://fk.uwks.ac.id/elib/Arsip/Departemen/Biokimia/The%20Emerging%20Role%20of%20the%20Endocannabinoid%20System.pdf (http://fk.uwks.ac.id/elib/Arsip/Departemen/Biokimia/The Emerging Role of the Endocannabinoid System.pdf)
Fibromyalgia
Nabilone for the Treatment of Pain in Fibromyalgia. Skrabek RQ, Galimova L, Ethans K, Perry D. J Pain. 2008 Feb;9(2):164-73. Epub 2007 Nov 5.
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9gDyCVhqJSMJ:files.meetup.com/404848/2008_Nabilone-for-the-Treatment-of-Pain-in-Fibromyalgia.pdf+Nabilone+for+the+Treatment+of+Pain+in+Fibromyalgia&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjFGavzxEJkBjsOj_YyWPHuo5PRG034PLna8X6n3sXGT696PVuaEH15HF07xVpfV10wLPfon8-nZoD0RcJfU6LInnuqHOGpKDECN4oQ6OWBgGgwXWckH2QB31FTn1BZn0KX9U7A&sig=AHIEtbQlDN8uMzxJIm6KKL0POTJdhmbsvg (http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:9gDyCVhqJSMJ:files.meetup.com/404848/2008_Nabilone-for-the-Treatment-of-Pain-in-Fibromyalgia.pdf+Nabilone+for+the+Treatment+of+Pain+in+Fibromyalgia&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjFGavzxEJkBjsOj_YyWPHuo5PRG034PLna8X6n3sXGT696PVuaEH15HF07xVpfV10wLPfon8-nZoD0RcJfU6LInnuqHOGpKDECN4oQ6OWBgGgwXWckH2QB31FTn1BZn0KX9U7A&sig=AHIEtbQlDN8uMzxJIm6KKL0POTJdhmbsvg)
Delta-9-THC based monotherapy in fibromyalgia patients on experimentally induced pain, axon reflex flare, and pain relief. Schley M, Legler A, Skopp G, Schmelz M, Konrad C, Rukwied R. Curr Med Res Opin. 2006 Jul;22(7):1269-76.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16834825 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16834825)
Fibromyalgia
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7007 (http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7007)
Glaucoma
American Glaucoma Society position statement: Marijuana and the treatment of glaucoma. American Glaucoma Society, Prepared by Henry Jampel, M.D., M.H.S., August 10, 2009
http://www.americanglaucomasociety.net/associations/5224/files/Marijuana%20and%20Glaucoma%20august%2030_BOD%20Approved%2010.23.09.pdf (http://www.americanglaucomasociety.net/associations/5224/files/Marijuana and Glaucoma august 30_BOD Approved 10.23.09.pdf)
Marijuana and Glaucoma” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=124 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=124)
Hepatitis C
Hepatitis C
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7010 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7010)
Marijuana effects, drug levels, DUI
Marijuana effect and delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol plasma level. Chiang CWN and Barnett G. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1984 Aug;36(2):234-8.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6086207 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6086207)
Contact highs and urinary cannabinoids excretion after passive exposure to marijuana smoke. Cone EJ and Johnson RE. Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics 1986 Sep;40(3):247-56.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3017628 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3017628)
Do delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol concentrations indicate recent use in chronic cannabis users? Karschner EL, Schwilke EW, Lowe RH, Darwin WD, Pope HG, Herning R, Cadet JL, Huestis MA. Addiction. 2009 Dec;104(12):2041-8. Epub 2009 Oct 5.
http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/49/7/1114 (http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/49/7/1114)
Developing limits for driving under cannabis. Grotenhermen F, Leson G, Berghaus G, Drummer OH, Krüger HP, Longo M, Moskowitz H, Perrine B, Ramaekers JG, Smiley A, Tunbridge R. Addiction 2007 Dec;102(12):1910-7. Epub 2007 Oct 4.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17916224 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17916224)
Urinary cannabinoid detection times after controlled oral administration of delta9-tetrahydrocannabinol to humans. Gustafson RA, Levine B, Stout PR, Klette KL, George MP, Moolchan ET, Huestis MA. Clin Chem. 2003 Jul;49(7):1114-24.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12816908 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12816908)
Editorial: Practical Challenges to Positive Drug Tests for Marijuana. ElSohly MA. Clin Chem. 2003 Jul;49(7):1037-8.
http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/49/7/1037 (http://www.clinchem.org/cgi/reprint/49/7/1037)
Dose related risk of motor vehicle crashes after cannabis use. Ramaekers JG, Berghaus G, van Laar M, Drummer OH. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2004 Feb 7;73(2):109-19.
http://www.ukcia.org/research/DoseRelatedRiskOfCrashes.pdf (http://www.ukcia.org/research/DoseRelatedRiskOfCrashes.pdf)
Tolerance and cross-tolerance to neurocognitive effects of THC and alcohol in heavy cannabis users. Ramaekers JG, Theunissen EL, de Brouwer M, Toennes SW, Moeller MR, Kauert G. Psychopharmacology (Berl). 2011 Mar;214(2):391-401. Epub 2010 Oct 30.
http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/bills/dui/raemakers.etal.pdf (http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/bills/dui/raemakers.etal.pdf)
Cannabis and Driving: A Scientific and Rational Review. Armentano P. NORML Foundation, Washington DC 2010
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7459 (http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7459)
Sex differences in the effects of marijuana on simulated driving performance. Anderson BM, Rizzo M, Block RI, Pearlson GD, O'Leary DS. J Psychoactive Drugs. 2010 Mar;42(1):19-30.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3033009/ (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3033009/)
Effects of THC on driving performance, physiological state and subjective feelings relative to alcohol. Ronen A, Gershon P, Drobiner H, Rabinovich A, Bar-Hamburger R, Mechoulam R, Cassuto Y, Shinar D. Accid Anal Prev. 2008 May;40(3):926-34. Epub 2007 Nov 26.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18460360 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18460360)
Muscle Spasms
Dystonia
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7006 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7006)
“Marijuana and Muscle Spasticity” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=106 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=106)
Nausea
See sections 3.1 of Cannabinoids in medicine: A review of their therapeutic potential. Amar MB. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 105 (2006) 1–25.
http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf (http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf)
Pain
University of California Center for Medical Cannabis Research—2010 Report to the Legislature
http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf (http://www.cmcr.ucsd.edu/images/pdfs/CMCR_REPORT_FEB17.pdf)
Chronic Pain
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7786 (http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7786)
“Marijuana and Pain” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=77# (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=77)
Post traumatic Stress Disorder
Cannabinoid receptor activation in the basolateral amygdala blocks the effects of stress on the conditioning and extinction of inhibitory avoidance. Ganon-Elazar E, Akirav I. J Neurosci. 2009 Sep 9;29(36):11078-88.
http://www.jneurosci.org/content/29/36/11078.full.pdf+html (http://www.jneurosci.org/content/29/36/11078.full.pdf+html)
[Extinction of emotional response as a novel approach of pharmacotherapy of anxiety disorders]. Lehner M, Wisłowska-Stanek A, Płaznik A. Psychiatr Pol. 2009 Nov-Dec;43(6):639-53.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20209877 (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20209877)
The Use of a Synthetic Cannabinoid in the Management of Treatment‐Resistant Nightmares in Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Fraser GA. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2009 Winter;15(1):84-8.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-5949.2008.00071.x/pdf (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-5949.2008.00071.x/pdf)
Public policy
Harm reduction-the cannabis paradox. Melamede R. Harm Reduct J. 2005 Sep 22;2:17.
http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/pdf/1477-7517-2-17.pdf (http://www.harmreductionjournal.com/content/pdf/1477-7517-2-17.pdf)
Seizures
See sections 3.7 of Cannabinoids in medicine: A review of their therapeutic potential. Amar MB. Journal of Ethnopharmacology 105 (2006) 1–25.
http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf (http://www.ucla.edu.ve/dmedicin/departamentos/fisiologia/cannabinoidsRevPatologias.pdf)
“Marijuana and Neurological Disorders” in Marijuana As Medicine? – The Science Behind the Controversy. Mack A and Joy J. National Academy of Science. National Academy Press, Washington DC 2000.
http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=115 (http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9586&page=115)
-
Out of curiosity I checked some of VCR's posts from 12+ years ago and, lo and behold, she was making 4, 5, or more rambling posts in a row in threads even back then. At least she is consistent. The only upside of engaging her in debate is that other users may benefit from seeing an intelligent response to her nonsense..I don't think she will
-
On the matter of post-legalization trends:
CONCLUSION
Limited post-legalization data prevent us
from ruling out that marijuana legalization
causes small changes in marijuana use or other
outcomes. As additional data become available, expanding this analysis will continue to
inform debates surrounding marijuana reform.
The data so far, however, provide little support for the strong claims about legalization
made by either opponents or supporters; the
notable exception is tax revenue, which has
exceeded some expectations. The absence of
significant adverse consequences is especially
striking given the sometimes-dire predictions
made by legalization opponents.
The effect of state marijuana legalizations: 2021 update
AK Dills, S Goffard, J Miron, E Partin - Cato Institute, Policy Analysis, 2021 - JSTOR
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/resrep30177.pdf
Two years later, still no evidence to supportive the "dire predictions" of the Reefer Madness lobby"
Abstract
Thirty-six states have legalized medical marijuana and 18 states have legalized the use of marijuana for recreational purposes. In this paper, we review the literature on the public health consequences of legalizing marijuana, focusing on studies that have appeared in economics journals as well as leading public policy, public health, and medical journals. Among the outcomes considered are: youth marijuana use, alcohol consumption, the abuse of prescription opioids, traffic fatalities, and crime. For some of these outcomes, there is a near consensus in the literature regarding the effects of medical marijuana laws (MMLs). As an example, leveraging geographic and temporal variation in MMLs, researchers have produced little credible evidence to suggest that legalization promotes marijuana use among teenagers. Likewise, there is convincing evidence that young adults consume less alcohol when medical marijuana is legalized. For other public health outcomes such as mortality involving prescription opioids, the effect of legalizing medical marijuana has proven more difficult to gauge and, as a consequence, we are less comfortable drawing firm conclusions. Finally, it is not yet clear how legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes will affect these and other important public health outcomes. We will be able to draw stronger conclusions when more posttreatment data are collected in states that have recently legalized recreational marijuana.
(https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fjel.20211635&utm_campaign=Economic)The public health effects of legalizing marijuana
DM Anderson, DI Rees - Journal of Economic Literature, 2023 - aeaweb.org
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257%2Fjel.20211635&utm_campaign=Economic%20Studies&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email
-
For me, as someone well published in the peer-reviewed literature (such as it is!), the most striking conclusion in nearly every single research study is this: "more research is needed."
Researchers ramble on about "potential" adverse outcomes from marijuana use, but are forced to admit they do not have the evidence beyond a few adverse outcomes in small numbers of identifiably vulnerable people.
Seriously! The more research that is published on marijuana, the more it becomes clear that there is no consensus that marijuana is inherently toxic personally or societally.
-
Out of curiosity I checked some of VCR's posts from 12+ years ago and, lo and behold, she was making 4, 5, or more rambling posts in a row in threads even back then. At least she is consistent. The only upside of engaging her in debate is that other users may benefit from seeing an intelligent response to her nonsense..I don't think she will
The nonsense that you call yourselves “traditional Catholics”and yet you go along with the lies of the world.
And your children are watching everything you do.
The majority of people using marijuana, opioids etc are lazy. This stuff is stronger than the junk from the 1960’s and people are driving stoned and on their cell phones walking around in a daze. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ wants everyone high so they control people.
-
The nonsense that you call yourselves “traditional Catholics”and yet you go along with the lies of the world.
I rebutted your fallacies of fact and logic, so now you seek the last refuge of scoundrels: name-calling.
Must we rave hysterically in order be granted your infallible and holy certification as "trads"? :laugh1:
The majority of people using marijuana, opioids etc are lazy. This stuff is stronger than the junk from the 1960’s and people are driving stoned and on their cell phones walking around in a daze. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ wants everyone high so they control people.
Your repetition of your hysteria is noted… and rebutted by the evidence I have already adduced today and 3 years ago.
Keep raving.
-
(https://i.imgur.com/IGqVFkG.png)
Could it be just an increase in paranoia, because there is no order to society? Without God order declines.
-
If I had to use a drug, I would prefer a natural herb or fermentation to whatever the pharmaceuticals can develop.
-
Fact: I shouldn’t have to be exposed to pot while I’m in public.
Unfortunately that is due to smoking, I also don't like the smell of cigarettes but sometimes I will smell it on people when I live my daily life.
If people used a vaporiser you wouldn't even smell it.
The nonsense that you call yourselves “traditional Catholics”and yet you go along with the lies of the world.
And your children are watching everything you do.
The majority of people using marijuana, opioids etc are lazy. This stuff is stronger than the junk from the 1960’s and people are driving stoned and on their cell phones walking around in a daze. Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ wants everyone high so they control people.
Could it be that lazy people turn to drugs and become examples used by people like yourself? While people who aren't lazy either don't use the drugs or use it in such a manner that is unnoticeable to others?
-
Your "facts" are merely foolish opinions that cannot be suported by any objective evidence.
Recreational use of Marijuana
1. Opens the soul to demonic influence.
2. Weakens moral judgement
3. Promotes immorality
1-3: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
4. Fosters narcissism
5. Leads to moral pessimism
4-5: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
6. Is socially and morally divisive
6: Freeing slaves was socially and morally divisive and it was the right thing to do.
7. Promotes laziness toward Catholic works
7: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
8. Promotes disobedience to priests and the Church
8: Rubbish. There is no authoritative proscription explicit to MJ. MJ must be considered under the same moral theology as alcohol.
9. Promotes disobedience to secular authority
9: What part of "increasingly legalized" and "no longer a gateway to criminal world" don't you understand?
10. Is a safety issue for children who's parents use.
11. Causes neglect, and abuse of children by parents who use
10-11: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject. Cf. alcohol.
12. Dulls sense of guilt and is counter to Sacrament of Confession
12: Potential loss of inhibition is dose-related, just as it is with alcohol. It is a manageable risk, just as it is with alcohol.
13. Profanes the reception of the Eucharist
13: If an honest risk/benefit assessment makes its use sinless, there is no profanation.
14. Is falsely equated with moderate use of alcohol
14: CORRECT! Medically, alcohol is much less beneficial and much more toxic.
15. Often leads to use of other drugs
15: Long argued. Largely related to an illegal substance being obtained from criminals.
16. Promotes secrecy and leads to animosity
17. Promotes other crime
18. Often destroys relationships
19. Impedes the desire to attain heaven
20. Leads to a liberal and worldly mindset
21. Retards emotions
16-21: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertions that I reject.
22. Wastes opportunities for good
22: Using a beneficial medicine increases opportunities for good.
23 Impedes Christ's mandate to evangelize
23: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
24 Denies Scripture's command to stay sober
24: As with alcohol.
25 Denies the modest conduct of Our Lady
26 Leads to the unforgivable sin of despair
27 Is often its own object of worship
25-27: Gratuitous, subjective, evidence-free assertion that I reject.
28. Causes certain kinds of brain damage
28: Benefits certain types of "brain damage," e.g., multiple sclerosis, dystonias, et al.
29. Often leads to other addictions
25: see #15. Argument from Repetition.
30. Inhibits holiness
30: see #'s 1-3, 7-8, 12-13, 22-27. Argument from Repetition.
31. Is well founded in paganism, abhorred in Christendom
31: Pagans also breathe air and eat food. Ad hominem/guilt by association.
32. Is proven by all the above to be a "sacrament" of the diabolic
32: see #'s 1-31
This list is by no means exhaustive, barely even scratches the surface. After it exceeded 21, I figured this was enough to get the picture. If anyone disagrees, present your argument. Whatever you do, don't smoke weed, rather, do penance for the salvation of souls.
No. Your list is not exhaustive, just exhausting in its repetition of logical fallacies and utter lack of evidence.
Yes. Do penance.
Good responses. Like I mentioned earlier there is a lot if bias against MJ due to propaganda. Meanwhile alcohol is objectively worse has destroyed far more lives. If alcohol didnt have legal regulation it would be far far worse because illegally made alcohol has a much higher risk, we also see this in 3rd world countries were people die from ethanol poisoning because they don't understand what they are drinking due to ignorance. Good laws stop this, this is why alcohols have labels like strength % and #standard drinks.
-
Quote from: Viva Cristo Rey on Today at 12:55:15 AM
Fact: I shouldn’t have to be exposed to pot while I’m in public
That is a matter of laws, public exposure will be determined by government oversight. That's why most places have designated smoking zones. Still smoke lingers on the clothes. Most cigarettes smokers would be better off using a dry herb vape with pure tobacco. This why there is no added dangerous chemicals putting their health are risk and danger from smoke itself since the substance wouldn't be burnt, and also no smell. But some people like the smell of smoke..
Although the plant/flower itself can have a distinct smell.
-
I used x's grok 3 to do a deep search on St Hildegard and Cannabis, this was the result
Key Points
Research suggests St. Hildegard of Bingen wrote about cannabis, calling it "hemp," in her 12th-century book Physica.
It seems likely she used it for medicinal purposes, particularly for stomach issues, based on her descriptions of its seeds and poultices.
The evidence leans toward her noting potential side effects, like head pain for those with mental weaknesses, indicating awareness of its effects.
Overview
St. Hildegard of Bingen, a notable 12th-century German abbess and healer, is known for her contributions to medicine, theology, and natural sciences. Her book Physica includes detailed writings on various plants, including what she referred to as "hemp," which is now understood to be cannabis. This section explores her docuмented use of cannabis for health purposes and highlights an unexpected detail: her caution about its effects on individuals with certain mental conditions, which suggests early recognition of its psychoactive potential.
Historical Context
Hildegard lived from 1098 to 1179 and was a Benedictine abbess who managed her monastery's infirmary. Her work Physica, written between 1151 and 1158, is a comprehensive text on natural healing, covering plants, elements, and more. Within this, she dedicated a chapter to hemp, reflecting her practical experience with herbal remedies.
Medicinal Use of Cannabis
In Physica, Hildegard described hemp as beneficial for healthy individuals, particularly noting that its seeds could be eaten to aid digestion and reduce mucus. She also recommended using the plant to make poultices for stomach comfort, suggesting its use for nausea and stomachaches. This aligns with modern understandings of cannabis's anti-emetic and anti-inflammatory properties, especially for gastrointestinal issues.
Potential Side Effects and Awareness
An unexpected detail is her caution that hemp could cause head pain for those "weak in the head" or with a "vacant mind," and stomach pain for the seriously ill. This suggests she was aware of potential adverse effects, possibly indicating early recognition of cannabis's psychoactive properties, such as those from THC, though she focused on internal and external applications rather than smoking.
Survey Note: Detailed Examination of St. Hildegard and Cannabis
This section provides a comprehensive analysis of St. Hildegard of Bingen's writings on cannabis, expanding on her historical context, the specifics of her observations, and the implications for understanding medieval herbal medicine. It includes all details from the research, organized for clarity and depth, mimicking a professional article.
Historical Background and Identity
St. Hildegard of Bingen (1098–1179) was a German Benedictine abbess, writer, composer, and mystic, renowned for her contributions to theology, botany, and medicine. She served as an infirmarian at her monastery, gaining firsthand experience with herbal remedies. Her work Physica, part of her broader medical collection Subtilitatum diversarum naturarum creaturarum libri novem (Nine Books on the Subtleties of Different Kinds of Creatures), was written between 1151 and 1158 and later submitted for her canonization inquiry in 1232 under the title Liber simplicis medicine (Book of Simple Medicine). This text is a seminal work in Western herbal medicine, organized into nine categories including plants, elements, and animals, with a pragmatic focus on humoral-pathological classifications.
Cannabis in Physica: Chapter 11 Analysis
Hildegard's writings on cannabis, referred to as "hemp" or "Cannabus," are found in chapter 11 of Physica. The translation by Priscilla Throop, available online at Archive.org, provides the following detailed description:
"Hemp is warm and grows where the air is neither very hot nor very cold, just as its nature is. Its seed is sound, and it is healthy for healthy people to eat it. It is openly gentle and useful in their stomach since it somewhat takes away the mucus. It is able to be digested easily; it diminishes the bad humors and makes the good humors strong. But nevertheless, whoever is weak in the head and has a vacant mind, if that person will have eaten hemp, it easily makes the person suffer pain somewhat in his or her head. However, whoever is sound in the head and has a full mind, it does not harm. Whoever is seriously ill, it also makes that person suffer pain somewhat in the stomach. However, whoever is only moderately ill, it does not cause pain when eaten. However, let whoever has a cold stomach cook hemp in water, squeeze out the water, wrap it in a cloth, and then place the hot cloth often over the stomach. This comforts the person and restores that place. Also, the cloth made from the hemp heals ulcers and weeping wounds because the heat in the hemp has been tempered."
This passage indicates multiple uses:
Internal Use: Eating the seeds was recommended for healthy individuals, aiding digestion and reducing mucus, aligning with its nutritional value.
External Use: Cooking hemp for a poultice was suggested for a cold stomach, providing comfort and restoration. Additionally, cloth made from hemp was noted for healing ulcers and wounds, possibly due to its fibrous properties and retained heat.
Interpretation of "Hemp" as Cannabis
In the 12th century, "hemp" referred to the plant now known as Cannabis sativa, used for fibers, seeds, and medicinal purposes. Historical sources, such as Britannica, confirm that hemp cultivation for fiber and seeds was common, with the plant originating in Central Asia and spreading to Europe by the Christian era. Given the lack of distinction between industrial hemp and psychoactive cannabis in medieval times, it is likely that Hildegard's "hemp" included varieties with tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the psychoactive compound. This is supported by her mention of head pain for those with mental weaknesses, which may indicate awareness of psychoactive effects, though she focused on seeds and poultices rather than smoking.
Medicinal Applications and Comparisons
Hildegard's recommendations for cannabis align with its known properties today, particularly for nausea and stomachaches, as noted in sources like SWR.de. Modern medicine recognizes cannabis's anti-emetic effects, especially in chemotherapy, and its potential for gastrointestinal relief, which corroborates her observations. Her use of poultices also suggests an understanding of its anti-inflammatory properties, though she did not explicitly mention pain relief beyond stomach comfort.
Potential Side Effects and Psychoactive Awareness
An intriguing aspect is her caution about side effects: hemp could cause head pain for those "weak in the head" or with a "vacant mind," and stomach pain for the seriously ill. This suggests early recognition of cannabis's psychoactive potential, possibly its impact on mental states, though she did not describe smoking or inhalation. This detail is unexpected, as it indicates a nuanced understanding of individual variability in response to the plant, which is not commonly highlighted in medieval herbal texts.
Scholarly Analysis and Reception
Research, such as an article on Medievalists.net, has analyzed Hildegard's herbal claims, finding them statistically more accurate than chance, suggesting her remedies were based on observation and experience. Her writings on cannabis, while not extensively analyzed in modern pharmacology, are part of this broader validation, with sources like ResearchGate noting her place in the historical use of cannabis for medicine. Her work influenced later monastic communities, as seen in Healthy Hildegard, which discusses her pragmatic approach to natural healing.
Table: Summary of Hildegard's Observations on Cannabis
Aspect
Details
Plant Name
Referred to as "hemp" or "Cannabus" in Physica, chapter 11.
Internal Use
Seeds healthy for digestion, reduces mucus, but may cause pain in ill.
External Use
Poultice for cold stomach, cloth heals ulcers and wounds.
Side Effects Noted
Head pain for those with mental weaknesses, stomach pain for seriously ill.
Historical Context
12th-century Europe, likely included THC-containing varieties.
Implications and Legacy
Hildegard's writings on cannabis reflect a holistic approach to healing, emphasizing harmony between body, mind, and spirit, as noted in The Herb Society. Her work was lost for centuries but rediscovered, with modern editions like the critical edition by Hildebrandt and Gloning (De Gruyter) providing new insights. Her influence extended to Scottish monasteries and beyond, as seen in Nia Faraway, highlighting her role in medieval medical traditions.
This detailed examination confirms her significant contribution to early cannabis docuмentation, offering a bridge between ancient and modern understandings of its medicinal potential.
Key Citations
Hildegard von Bingen's Physica complete English translation health healing
Cannabis als Medizin Ein starker Stoff SWR Aktuell
Hemp Description Products Seeds Fiber Uses Britannica
The herbal cures of Hildegard von Bingen was she right Medievalists
The pharmacological history of cannabis ResearchGate
Physica Nature's Healing Power Healthy Hildegard
Physica Hildegard Wikipedia
The elk-chapter in Physica by Hildegard von Bingen stemmatological word-historical key text ResearchGate
Physica Liber subtilitatum diversarum naturarum creaturarum Textkritische Ausgabe De Gruyter
Hildegard of Bingen To Be Lost and Found The Herb Society
The Devil’s Lettuce Or The Lord’s Kale The Cannabis Chronicles Nia Faraway
-
Unfortunately, many Trad Catholics have in fact been infected with Prot/Puritan mentalities and attitudes ... very reminiscent of the Prots I had run into over the years who claimed that Jesus never drank actual wine, but merely a form of "mustum".
As Mark stated, the liceity of drug use must be evaluated on a case by case basis. Grave impairment of faculties requires a grave justification, whereas impairment to lesser degrees can be justified by proportionately less-grave reasons. It's actually not very difficult, but there's just this Prot/Puritan attitude out there.
I've never once in my life used marijuana, by the way, so I have no horse in this race ... just reason. I would not be averse to trying/using THC were a reason to arise.
-
Altar "Wine" (non-alcoholic) ...
(https://www.angeldirect.com/cdn/shop/files/mont-la-salle-mustum-alcohol-free-750ml-bottle-size-mu750.jpg?v=1686686476)
-
Good responses. Like I mentioned earlier there is a lot if bias against MJ due to propaganda. Meanwhile alcohol is objectively worse has destroyed far more lives. If alcohol didnt have legal regulation it would be far far worse because illegally made alcohol has a much higher risk, we also see this in 3rd world countries were people die from ethanol poisoning because they don't understand what they are drinking due to ignorance. Good laws stop this, this is why alcohols have labels like strength % and #standard drinks.
Let's feed VCR's hunger for anecdotes. Only minutes ago I was reading about this alcohol incident:
Third person dies of suspected methanol poisoning in Laos as two Australians fight for lives
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-21/laos-methanol-alcohol-poisoning-third-person-dies/104627872
All 5 have died.
"I shouldn't have to be exposed to anything I don't like." :laugh2:
-
Let's feed VCR's hunger for anecdotes. Only minutes ago I was reading about this alcohol incident:
Third person dies of suspected methanol poisoning in Laos as two Australians fight for lives
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-11-21/laos-methanol-alcohol-poisoning-third-person-dies/104627872
All 5 have died.
"I shouldn't have to be exposed to anything I don't like." :laugh2:
That incident was quite recent, it was all over the news. Cheap alcohol is extremely risky.