I have no use for it.

That's certainly one possible motive. But I don't see why marijuana use can't be motivated for the same usual motivations we see with alcohol use: to promote camaraderie, to relax, to raise the spirits after a difficult day, etc. Each of these motives are lawful motives for using alcohol in moderation, so why would they not be lawful motives for using other intoxicants in moderation? 

In the other thread someone mentioned that the MJ of today is engineered to be considerably stronger than the MJ of yesteryear. I have long found this a compelling PRACTICAL argument complicating its moral use, since if the thing CAN'T be used moderately, then it shouldn't be used at all. But with various innovations that allow for micro-dosing and non-smokable delivery methods, it seems this practical argument loses steam. It's still true where it applies, but I'm not sure it applies in many cases. 

St Peter says to be sober and watch. But the Psalmist excites us to bless God, 'who maketh wine to cheer the heart of man.' We think of sobriety as a word describing a state completely free of any intoxicants. But really sobriety is the virtue whereby man uses those substances lawfully-- in the right time, right place, right amount, with the right motives, etc. 

At the risk of feeding rabid trolls…

First you must define the purpose of recreation.

Propose a meaningful answer, Tradrabid.

That's certainly one possible motive. But I don't see why marijuana use can't be motivated for the same usual motivations we see with alcohol use: to promote camaraderie, to relax, to raise the spirits after a difficult day, etc. Each of these motives are lawful motives for using alcohol in moderation, so why would they not be lawful motives for using other intoxicants in moderation?

In the other thread someone mentioned that the MJ of today is engineered to be considerably stronger than the MJ of yesteryear. I have long found this a compelling PRACTICAL argument complicating its moral use, since if the thing CAN'T be used moderately, then it shouldn't be used at all. But with various innovations that allow for micro-dosing and non-smokable delivery methods, it seems this practical argument loses steam. It's still true where it applies, but I'm not sure it applies in many cases.

St Peter says to be sober and watch. But the Psalmist excites us to bless God, 'who maketh wine to cheer the heart of man.' We think of sobriety as a word describing a state completely free of any intoxicants. But really sobriety is the virtue whereby man uses those substances lawfully-- in the right time, right place, right amount, with the right motives, etc.

End of thread right here.  Same principles apply to MJ as do to alcohol. 

Differences are merely practical (or extraneous) considerations around --
1) the possibility of using smaller doses that do not lead to the complete loss or reason
2) in places where it's illegal, whether it would be a sin to violate the law
3) for those who could lose their jobs due to random testing, etc.

This really is not a particularly difficult question.

That's certainly one possible motive. But I don't see why marijuana use can't be motivated for the same usual motivations we see with alcohol use: to promote camaraderie, to relax, to raise the spirits after a difficult day, etc. Each of these motives are lawful motives for using alcohol in moderation, so why would they not be lawful motives for using other intoxicants in moderation?

In the other thread someone mentioned that the MJ of today is engineered to be considerably stronger than the MJ of yesteryear. I have long found this a compelling PRACTICAL argument complicating its moral use, since if the thing CAN'T be used moderately, then it shouldn't be used at all. But with various innovations that allow for micro-dosing and non-smokable delivery methods, it seems this practical argument loses steam. It's still true where it applies, but I'm not sure it applies in many cases.

St Peter says to be sober and watch. But the Psalmist excites us to bless God, 'who maketh wine to cheer the heart of man.' We think of sobriety as a word describing a state completely free of any intoxicants. But really sobriety is the virtue whereby man uses those substances lawfully-- in the right time, right place, right amount, with the right motives, etc.

Have you ever smoked pot?

And I'm only on the moderation usage side of this

How much pot do you smoke recreationally in "moderation"?

I'm assuming that LT is asking everyone if they smoke pot to either show that none of them really 'believe' it can be used in moderation since if they did they would be using it, or to argue that their lack of experience with it shows that they don't know what they're talking about. Either way, those are non-sequiturs.  Someone can say that they believe it is lawful to fight in self defense and yet at the same time never do so even when justified. This is logically consistent, for that may be a better good one is pursuing. And lack of experience should hardly factor in since moral questions are guided by principles firstly. This is how priests can counsel about sɛҳuąƖ relationships even if they are virgins: they are guided by principles rather than experience.