Jansenism and Manicheanism are both heresies, FYI.
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.
This really is not a particularly difficult question.Unfortunately, it is given that it has been hammered into our heads for close to a century that "MJ bad" and "alcohol good" when both are on equal footing morally-speaking.
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?Have you ever smoked pot?
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.You have never smoked pot nor used it to seduce girls, so how would you know about "tusing smaller doses that do not lead to the complete loss of reason'?
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.
And I'm only on the moderation usage side of thisHow much pot do you smoke recreationally in "moderation"?
Jansenism and Manicheanism are both heresies, FYI.That is irrelevant my friend, you are starting to get emotional. I asked a question in the OP, that is no answer. Do you smoke pot or let your children smoke pot?
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.In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. That is why I see the young people leave and go into the world as soon as they are able. That is what happened in the 1960's when 80% of Americans went to mass and the Novus Ordo did not exist. The priest didn't have a clue how to deal with it. I see women counselors who never had any children, giving lectures about how to raise children, and college professors who have never had to use their theories in the real world, teaching students . They are only good for teaching those that know little, like children. "In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king".
You have never smoked pot nor used it to seduce girls, so how would you know about "tusing smaller doses that do not lead to the complete loss of reason'?
How much pot do you smoke recreationally in "moderation"?I don't. And I made that much clear in my response above in my opposition to the "culture" that surrounds MJ.
That is irrelevant my friend, you are starting to get emotional. I asked a question in the OP, that is no answer. Do you smoke pot or let your children smoke pot?Interesting you accuse Pax of emotionalism when you specifically direct the question to something of emotional weight like his own children. It is clear that you are the one with the emotionalism on this subject, not Pax, and this is shown by your own effort to coax him into an emotional response. Which is diabolic.
Because I've read about micro-dosing an also less potent strains. (less potent today is the MJ of my time, and it was the certain signal of a promiscuous girl). None of this changes the principles involved in assessing the morality (principles mean nothing, they smoked pot, they were promiscuous. while you are discussing principles, they are "partying".) . Of course it's not permitted to seduce girls (with or without marijuana involved). I surmise that alcohol is used more often than MJ for those purposes (yes it is, till they figure out that MJ is far better, which they will once it is as easy to get. Two tokes and they are in the bag). All of this is to miss the moral principles. If someone has anxiety issues (and I know people with almost debilitating anxiety),(they are not smoking for recreation, it is irrelevant to the discussion) and a hit of a less-potent strain of MJ or a micro-dose of MJ helps alleviate the anxiety without causing them to lose use of reason, taken in the privacy of their own home, without any other nefarious intent than to relieve anxiety, without intending to drive a vehicle impaired, in a state where recreational use is legal, and holding a job that is not put at risk by the possiblility of a random drug test, etc. etc. then there's absolutely nothing wrong with it from a moral standpoint. Period (Irrelevant, not recreational usage). You keep wandering away from the moral principles (your "moral principles" won't convince any pot smoker not to "party", it is just fluff, it will go in one ear and out the other. They will laugh at your naiveness), are not real involved into all kinds of caricatures regarding what some or many pot users do, which is no different than what people do when they abuse alcohol (MJ is much better than alcohol for lowering inhibitions. what I say here is the real world, while your moral principles have as much affect on these people as water off a duck).My answers above in bold.
It is interesting the different personalities and how they perceive these things. Ladislaus, and Pax Vobis are very similar, their thinking is theoretical, and everything must fit into what they know. That is the way they are wired. I on the other hand am a field marshal, I am out in the battlefield with no one to ask for orders, I am it, if I don't think fast on my feet, I, and all of my men are as good as dead. My teachers, my grandfather, had 5000 employees under him, and my father had 2000. I learned from them. I fortunately did not have as many employees depending on me like they did, but I had at least 50 employees and thousands of other people who were employees in companies I supplied, that depended on my going to work every day and making the right decisions. When one does that day in day out, one learns to think fast because at any moment you could make a mistake that will affect many people's lives. One has to be able to think outside of the box and be quick to change anything that does not work. The mindset of Ladi and Pax Vobis would have failed in the 1960's revolution, that is what happened to the priests. For young people it will go in one ear and out the other. It went and still goes in one ear and out the other for me and I am now in my late 60's.(https://i.imgur.com/m6qYWN7.png)
It is interesting the different personalities and how they perceive these things. Ladislaus, and Pax Vobis are very similar, their thinking is theoretical, and everything must fit into what they know. That is the way they are wired. I on the other hand am a field marshal, I am out in the battlefield with no one to ask for orders, I am it, if I don't think fast on my feet, I, and all of my men are as good as dead. My teachers, my grandfather, had 5000 employees under him, and my father had 2000. I learned from them. I fortunately did not have as many employees depending on me like they did, but I had at least 50 employees and thousands of other people who were employees in companies I supplied, that depended on my going to work every day and making the right decisions. When one does that day in day out, one learns to think fast because at any moment you could make a mistake that will affect many people's lives. One has to be able to think outside of the box and be quick to change anything that does not work. The mindset of Ladi and Pax Vobis would have failed in the 1960's revolution, that is what happened to the priests. For young people it will go in one ear and out the other. It went and still goes in one ear and out the other for me and I am now in my late 60's.In essence, you're good with quick decisions, which is contrary to the principles of moral theology. And admitting that you probably shouldn't be one to address these concerns, yes?
What would you defenders of recreational MJ smoking think of say your son having long beautiful flowing clean hair like the picture below? What would you advise your son about his hair? Say like this:Looks fine. Our Lord is often depicted with beautiful flowing hair too.
(https://i.imgur.com/m4eK9r0.png)
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever.This is a very dangerous and stupid statement. You're almost denying the vocational graces and holy inspirations that priests have, from the Holy Ghost, to guide those young people of good will. You need to step off your soap box.
If you have not smoked pot you can't know anything but what you read. If you have friends who smoke pot, that is one way to learn about the effects by seeing them and how they live. Do you have any experience with relatives and friends who smoke pot?Yep, I have known many people over the years who smoke. I currently know a few lawyers who use it to unwind, instead of alcohol. In my experience, some kids go overboard, some don't. Some turn into hippies, some don't. Some grow out of it and some don't. It depends on the person.
In essence, you're good with quick decisions, which is contrary to the principles of moral theology. And admitting that you probably shouldn't be one to address these concerns, yes?No. When there is no time and no option but a quick decision, the foundation of decision comes from what one has learned from real world experience, preferable from other people's mistakes over many years. The decision is fast, but the knowledge of what to do was long in acquiring. "Fools rush in where wise men fear to tread". It is really not a quick decision of a fool.
Looks fine. Our Lord is often depicted with beautiful flowing hair too.
This is a very dangerous and stupid statement. You're almost denying the vocational graces and holy inspirations that priests have, from the Holy Ghost, to guide those young people of good will. You need to step off your soap box.The fact of the matter is that it did not work in the 1960's and is not working now. Your foundations for fighting MJ and drug abuse with the teaching that it is morally neutral, did not work in the 1960's and does not work today to divert young people from "partying". You are just banging your head against the same wall over and over and over. Learn to react to people when they do not listen to you. Move to one foot to the side there is a door there my friend. Your system does not work!
You need to step off your soap box.
Yep, I have known many people over the years who smoke. I currently know a few lawyers who use it to unwind, instead of alcohol. In my experience, some kids go overboard, some don't. Some turn into hippies, some don't. Some grow out of it and some don't. It depends on the person.Any of them practicing Catholics with children who live the faith? (P.S. - I hope you are not impressed with a person just because he is a lawyer?)
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. …
The question is; What would you advise your son about his hair? Would you then complement him and say he looks very handsome, that he looks like the pictures of Our Lord? Is that what you would say to him?This: "Be not solicitous therefore, saying, What shall we eat: or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed? [32] For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things. [33] Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you."
It would be easier to demand that water stop being wet.I am what I am my friend, many people and families relied on me for their livelihood. There is no need for envy, it was no piece of cake.
This: "Be not solicitous therefore, saying, What shall we eat: or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed? [32] For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things. [33] Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you."I suppose that if your son grew up hearing you quote scripture for everything, that he would think that that was normal, but my grandfather and my father, nor I talk that way. What does that have to do with long hair?
Your fixation on appearances is distressing.
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience…
Your "experience"? What "experience"?No, I judge them by their fruits, the young people they advised in the Catholic schools and in the confessional, they all lost the faith in the 1960's. I see the same today in my SSPX chapel. I spelled all that out earlier.
Do you have your ear to the confessional week after week so that you can patrol the content and progress of confessors' advice?
You have far too much gall. You presume you have the formation and discernment to judge the competence of confessors—when you have thoroughly demonstrated here that you don't have the slightest grip on moral theology. Meanwhile you project your pathology on others.I am flattered that you think of me so highly that you envy me and feel a need to insult me. But be advised, that not everyone is like me, most people will really be affected by what you say and it could cause them to even commit ѕυιcιdє. I have seen it happen in my life to man that was ganged up on with ridicule at my SSPX chapel till he snapped and killed himself. Be very careful what you write about people.
Implicitly you share Meg's penchant for judging the interior forum and also arrogate to yourself paranormal diabolical "remote viewing" of people's bedroom activities (unless you actually are peeping and listening to the confessions of others).
You are a seriously disordered person.
I suppose that if your son grew up hearing you quote scripture for everything, that he would think that that was normal, but my grandfather and my father, nor I talk that way. What does that have to do with long hair?That I, and Our Lord, cares more that he is righteous than what clothes he wears, or how his hair looks.
That I, and Our Lord, cares more that he is righteous than what clothes he wears, or how his hair looks.
What do you mean by 'righteous?'Stop being coy. You know exactly what I mean.
Stop being coy. You know exactly what I mean.
I am flattered that you think of me so highly that you envy me and feel a need to insult me. But be advised, that not everyone is like me, most people will really be affected by what you say and it could cause them to even commit ѕυιcιdє. I have seen it happen in my life to man that was ganged up on with ridicule at my SSPX chapel till he snapped and killed himself. Be very careful what you write about people.
I do not know what you mean. 'Righteous' is a term mainly used by Prots. You seldom see traditional Catholics using the term. What is 'righteous' to you, in relation to the subject of this thread? I truly do not get it. Actually, I don't recall any Traditional Catholic ever using that term. So I'm surprised that others on the thread would agree with you.Righteous is literally used in the Douay-Rheims Bible several times.
But they obviously do, with their upvotes. A bit odd.
I do not know what you mean. 'Righteous' is a term mainly used by Prots. You seldom see traditional Catholics using the term. What is 'righteous' to you, in relation to the subject of this thread? I truly do not get it. Actually, I don't recall any Traditional Catholic ever using that term. So I'm surprised that others on the thread would agree with you.Definition of righteous
But they obviously do, with their upvotes. A bit odd, to say the least.
Righteous is literally used in the Douay-Rheims Bible several times.
Okay. Well, I haven't memorized the Bible, as Protestants do.Lol equating knowledge of Scripture with Protestantism is just dumb, Meg. I guess St. Jerome was a Protestant too because he memorized all of Scripture...
In what context did you intend to use the term? Is there a reason why you do not want to explain?
Lol equating knowledge of Scripture with Protestantism is just dumb, Meg. I guess St. Jerome was a Protestant too because he memorized all of Scripture...
Nadir defined it for you above, since you're incapable of using a search engine.
No, I judge them by their fruits, the young people they advised in the Catholic schools and in the confessional, they all lost the faith in the 1960's. I see the same today in my SSPX chapel. I spelled all that out earlier.Non-responsive.
I'm not asking for a definition of 'righteous.' Good grief. :facepalm:Righteous, meaning holy, without sin. You know that. I would rather my son be righteous than putting stake in outward appearances. Everyone else got that
What did you mean when said that "Our Lord cares more that he is righteous than what clothes he wears, or how his hair looks."
You obviously do not intend to explain yourself. A bit strange, but okay. Maybe you don't even know why you wrote that, or what you meant by it. It just sounded somehow virtuous at the time, to use that word?
There was an illiterate saint (can’t remember his name - I will try to find his name) who knew the whole book of Psalms and recited them all every day.Correction. He was Bl Constantius of Fabriano. He was literate. He recited the Office of the Dead every day, and often the whole 150 Psalms which he knew by heart. He said he had never been refused a favour for which he has recited the whole Psalter.
Must have been a Protestant! :laugh1:
Righteous, meaning holy, without sin. You know that. I would rather my son be righteous than putting stake in outward appearances. Everyone else got that
Righteous, meaning holy, without sin. You know that. I would rather my son be righteous than putting stake in outward appearances.There, that's better. If the writer had answered that in the first place, it would have saved a lot of time.Everyone else got that
I have not read the other thread on this topic, but my question regarding Use of Marijuana would be where is the line drawn? If moderation is the line, why can't we use many other drugs in moderation?
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever.
Okay, thank you for explaining. And no, I didn't know that that's what you meant by it. Like I said, traditional Catholics do not use that term (even though it's in the Bible THREE whole times). I guess that "everyone else" is familiar with terminology that Prots use. Fine. A little weird, but fine.Two downvotes for that honest, courteous and "righteous" response comment so far, I guess the third downvoter has not logged in yet?
So you believe that your son should not care about outward appearance, only in being holy and without sin? That means that you are fine with him looking any way that he chooses? Any way at all? Does he follow your example? The Novus ordo folks would certainly agree with you about appearance, except that they aren't really concerned with holiness so much. For them, its like, "God needs to take me as I am." Such nonsense.
How can we relate this to recreational pot smoking?
c) Since morphine, opium, chloroform and similar drugs can also deprive one of the use of his reason temporarily, that which was said of intoxicating drinks holds also for narcotics (Cf. 165, 4).
a) To use narcotics in small quantities and only occasionally, is a venial sin if done without a sufficient reason. Any proportionately good reason justifies their use, e.g., to calm the nerves, dispel insomnia, etc.
Such usc becomes gravely sinful if it creates an habitual craving for "dope" which is more difficult to overcome than dipsomania and more injurious to health.
(3) To use drugs in greater quantities so as to lose the use of one's reason is in itself a mortal sin; but for a good reason it is permissible. Such a good reason is had in case of operations, i.e., that the patient be rendered insensible to intense pain, or that one might remain calm under the knife. In like manner one may administer opiates to one who is suffering greatly in order to alleviate his pain.
You are correct, I didn't write that properly when it is left to hang by itself like that. The personal experience needs to be elaborated on. In the 1960's the drugs, sex, and pill took away all of the young people away from the Church. These young people were raised in Catholic schools, which is the primary source for learning the faith and keeping young people in the sacraments, chiefly confession, which is the continuously used sacrament. The priests and nuns were there to teach 24/7 at the school, not just in confession and Sunday sermons. The schools failed big time. They were not trained and prepared for dealing with the drugs, sex, and pill, the "MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations". Had they been trained to see and deal with it as THE greatest enemy they have, the sin that takes by far the most souls to hell as St. Remigius taught "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", they would have had far less loss of souls. They had the Latin Mass in every church and the beautiful vestments, marble, incense and music. The SSPX is n living in the 1960's again. I see the same mistakes occurring today and the young people going off to live in the world, party and have a good time, while the SSPX priests are not even giving a sermon. The sin that takes practically every adult and it is not even acknowledged or mentioned! That is what happened in the 1960's.QuoteLT wrote: In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever.Sorry, but this is the same garbage spewed by the Novus Ordo, that priests cannot counsel married couples since they're not married. So you're saying that the best priests are those who have had experiences with MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography, and fornication?
Jone's Moral TheologyWhere the rubber meets the road, this advice is useless. According to this, I can use Cocaine like coffee to get a job done or go out dancing with my wife when I am tired and do not want to. Teach this to the children, that it is just a venial sin and it will they will go the way of the 1960's.
c) Since morphine, opium, chloroform and similar drugs can also deprive one of the use of his reason temporarily, that which was said of intoxicating drinks holds also for narcotics (Cf. 165, 4).
a) To use narcotics in small quantities and only occasionally, is a venial sin if done without a sufficient reason. Any proportionately good reason justifies their use, e.g., to calm the nerves, dispel insomnia, etc.
Unfortunately, it is given that it has been hammered into our heads for close to a century that "MJ bad" and "alcohol good" when both are on equal footing morally-speaking.But if you examine WHY MJ was illegized, you will see that It should not have been.
And I'm only on the moderation usage side of this because to say it's inherently sinful is untrue. I personally hate the "pot culture" and have seen several friends and acquaintances wreck their lives with it.
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.Not once have I received good counsel from a priest about sɛҳuąƖ relationships. Most of the time they were dead wrong.
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. That is why I see the young people leave and go into the world as soon as they are able. That is what happened in the 1960's when 80% of Americans went to mass and the Novus Ordo did not exist. The priest didn't have a clue how to deal with it. I see women counselors who never had any children, giving lectures about how to raise children, and college professors who have never had to use their theories in the real world, teaching students . They are only good for teaching those that know little, like children. "In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king".There are other ways to injest MJ than smoking it.
If you have not smoked pot you can't know anything but what you read. If you have friends who smoke pot, that is one way to learn about the effects by seeing them and how they live. Do you have any experience with relatives and friends who smoke pot?
No, I judge them by their fruits, the young people they advised in the Catholic schools and in the confessional, they all lost the faith in the 1960's. I see the same today in my SSPX chapel. I spelled all that out earlier.SO many other factors than priests destroying the faith in people, LT.
Okay, thank you for explaining. And no, I didn't know that that's what you meant by it. Like I said, traditional Catholics do not use that term (even though it's in the Bible THREE whole times). I guess that "everyone else" is familiar with terminology that Prots use. Fine. A little weird, but fine.Funny, I use the term frequently and I have been trad all my old life.
So you believe that your son should not care about outward appearance, only in being holy and without sin? That means that you are fine with him looking any way that he chooses? Any way at all? Does he follow your example? The Novus ordo folks would certainly agree with you about appearance, except that they aren't really concerned with holiness so much. For them, its like, "God needs to take me as I am." Such nonsense.
How can we relate this to recreational pot smoking?
SO many other factors than priests destroying the faith in people, LT.The SSPX priests are not destroying the faith, no, no, do not misunderstand what I am saying, I never said that. What I said was that they are not even addressing THE sin that takes away by far the most souls and according to St. Remigius that takes practically every adult male and female:
Not once have I received good counsel from a priest about sɛҳuąƖ relationships. Most of the time they were dead wrong.The sin that takes practically every adult to eternal damnation! It is like a plumber that will not work on anything dirty.
Is using pot sinful for Catholics? In my opinion, it is. Grace builds on nature. It's undeniable that the general culture surrounding the use of pot is immoral, loose and destructive to the individual soul and society as a whole. Best to err on the side of caution and prudence. "Medicinal" pot use is the back door to legalizing pot for "recreation". Since, according to some, the church allows for the use of substances such as pot, this doesn't mean it must be allowed. It means in the strict sense it can be allowed. If the church allows the use of pot, then the use of it can be freely opposed. I oppose its use."Catholic recreational users of MJ", should be an oxymoron to Catholics, it is that simple. Catholics that think otherwise, are either not thinking, naive, or do not want to give up their toys. I am amazed that there are actually a few people here on CI that are defending recreational use of MJ.
On the whole, it seems that none of the zealous "tolerators" of pot use smoke pot. Isn't that something. Some have jobs that test against its use. The military, civil service jobs test against the use of pot and none of the pot use "tolerators" can't/won't answer why this is. Try getting and keeping a CDL while using pot.
To LT and others there is no reason to second guess your convictions regarding pot use.
The SSPX priests are not destroying the faith, no, no, do not misunderstand what I am saying, I never said that. What I said was that they are not even addressing THE sin that takes away by far the most souls and according to St. Remigius that takes practically every adult male and female:SSPX priests ARE destroying the faith. The advice some of them give is horrible, sometimes even sinful.
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)
The recreational use of MJ and other drugs is a primary ingredient is the licentious behavior taking the souls away .
"Bringing forth grass for cattle, and herb for the service of men. That thou mayst bring bread out of the earth:" [Psalms 103:14 (http://www.drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=21&ch=103&l=14#x)] |
Use of MJ is not a sin of the flesh. (No one has said that it is) It may contribute to it, but so does alcohol, pain killers, even over the counter meds or supplements (MJ is a stimulant for sex drive, much more that alcohol). Benadryl makes me hyper. Melatonin makes me lose all inhibitions. Some people "get off" on certain foods. Do we make everything illegal? No. Moderation in all things is the way to go (Nothing is impossible, but just because it is possible for some Spartan or non-functioning old men, one does not legalize something in which there really is no moderation in recreational use among young adults, which is what I am concerned with. If an old man like M79 wants to "recreationally" smoke dope in his home and only he and his wife know, that is their problem, I could care less, since nothing I say is going to change that.)My comments in bold.
Go ahead and eat all the GMO corn, drink up the fluoride city water, and eat all the steroided beef, they are all made the same as todays MJ.
[Psalms 103:14 (http://www.drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=21&ch=103&l=14#x)]
And God said: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat: (http://www.drbo.org/cgi-bin/d?b=drb&bk=1&ch=1&l=29-29&q=1#x)
Genesis 1:29
I am amazed that there are actually a few people here on CI that are defending recreational use of MJ.I defend the legalization of MJ, and the responsible use thereof, because I grow weary of government control of healing medications God gave us.
Where the rubber meets the road, this advice is useless. According to this, I can use Cocaine like coffee to get a job done or go out dancing with my wife when I am tired and do not want to. Teach this to the children, that it is just a venial sin and it will they will go the way of the 1960's.
Go ahead and eat all the GMO corn, drink up the fluoride city water, and eat all the steroided beef,God did not make those things.
My comments in bold.I am neither a spartan or a non-functioning old man, but when I tried smoking MJ, twice, it did nothing to me, absolutely nothing.
I guess you didn't actually read it (or comprehend). Cocaine has an extremely high risk of addicition and would therefore fall under that prohibition.Any young man that reads Jone and what you write will conclude that it is no big deal to smoke dope "recreationally". There is more to life than what that book says, which is not much. A normal person that reads Jone will know less than they did before they sought it out. But you do not see that because you think that Jone is the end all be all. I am sorry, but Jone clarifies nothing for the average Joe on the street, 99.99 percent of the world.
Secondly, here you go again with the "just" a venial sin garbage. Nobody's advocating venial sin. Jone says that it's venial if there's no proportionate justification, but no sin at all if there's proportioniate justification. So, if you could take cocaine without the risk of addiction (not possible, from what I understand), and it didn't compromise your reason, and you needed it to get your work done, yes, it would be justifiable.
God did not make those things.God did not make the MJ they are selling today, just the same as God did not make miniature Dobermans and all the other breeds.
Legalizing MJ would give us "organic" MJ.
Pax Vobis commented: Yep, I have known many people over the years who smoke. I currently know a few lawyers who use it to unwind, instead of alcohol. In my experience, some kids go overboard, some don't. Some turn into hippies, some don't. Some grow out of it and some don't. It depends on the person.Does anyone have an example of a real Catholic with children that smokes MJ recreationally and has had no problems with his children living with it?
Any of them practicing Catholics with children who live the faith? (P.S. - I hope you are not impressed with a person just because he is a lawyer?)
They (priests) were not trained and prepared for dealing with the drugs, sex, and pill, the "MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations".This is just a flawed view of how free will works and the limits of the Church to stop people from sinning. It's apparent that your personality is one of "blame everyone else first but not the individual (or yourself)". Everyone has the natural law written on their heart, everyone has free will, everyone has a DUTY to follow their conscience and KNOW their Faith. Those that sin, do so because of their own choice. Same for those that go to hell.
This is just a flawed view of how free will works and the limits of the Church to stop people from sinning.Please quote where I said the priest are the only ones to blame for what happened in the 1960's.
God did not make the MJ they are selling today, just the same as God did not make miniature Dobermans and all the other breeds.MJ has been proven to cure cancer and other ailments. How much cheaper it would be and how many lives would be saved if it were legal. Keeping things prescription only doesn't stop pain pill adicts from getting it.
The people that eat organic food are few, the market is miniscule compared to non-organic, one does not legalize MJ because like 1% will be organic.
You are wanting to legalize something which is destructive to society, it is already bad enough (like 60% of Americans are on some kind of a mind altering substance). Catholics who promote MJ for recreational use should be an oxymoron.
I am neither a spartan or a non-functioning old man, but when I tried smoking MJ, twice, it did nothing to me, absolutely nothing.:laugh1: Your comment brought this to mind:
I have not read the other thread on this topic, but my question regarding Use of Marijuana would be where is the line drawn? If moderation is the line, why can't we use many other drugs in moderation?If you read the early pages of that thread, you will appreciate the gravamen of the argument.
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. …
You made this very revealing statement.Maybe he knows the sins of his children and requires then to tell him what the priest says in the confessional?
You claimed that your "experience" (your exact word) allowed you to know the advice of multiple priests (you used the plural) and were in a position to know the results of that advice regarding five concerns. So, unless 1 penitent had sins related to all five topics, you are claiming you have knowledge of the sins of multiple penitents before and after the advice of multiple priests.
You cannot know the advice of multiple priests unless you were told by the priests and penitents or listened at the confessional. Which is it? Did multiple priests break the seal of the confessional? Or did you listen to the confessions of others? Or did multiple people decide that they also needed to confess their sins to you? Which is it?
You cannot know the outcome of that advice unless you can compare the sins before and after the advice. To make that comparison you must have knowledge of the sɛҳuąƖ activities of multiple people. How did you get that knowledge? Did all those penitents give you a tally of their porn use, masturbation, and fornication? Were you doing occult paranormal "remote viewing"? Or were you a serial Peeping Tom?
Of course, there is another possibility… You lied that you have "experience," simply did the Meg thing, presumed you know the interior forum and project acts about which you could only perversely know or imagine, and are just what we know you to be—a rabid blowhard perverted bullsh*tter.
Your own statement reveals that you are a seriously disordered person—sɛҳuąƖly and spiritually—who foams and perversely ruminates about and projects the sɛҳuąƖ sins of others. It seems that your stated sɛҳuąƖ past is reflected in your present disorder.
Totally disgusting.
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. That is why I see the young people leave and go into the world as soon as they are able. That is what happened in the 1960's when 80% of Americans went to mass and the Novus Ordo did not exist. The priest didn't have a clue how to deal with it. I see women counselors who never had any children, giving lectures about how to raise children, and college professors who have never had to use their theories in the real world, teaching students . They are only good for teaching those that know little, like children. "In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king".I don't have to have had an abortion to know to advise against it.
If you have not smoked pot you can't know anything but what you read. If you have friends who smoke pot, that is one way to learn about the effects by seeing them and how they live. Do you have any experience with relatives and friends who smoke pot?
Maybe he knows the sins of his children and requires then to tell him what the priest says in the confessional?If that were the case he would also need to know the specifics of the advice in the confessional either by listening or coercing his children.
I don't have to have had an abortion to know to advise against it.Note carefully: he said it is his "experience."
I guess you didn't actually read it (or comprehend). Cocaine has an extremely high risk of addicition and would therefore fall under that prohibition.Given the examples Jone gives where there would be no sin to take narcotics occasionally, I have to wonder what else could be considered "proportionate justification". It seems a bit too easy to claim "proportionate justification".
Secondly, here you go again with the "just" a venial sin garbage. Nobody's advocating venial sin. Jone says that it's venial if there's no proportionate justification, but no sin at all if there's proportioniate justification. So, if you could take cocaine without the risk of addiction (not possible, from what I understand), and it didn't compromise your reason, and you needed it to get your work done, yes, it would be justifiable ... and NO sin at all (not "just" venial sin).
Given the examples Jone gives where there would be no sin to take narcotics occasionally, I have to wonder what else could be considered "proportionate justification".What exactly are you asking?
What exactly are you asking?I am referring to this:
I am referring to this:
To use narcotics in small quantities and only occasionally, is a venial sin if done without a sufficient reason. Any proportionately good reason justifies their use, e.g., to calm the nerves, dispel insomnia, etc.
It doesn't seem to take much to come up with a "proportionately good reason" for occasional use of narcotics without imputing sin.
This isn't speaking of MJ, but I think that this might be what LT is concerned with...
Any young man that reads Jone and what you write will conclude that it is no big deal to smoke dope "recreationally". There is more to life than what that book says, which is not much. A normal person that reads Jone will know less than they did before they sought it out. But you do not see that because you think that Jone is the end all be all. I am sorry, but Jone clarifies nothing for the average Joe on the street, 99.99 percent of the world.If God made it, it should be legal.
Cocaine has the same risk of addiction as MJ, it can be easily used in moderation, one line and a tired husband is off to the clubs to dance with his wife. If todays MJ is legal, so can Cocaine be made legal and so can Hashish which also can also be used "in moderation". Once you open that pandoras box that it can be used recreationally in "moderation", the list of approved equivalents will never end.
I am referring to this:If God gave it to us, there is a reason.
To use narcotics in small quantities and only occasionally, is a venial sin if done without a sufficient reason. Any proportionately good reason justifies their use, e.g., to calm the nerves, dispel insomnia, etc.
It doesn't seem to take much to come up with a "proportionately good reason" for occasional use of narcotics without imputing sin.
This isn't speaking of MJ, but I think that this might be what LT is concerned with...
Regarding recreational use, it can be argued that alcohol does more damage to the body than MJ does yet God has no problem with MODERATE alcohol consumption.…I state it more strongly: It is inarguable. Absolutely for certain alcohol is toxic; people die regularly from overdose of alcohol as a direct effect of the drug. It is impossible to die of a marijuana overdose (unless you simultaneously cut off a person's oxygen supply).
I state it more strongly: It is inarguable. Absolutely for certain alcohol is toxic; people die regularly from overdose of alcohol as a direct effect of the drug. It is impossible to die of a marijuana overdose (unless you simultaneously cut off a person's oxygen supply).Sorry, meant to upvote...
Sorry, meant to upvote...No worries. I care nothing about downthumbs EXCEPT for the enormous fun of irritating hysterics and effeminates.
Your statement is true.
Go ahead and eat all the GMO corn, drink up the fluoride city water, and eat all the steroided beef, they are all made the same as todays MJ.So are the grapes for your wine, the hops for your beer, the corn or potatoes for your vodka, the hormones in your chicken and pork, and probably 95% of every food item in your kitchen.
So are the grapes for your wine, the hops for your beer, the corn or potatoes for your vodka, the hormones in your chicken and pork, and probably 95% of every food item in your kitchen.Actually there is a rumor that Last Tradhican's "North 40" is contaminated with "natural" heavy metals and radionuclides.
The only way to get away from it is to raise your own everything. Even then you have to be careful about the feed you give your animals, what is in the fertilizer you use in your garden, and what was used on the land before you got there.
Actually there is a rumor that Last Tradhican's "North 40" is contaminated with "natural" heavy metals and radionuclides.Don't go there....
To amplify on "can't overdose on MJ," I met 8 patients, each of whom cured aggressive or advanced cancer using 50 times the psychoactive dose for 60 days. No overdose, but CURED OF CANCER.Yep.
Don't go there....Hmmmm… I wonder who started the rumor. [trying to put an innocent look on my face] :laugh1:
You [Last RabiesTrad] made this very revealing statement.I wouldn't want the interrogator to miss his own interrogation.
You claimed that your "experience" (your exact word) allowed you to know the advice of multiple priests (you used the plural) and were in a position to know the results of that advice regarding five concerns. So, unless 1 penitent had sins related to all five topics, you are claiming you have knowledge of the sins of multiple penitents before and after the advice of multiple priests.
You cannot know the advice of multiple priests unless you were told by the priests and penitents or listened at the confessional. Which is it? Did multiple priests break the seal of the confessional? Or did you listen to the confessions of others? Or did multiple people decide that they also needed to confess their sins to you? Which is it?
You cannot know the outcome of that advice unless you can compare the sins before and after the advice. To make that comparison you must have knowledge of the sɛҳuąƖ activities of multiple people. How did you get that knowledge? Did all those penitents give you a tally of their porn use, masturbation, and fornication? Were you doing occult paranormal "remote viewing"? Or were you a serial Peeping Tom?
Of course, there is another possibility… You lied that you have "experience," simply did the Meg thing, presumed you know the interior forum and project acts about which you could only perversely know or imagine, and are just what we know you to be—a rabid blowhard perverted bullsh*tter.
Your own statement reveals that you are a seriously disordered person—sɛҳuąƖly and spiritually—who foams and perversely ruminates about and projects the sɛҳuąƖ sins of others. It seems that your stated sɛҳuąƖ past is reflected in your present disorder.
Totally disgusting.
If God gave it to us, there is a reason.
Regarding recreational use, it can be argued that alcohol does more damage to the body than MJ does yet God has no problem with MODERATE alcohol consumption.
Why would he have a problem with MODERATE MJ use? Makes no sense to me.
At least those who drink alcohol don't usually claim that it's for "medicinal purposes." Unless they wink their eye when doing so.
At least those who drink alcohol don't usually claim that it's for "medicinal purposes." Unless they wink their eye when doing so.Don't forget Paul's advice to Timothy:
Like I said, we are from two different worlds, different places, having lived totally different lives.
It is not a sin to allow one's daughter to go out on a "date" with a stranger that the parents have never seen.
It is not a sin for your children to go with their friends on Summer break to Florida.
It is not a sin for a husband to go help the neighbors 20 year old daughter whenever she calls
It is not a sin to have one's daughter clean homes of men.
It is not a sin to leave your daughter alone to play with boys
It is not a sin for one's daughter to smoke marijuana at a "party" with "friends" the parents do not even know.
It is not a sin to leave one's door or garage open at night
It is not a sin to swim in black water that is home to Gators, Snapping Turtles and venomous snakes.
It is not a sin to work on electrical appliances with power connected.
All of these examples are dangerous occasions of sin or physical harm. Whether something is a sin or not isn't the sole determinant of whether it is wise to do. Nature never forgives, we have a fallen nature.
No evasion, RabiesMan.
How did you gain experience that allowed you to compare priests' advice and penitents' continued sinfulness?
You cannot make the comparison you made of multiple priests and penitents unless you have knowledge of both the advice and the subsequent behaviors.
You made a sweeping generalization about the ineffectuality of SSPX priests' advice.
How did you gain knowledge of priests' advice to others?
How did you gain knowledge of the serial bedroom activities of others?
Only perverse and sinful means would give you information that would support your claim.
You made this very revealing statement.
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. That is why I see the young people leave and go into the world as soon as they are able. That is what happened in the 1960's when 80% of Americans went to mass and the Novus Ordo did not exist. The priest didn't have a clue how to deal with it. I see women counselors who never had any children, giving lectures about how to raise children, and college professors who have never had to use their theories in the real world, teaching students . They are only good for teaching those that know little, like children. "In the country of blind men, the one eyed man is a king".
If you have not smoked pot you can't know anything but what you read. If you have friends who smoke pot, that is one way to learn about the effects by seeing them and how they live. Do you have any experience with relatives and friends who smoke pot?
You have made no attempt whatsoever to address those argumentsUltimately, this is LT's problem. He's so close-minded, narrow focused and my-way-or-the-highway, that he refuses to *attempt* to see anyone else's perspective, nor does he seemingly acknowledge that there *might be* valid, alternative perspectives (which is typical of narcissists). Thus, he chastises everyone who disagrees with him as being a closeted pervert, he reduces everything he disagrees with as impure, and he blames all of society's evils on external factors (bad priests, bad parents, out-of-touch moral theology books, etc).
Someone without such issues and no understanding regarding the moral aspect of immodesty: it's just a normal thing to wear, comfortable, especially when it's hot out.I get your larger point, but we cannot say that a person has "no understanding" about immodesty because the natural law is written on all men's hearts, so there is no excuse for such sins. Everyone, male or female, knows when they are being impure. If they've dulled their conscience to the point where they don't feel guilt anymore, that's their issue, but we cannot say that they they *never* knew that immodesty was wrong. It's infallible that God created all people with a conscience.
We don't know what graces they've received or haven't received. We don't know whether she's been informed about the matter (very few people in society have).Same faulty line of thinking. Modesty and basic morality are part of the natural law which is written on all men's hearts. All adolescents become acutely aware of purity issues when their hormones kick in. There is no excuse for immodesty in women, just as their is no excuse for lust of the eyes in men. In the very beginning of a sinful life, all people know what they are doing is wrong; in the early years, they feel guilt. It's only after a life of sin that the conscience is dulled and they become accustomed to vice.
They realized how many graces they had received and how many they had wasted, and yet always gave their neighbor the benefit of the doubt, assuming that they hadn't received the same graces.This right here, from my observations, is the chink in the armor of trads these days. We don't give others the benefit of the doubt, we just assume that they're worse than ourselves and we assume the worst of their intentions. My favorite devotional book, Imitation of the Sacred Heart, tells us that we need to operate in such a manner that we presume everyone else is holier than ourselves to crush all pride.
Situation: woman wears shorts out to a grocery store.If Lizzo wear shorts to the grocery store and nobody feels lust is it still a sin?
At least those who drink alcohol don't usually claim that it's for "medicinal purposes." Unless they wink their eye when doing so.And that is why MJ should be legalized.
Actually alcohol was used effectively to slow premature labor.Hops has been used by midwives for a long time to help women with morning sickness. Sipping on half a beer throughout the day can really help.
Much more efficacious and non-toxic alternatives are now used.
So much for Meg's medical insights—about as worthless as her channeling the interior dispositions of others.
And that is why MJ should be legalized.
It's often remarked by Catholics that our country has a puritanical heritage. Usually, the heritage of American puritanism is seen simply as a rigid and principled rejection of certain pleasures, especially intoxicants.
I don't think that's actually the heritage of American puritanism, though. I think the real heritage of American puritanism is the idea that intoxicants are for "getting messed up." This attitude is something that almost all Americans share, they just differ in judging "getting messed up" to be a good or bad thing. In general, irreligious people think that getting messed up is good, whilst religious people think it's bad.
In Europe, I am told, there is a much healthier attitude toward intoxicants (alcohol especially). Taking alcohol as an example, it is a cultural staple and even children are given it. Alcohol is to Europe what guns are to America: early exposure and normalization helps provide for a much more moderate and responsible use. This isn't to suggest or imply that we should give children cannabis just for the sake of getting them used to it. Cannabis is psychoactive, so I would favor age restrictions on it since regular use can be detrimental to cognitive development. No, the reason I bring it up is to show how very cultural the evaluation LT offers (and others who argue like him) actually is. And as is the case with many things that are cultural, it's just about impossible to imagine it being any other way.
There are fewer side effects to MJ than alcohol. Educate yourself. Google Rick Simpson Oil story.
Well said. When I took an enology course at a community college, the instructor's parents were from France. She said that they were all given wine as children during supper, diluted with water. She said that she and none of her 5 siblings were alcoholics.
Yes, cannabis is psychoactive. Hence, caution should be used. And one needs to be realistic about the side effects, which are very much downplayed.
There are fewer side effects to MJ than alcohol. Educate yourself. Google Rick Simpson Oil story.
It is an amusing irony that marijuana's strongest opponents continue to claim that marijuana causes cancer. The National Institute of Drug Abuse funded UCLA pulmonologist Prof. Donald Tashkin. For decades Tashkin struggled to demonstrate that smoking marijuana causes cancer, but he finally gave up. Tashkin's 2006 publication of his case-controlled study compared 1,200 patients with lung and head and neck cancers to a control group without cancers. To his credit, Tashkin reported reported the results that flew against his prejudice. He reported that, while tobacco smokers had a twenty-fold risk of cancer compared to non-smokers, marijuana smokers had lower cancer risk than non-smokers.
Got that? Marijuana smokers had lower cancer risk than non-smokers!
Marijuana Use and the Risk of Lung and Upper Aerodigestive Tract Cancers: Results of a Population-Based Case-Control Study
Mia Hashibe; Hal Morgenstern; Yan Cui; Donald P. Tashkin; Zuo-Feng Zhang; Wendy Cozen; Thomas M. Mack; Sander Greenland. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev (2006) 15 (10): 1829–1834.
https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0330 (https://doi.org/10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0330)
Tashkin's findings merely echoed an earlier 1997 National Institute of Drug Abuse funded study of 65,000 Kaiser HMO patients. In turn, those findings in humans were presaged by federally funded animal studies from the 1970s.
Get the memo—the most committed opponents of marijuana (researchers and feds) have been forced to begrudgingly admit that there is no evidence that marijuana causes cancer.
That marijuana smokers have lower cancer risk than non-smokers certainly lends credence to the reports of cancer cures using marijuana.
Sure, marijuana's rabid enemies can point to this or that putatively carcinogenic chemical in marijuana smoke (e.g., aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzopyrene), but whatever those chemicals, it is clear that marijuana's beneficial chemicals have the predominant effect.
If Lizzo wear shorts to the grocery store and nobody feels lust is it still a sin?
I get your larger point, but we cannot say that a person has "no understanding" about immodesty because the natural law is written on all men's hearts, so there is no excuse for such sins.
My favorite devotional book, Imitation of the Sacred Heart, tells us that we need to operate in such a manner that we presume everyone else is holier than ourselves to crush all pride.
There's no natural law about wearing shorts. Nature had Adam and Eve running around unclothed. This notion of natural law is excessively widened sometimes to include everything under the sun. That's simply not true.Adam and Eve's bodies pre-fall reflected the glory of their souls, so there was appropriately no shame.
If someone is suffering from cancer, and pot helps, that's fine. But that's a completely different thing from saying that there's nothing wrong with smoking pot recreationally. And I still don't believe that it's an actual cure for cancer.Well, I researched MJ extensively when my uncle was found to have incurable stage 4 cancer. He was given 2 weeks to live. He was put on all kinds of meds which made him loopy with no appetite.
And I'm willing to bet that I've seen more people suffer and die from cancer (and chemotherapy) than you have, since I worked for several years in an in-patient hospital oncology unit. I'm not a fan of allopathic medicine. I favor alternatives. But those who push pot as being medicinal tend to completely whitewash the negative aspects of it, especially when taken recreationally.
You're another know-it-all. Aren't traditional Catholics wonderful? :laugh1:
As if emptying bedpans is a qualification to pontificate on oncology protocols or to correct "know-it-alls"?Sometimes it is difficult for people who work in the western medical field to awaken from the education they received in training and work.
Adam and Eve's bodies pre-fall reflected the glory of their souls, so there was appropriately no shame.Social conditioning.
Even children know from a very young age that there's something strange about someone walking around naked in public. Or is this merely social conditioning?
If someone is suffering from cancer, and pot helps, that's fine. But that's a completely different thing from saying that there's nothing wrong with smoking pot recreationally. And I still don't believe that it's an actual cure for cancer.
And I'm willing to bet that I've seen more people suffer and die from cancer (and chemotherapy) than you have, since I worked for several years in an in-patient hospital oncology unit. I'm not a fan of allopathic medicine. I favor alternatives. But those who push pot as being medicinal tend to completely whitewash the negative aspects of it, especially when taken recreationally.
You're another know-it-all. Aren't traditional Catholics wonderful? :laugh1:
Social conditioning.Yeah, but that's before they hit the age of reason. Adam and Eve didn't need any social conditioning to be ashamed of their nakedness.
My kids had no problem running around naked.
It must be legalized so it can be available to all, regardless of income.This thread is about recreational use of marijuana, so you are advocating legalizing marijuana for recreational use by your daughters?
This thread is about recreational use of marijuana, so you are advocating legalizing marijuana for recreational use by your daughters?No more so than alcohol.
If you have not read what I wrote: in my long personal experience, till I came back to the Church at 40, marijuana smoking was a certain indicator that young girls were promiscuous (to be polite).
To be blunt, marijuana for young girls is a leg spreader. Allowing our daughters to smoke it for recreation is like allowing a rapist to live in your home and sleep in the same room as your daughters.
It must be legalized so it can be available to all, regardless of income.
In the state where I live, it is legal and available to all. Though it is expensive, and regulated. Maybe low-income folks can get it cheaper at the pot shops here (there are many). I have no idea.You have no idea, is right.
I'm surprised that you aren't aware of the regulations of pot shops in states where it has been legalized, since you claim to know so much about it.
You have no idea, is right.
Why should I know about the laws of every location where it is legal? Did I say I was an expert on the laws regarding MJ?
MJ should be as legal and readily available as alcohol and that the government should not have special taxes on anything (gas, meds, alcohol, etc).
That's a lot of "shoulds."Did I SAY everything should be legal?
Everything should be legal, in your view, with no restrictions or special taxes. That means, it would stand to reason, that you believe that people are usually capable of making good decisions when it comes to substances that are addictive and mind-altering?
Did I SAY everything should be legal?
Go bake a cake, Meg.
We are speaking of pot and alcohol. That's a good way to deflect and not address the subject.It is impossible to have an intelligent conversation with someone who doesn't read, makes assumptions, tries to read minds, is illogical, and puts words into my mouth.
Everything should be legal, in your view, with no restrictions or special taxes. That means, it would stand to reason, that you believe that most people are usually capable of making good decisions when it comes to substances that are addictive and mind-altering?
True Catholics are libertarians because politics should mirror the Church, and saving one's soul is based on PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. A nanny state cannot force anyone to save their soul or to follow laws....and cheaper and more readily available to all.
Even St Thomas Aquinas said that prostitution should be legal, but follow zoning laws, because no amount of govt regulation would ever stop it. So you use zoning laws to regulate it to an isolated, rural part of the city which moral people can avoid.
People who smoke MJ are gonna keep doing it, laws or not. You might as well legalize it and make it safer.
People who smoke MJ are gonna keep doing it, laws or not. You might as well legalize it and make it safer.
Apples-oranges. Abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, etc are inherently evil and cannot be accepted under any circuмstances. MJ is not inherently evil and thus has different rules.
So we should have some restrictions? Why, when humans are just going to get around the restrictions? That has been your argument.A catholic country HAS to restrict those things which are inherently/all-the-time evil. Such as blasphemy, murder, sins against nature, etc.
A catholic country HAS to restrict those things which are inherently/all-the-time evil. Such as blasphemy, murder, sins against nature, etc.
MJ is not part of this category and is similar to alcohol in that it should have very little restrictions. BECAUSE IT'S NOT INHERENTLY EVIL.
What is the purpose of smoking MJ for recreation? To get stoned. Trads are fine with that. No problem. Enough said.What is the purpose of alcohol for recreation? To get drunk?
Apples-oranges. Abortion, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity, etc are inherently evil and cannot be accepted under any circuмstances. MJ is not inherently evil and thus has different rules.Better than that. MJ was given to us by God for our benefit and use.
So a Catholic country decides what the rules are? What country would that be?EVERY country should be Catholic.
EVERY country should be Catholic.
GO BAKE A CAKE, MEG.
So a Catholic country decides what the rules are? What country would that be?:facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm: :laugh2: :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm: :laugh2::laugh2: :facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:
Except that there are no Catholic counties anymore. And why would a Traditional Catholic (on this forum) want that anyway? Pretty sure that they love their freedoms here in this godless so-called democracy just as much as anyone else.Did I say there were any?
FWEEDOM!
Here's a little video for you, and the other lovers of freedom in the good 'ol USA:
song, freedom - Bing video (https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=song%2c+freedom&refig=3e38d63d57364407b041b862dc564a65&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dsong%2C%2bfreedom%26form%3dANNNB1%26refig%3d3e38d63d57364407b041b862dc564a65&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=B7BFC034A30B55D4FC07B7BFC034A30B55D4FC07&FORM=WRVORC)
What's the purpose of alcohol? Drukenness.Then teach that to your daughters your "logic" and even smoke some weed recreational with them "in moderation" like "your logic" says or else shut up and stop being a hypocrite. Some people only learn by their mistakes. Your daughters will be cannon fodder if you teach them your "logic" that they can smoke MJ if it is in moderation. I could not have warned you more.
What's the purpose of ice cream? Gluttony.
What's the purpose of a living room couch? Slothfulness.
What's the purpose of a vacation? Laziness.
This is the kind of logic which is applied to MJ and it leads to the heresies of Jansenism and Manichaeism, which is the error that natural things all lead to sin and temporal things are inherently wrong.
Meg, please research MJ.This thread is about recreational use. There is nothing to research about MJ for recreational use in young girls, it is a leg spreader for young girls.
(https://media.gab.com/cdn-cgi/image/width=720,quality=100/system/media_attachments/files/101/690/538/original/0edf510031854dff.png)
In my experience very few if any SSPX priests [plural!] (that's where I go) can guide young people in matters of MJ, alcohol, self-abuse, pornography and pre-marital relations, because they have no personal experience whatsoever. …
Weak cop out. YThe truth is that I was attempting to be polite, since you posted that you are in bad straights again. The truth is that I have not read anything you've written in quite a while that is why you had to keep posting the same questions in different threads that you saw that I was writing in. Just a few minutes ago, because I learned that you were sick, and in the hospital again, I answered you and now you are doing exactly what I expected, revealing your hate for me just because I contradict your belief in the use of recreational marijuana. You do that with everyone that disagrees with you. I have answered you about how I judge priests, and henceforth, do not expect any more responses from me.
The truth is that I was attempting to be polite, since you posted that you are in bad straights again. The truth is that I have not read anything you've written in quite a while that is why you had to keep posting the same questions in different threads that you saw that I was writing in. Just a few minutes ago, because I learned that you were sick, and in the hospital again, I answered you and now you are doing exactly what I expected, revealing your hate for me just because I contradict your belief in the use of recreational marijuana. You do that with anyone that disagrees with you. I have answered you about how I judge priests, and henceforth, do not expect any more responses from me.Gee thanks, but your comprehension still suffers. My tribute to my family mentions that I am recovering. I am not in the hospital again. I am back to work again (part-time) helping people.
Gee thanks, but your comprehension still suffers. My tribute to my family mentions that I am recovering. I am not in the hospital again. I am back to work again (part-time) helping people.AMEN.
For the record—You don't make me angry and I don't hate you. To be perfectly clear, I am merely disgusted by your perverse obsession with the sins of others, [compensating] boasts of your "functionality," and cloaked [unsuccessfully] in sanctimonious piety.
AMEN.Thank you for bumping up my thread. Can you answer my questions that I asked you above? Try to answer them without any conjectures and extrapolations and insults. One should have conviction and be proud of what they teach their children, so go ahead and write all you want in answer to each question.
This thread is about recreational use. There is nothing to research about MJ for recreational use in young girls, it's recreational use is a clear indicator that they are promiscuous and they "party".
Do you use MJ recreationally?
Do you have daughters?
Do they know that you are Ok with them smoking MJ recreationally?
Are they going out by themselves to see friends and can therefore can possibly be smoking MJ recreationally with strangers without your knowing?
Thank you for bumping up my thread. Can you answer my questions that I asked you above? Try to answer them without any conjectures and extrapolations and insults.I didn't see your questions previously.
I didn't see your questions previously.Ok, I understand you did not see the question before. You don't want to answer the questions so nobody knows your personal information, I can understand you feeling that way. It amazes me how people post pictures about their family on Facebook for everyone to see. So, basically there is no way to know if you even have any daughters or sons that have used your advice on MJ recreational use and how it has worked out for you. We really know absolutely nothing about you.
Can I answer them? Yes
Will I? No
You don't need any more personal information about my family and me
I didn't see your questions previously.Bravo! What sane men would allow their wives and children to be dragged in front of his crosshairs?
Can I answer them? Yes
Will I? No
I do not make assumptions or extrapolate. You do.
You don't need any more personal information about my family and me, because i grow weary of your lack of comprehension, your assumptions, extrapolations, and your attempts using such to tear people apart.
…
Do you use MJ recreationally? No, I never used it recreationally. I did however use it as a tool for evil purposes when I was young and foolish, before I came back to the Church…
Priceless. LT's use of MJ as a "leg spreader" was not recreational.Note to self, do not even say one word to Mark79, he will twist even one word into a useless thread dilution.
- Recreational MJ use in young girls is an indicator that they are promiscuous or will soon. Girls can easily have sɛҳuąƖ relations just by picking out the man they are attracted to and saying let's go. If one is a parent they should treat MJ use in their daughters as a rattlesnake in the home!
- MJ use in boys is only different in that they just can't go out to any girl they are attracted to and say Ok let's do it. In boys the biggest problem is that they lose their drive for improving themselves, reaching their God given potential and they will self abuse themselves.
Those are just two effects of MJ for recreational among young people to show that in the real world there is rarely any moderation in use for young people.
I am really surprised that there are even three people on CI that are defending recreational use of MJ for young people, even their daughters. But I should have known better because it happened also in the 1960's among Catholics when there were Catholic schools and only the Latin Mass, so why not now with so-called "trads".It amazes me that you can't get it through your thick skull that MJ is not a sin of the flesh.
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)
Ok, I understand you did not see the question before. You don't want to answer the questions so nobody knows your personal information, I can understand you feeling that way. It amazes me how people post pictures about their family on Facebook for everyone to see. So, basically there is no way to know if you even have any daughters or sons that have used your advice on MJ recreational use and how it has worked out for you. We really know absolutely nothing about you.Who cares?
I on the other hand am proud of everything I have done since I came back to the Church, and all that God has done for me. So I'll do much more than answer the questions, I can use this in the future every time someone asks, so it won't be a one time used waste of time.
God brought me back almost directly to the SSPX and the trad mass. I never saw a Novus Ordo mass when I was young, for I left the Church before the N.O. existed and when I came back to the Church I only went like 5 times before I found the SSPX. I came back at 40 years of age and 3 years later I met my future wife at mass when she showed up one day. I married her when I was in my late 40's and she was in her early 20's. God sent me not only a young beautiful looking wife, but also a trad Catholic that wanted what I wanted, 12 children. Unfortunately, she had problems at half a dozen, and that is where we are today. She is very organized, is a master chef, and she has been homeschooled the children From K to 12. Out children run from less than 10 to almost 21. They are all very happy children living in the outdoors, no cell phones, eating unbelievable food, and with a great sense of humor. We have taught them to not be afraid to question anything we teach. The more questions children ask, the more one knows that they understand question everything. I was raised by my father and mother and worked with my father in the family business. In other words my Dad and I were together every day from the time I was born till the day he died. My grandfather did the same with my father, and he lived with me also from the day I was born till I was 40. He died when he was almost 101 and was in perfect health, he ate a big dinner, went to sleep and just didn't wake up the next day. My grandfather was the CEO of a company with 5000 employees, and my father the President of a company of 2000 employees. They lost everything every penny to communism in the 1960when I was just 6 years old and came to this country and proceeded to wok to do it again. They were with me all day till they died, teaching me everything about life and how to teach my children. My family heritage comes from a Catholic country, a Catholic culture, Spain, but like most Catholic cultures they do not really teach or live the faith, the faith is just something they do on Sunday for an hour. Being a Catholic culture however, there is almost all that they do and the way they behave, though they do not realize it, came from being a Catholic culture for like ever. Family is everything, and all the cousins and relatives live like across the street and grandparent teach them how things were and should be in the family. Grandparents are their best friend, after their parents, and the grandparents and parents, aunts and uncles , for the children are their TV, Internet, cell phone, movie for the children, teaching them everything. THAT is what I am continuing with my family. I am proud of my family and everything we are doing.
Here I answer the questions:
Do you use MJ recreationally? No, I never used it recreationally. I did however use it as a tool for evil purposes when I was young and foolish, before I came back to the Church
Do you have daughters? Yes, more than 4
Do they know that you are Ok with them smoking MJ recreationally? I am not OK with its use and they know exactly why and any doubts or questions that they have, they have been taught from experience that they can come and ask both my wife and I.
Are they going out by themselves to see friends? No, they are chaperoned by my wife or I, same as my parents, my grandparents, and great grandparents were.
This is how it works:
TheGodfather2 Simonetta Stefanelli Apollonia - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAgB3qxvRkU)
You project your "leg spreader" life before 40 on others as Meg projects her home life on others.All the men I have met who have married someone half their age are really "off".
You rage about the imagined sɛҳuąƖ proclivities of others while boasting of your "functionality" and younger wife.
You and Meg pretend you can read the interior forum of others even though you stated you can "know nothing about them."
You are thankful for your family, but you and Meg defecated on the thankfulness of others for their families.
You are seriously disordered spiritually and sɛҳuąƖly.
Having known a number of pot smoking people in my life (a number of them are relatives), I can say that their purpose of smoking marijuana is to get high. Period. They have no ulterior motive. They just want the physical feeling of being intoxicated on marijuana.So What?
All the men I have met who have married someone half their age are really "off".The thought that that person was a baby when I was 20 years old would be off-putting enough.
All the men I have met who have married someone half their age are really "off".You are way “off”. I married a MAN instead of a child.
The thought that that person was a baby when I was 20 years old would be off-putting enough.So you think a 40 year old marrying a 20 year old is o.k.
But, if he has a good wife and a beautiful family because of it, why judge?
Sorry, Babe. I married a MAN instead of a child. That is what most men my age are: immature, lazy and selfish children who never grew up.A woman calling a man "babe"?
How about 30 and 15?Uh...
Uh...If God verbally tells you to marry someone half your age because she is expecting to birth Our Lord, I will give you a pass.
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/cb/af/87/cbaf87975967aae738b57755a6ca3a06.png)
This thread is marching swiftly right into detraction territory. A moral sin, mind you. I'm out.Its getting pretty off topic, too.
A woman calling a man "babe"?Epiphany is usually a woman’s name. There is nothing wrong for a woman marrying an older man. Are you married?
Pretty inappropriate.
I agree, however, that most young men, and even middle aged men, are very immature.
That doesn't change the fact that there is something inherently wrong with marrying someone half (or twice) your age.
If God verbally tells you to marry someone half your age because she is expecting to birth Our Lord, I will give you a pass.Point being: it has been historically normal for a woman to wed once she reaches child-bearing age (mid-teens). So a 40 year old marrying a 20 year old may be taboo today, but, it's not without precedent in history.
Epiphany is usually a woman’s name. …… but not as a rule… ummm… Saint Epiphanius, Bishop of Salamis.
A guy using a girl’s name to post is way way off!It a girl’s name. Why thumbs down?
Epiphany Origin and Meaning
The name Epiphany is a girl's name of Greek origin meaning "manifestation, striking appearance".
It’s Lent. Are y’all still smokin pot?Did you give up beating your aged spouse for Lent?
[@LT]
You project your "leg spreader" life before 40 on others as Meg projects her home life on others.
You rage about the imagined sɛҳuąƖ proclivities of others while boasting of your "functionality" and younger wife.
You and Meg pretend you can read the interior forum of others even though you stated you can "know nothing about them."
You are thankful for your family, but you and Meg defecated on the thankfulness of others for their families.
You are seriously disordered spiritually and sɛҳuąƖly.
Charity and Epiphany are usually names for women.
Just because they're utilized as one's username does not necessarily mean there used as literal names.Simple explanation, not that I need one:
If I decided to sign up to another forum with the username "eureka", I may be inspired by the incident that is told of Archimedes.
Eureka could be a girls' name, but there is no rule that a username has to correspond to an actual name.
The thought that that person was a baby when I was 20 years old would be off-putting enough.I know what you mean by off-putting, but I'm thankful for my great-grandparents. He was 45, she was 18 when they wed. Married 45 years, 6 children that survived to adulthood, I've never counted the current number of descendants.
But, if he has a good wife and a beautiful family because of it, why judge?
I know what you mean by off-putting, but I'm thankful for my great-grandparents. He was 45, she was 18 when they wed. Married 45 years, 6 children that survived to adulthood, I've never counted the current number of descendants.Off-putting for sure, in our current culture.
Off-putting for sure, in our current culture.According to God’s perfect plan, women are usually unable to produce children after around 45, whereas male fertility may last until death. It may be off-putting to you, but God has planned that an older man may marry a younger woman and still fulfill His purposes. Our current culture is sick, as I am sure you must agree.
So What?I was not commenting on the morality of marijuana use, I was merely definitively answering the topic question.
The key is how high?
Responsible use of MJ is akin to responsible use of alcohol, with MJ have beneficial medical side effects.
were you a serial Peeping Tom?The writer of the above, Mark79, is a perfect example of what everyone should avoid if they want to grow in the faith and be successful in life. He is filled with so much hate of himself and envy of others that he only sees the fly in the dining room filled with sumptuous food. People like that are the types that make it almost impossible for a black man to get out of their poverty, for anyone that tries to improve themselves will be denigrated and ostracized by these envious types and called uncle toms and such. This is what the Clarence Kelly's, Thomas Sowells, and Alan Keyes had to overcome. Only a tremendous drive and incredible strong man can overcome that envy crowd and escape that ghetto. The envious drag down the average man and pulverize him to dust. They are a walking black cloud, they take it with them everywhere they go.
Of course, there is another possibility… You lied that you have "experience," simply did the Meg thing, presumed you know the interior forum and project acts about which you could only perversely know or imagine, and are just what we know you to be—a rabid blowhard perverted bullsh*tter.
Your own statement reveals that you are a seriously disordered person—sɛҳuąƖly and spiritually—who foams and perversely ruminates about and projects the sɛҳuąƖ sins of others. It seems that your stated sɛҳuąƖ past is reflected in your present disorder.
Totally disgusting.
[@LT]
You project your "leg spreader" life before 40 on others as Meg projects her home life on others.
You rage about the imagined sɛҳuąƖ proclivities of others while boasting of your "functionality" and younger wife.
You and Meg pretend you can read the interior forum of others even though you stated you can "know nothing about them."
You are thankful for your family, but you and Meg defecated on the thankfulness of others for their families.
You are seriously disordered spiritually and sɛҳuąƖly.
Did you give up beating your aged spouse for Lent?What? That doesn’t make sense. My husband can kick your butt and most effeminate punks. Pretty sad you can’t even give up pot for Lent.
What? That doesn’t make sense. My husband can kick your butt and most effeminate punks. Pretty sad you can’t even give up pot for Lent.
It’s Lent. Are y’all still smokin pot?
According to God’s perfect plan, women are usually unable to produce children after around 45, whereas male fertility may last until death. It may be off-putting to you, but God has planned that an older man may marry a younger woman and still fulfill His purposes. Our current culture is sick, as I am sure you must agree.Just hold on here.
I was not commenting on the morality of marijuana use, I was merely definitively answering the topic question.You do not have to get high to benefit from MJ, nor should you to an extreme, just as you should not get drunk from alcohol. But responsible recreational use of MJ is perfectly acceptable in God's eyes, according to the bible.
As for the "medical benefits" of getting high, well, all I can say is that the Idiocracy has truly permeated the medical industry in this country.
We need to get along. We can’t be mean to one another. This Lent.Also Viva earlier that day:
What? That doesn’t make sense. My husband can kick your butt and most effeminate punks. Pretty sad you can’t even give up pot for Lent.
Also Viva earlier that day:(http://<a href=)(https://i.ibb.co/SKHFqzD/giphy.gif)
You (plural) point to the Church teaching about being "sober." THAT is based on the risks of abuse. I see no mention in 1 Thessalonians 5:7-9 of exceptions, so how exactly does the Church justify ANY use of alcohol? Return to first principles: avoid undue risk of self-harm (whether physically or spiritually).
Since you claim MJ use is different from alcohol use, the burden is on YOU to make the case for the moral or medical difference—on something more substantial than your half-baked [pun-intended] "opinion."
No. I cannot point to "a" single study, but to dozens, even hundreds of studies. Glad you asked. :jester:
Start here, my bibliography for a series of 8 articles I wrote about medical marijuana in 2010-2011 when it was an issue in our state:
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
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
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
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
Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine, 1999
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
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
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
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
ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Lou Gehrig's Disease)
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7004
Alzheimer's Disease
Alzheimer's Disease
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
Cancer
Gliomas/Cancer
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
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®). National Cancer Institute. 2011.
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
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
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
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
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
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
Cardiovascular Effects of Cannabis | Medicinal Cannabis Information. Independent Drug Monitoring Unit, United Kingdom, undated
http://www.idmu.co.uk/canncardio.htm
Crohns Disease
Gastrointestinal Disorders
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
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
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
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
Fibromyalgia
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
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
Hepatitis C
Hepatitis C
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Cannabis and Driving: A Scientific and Rational Review. Armentano P. NORML Foundation, Washington DC 2010
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/
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
Muscle Spasms
Dystonia
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
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
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
Chronic Pain
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#
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
[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
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
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
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
“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
I see no mention in 1 Thessalonians 5:7-9 of exceptions, so how exactly does the Church justify ANY use of alcohol?Since LT has started multiple threads, I’ll post his quote from the other thread. Above is his puritanical extremism where he’s arguing that there’s no proof of the Church allowing moderate alcohol use. :facepalm:
Since LT has started multiple threads, I’ll post his quote from the other thread. Above is his puritanical extremism where he’s arguing that there’s no proof of the Church allowing moderate alcohol use. :facepalm:Ditto…
The psalmist literally says "blessed be God who maketh wine to cheer the heart of man."Yep.
Not God who maketh wine as an anesthetic substitute or who maketh wine for the antioxidants.
Drink wine so you feel happier. That's recreational. Come on.
Ditto…Very true, from what I have read of LTs comments.
I'd argue that it is his disordered pea brain that refuses to comprehend the difference between "drunk" and "partaking."
Yep.Better yet: "The Son of man is come eating and drinking: and you say: Behold a man that is a glutton and a drinker of wine, a friend of publicans and sinners."
Christ, Himself, changed water into wine, for a wedding.
LT asks for proof if the Church condones alcohol …and yet the priest drinks wine everyday at mass.
I wonder what they think of St Augustine? He wrote about his past sins? Was he a pervert and blowhard?
…Most of The fruits of the Catholic Church are not good.…
huh?
…heroine…
QuoteI see no mention in 1 Thessalonians 5:7-9 of exceptions, so how exactly does the Church justify ANY use of alcohol?
Since LT has started multiple threads, I’ll post his quote from the other thread. Above is his puritanical extremism where he’s arguing that there’s no proof of the Church allowing moderate alcohol use. :facepalm:
LT asks for proof if the Church condones alcohol …and yet the priest drinks wine everyday at mass.
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
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
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
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
Marijuana and Medicine: Assessing the Science Base. National Academy of Science Institute of Medicine, 1999
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
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
Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)
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
ALS (Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Lou Gehrig's Disease)
Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS)
http://www.norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=7004
Alzheimer's Disease
Alzheimer's Disease
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
Cancer
Gliomas/Cancer
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
Cannabis and Cannabinoids (PDQ®). National Cancer Institute. 2011.
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
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
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
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
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
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
Cardiovascular Effects of Cannabis | Medicinal Cannabis Information. Independent Drug Monitoring Unit, United Kingdom, undated
http://www.idmu.co.uk/canncardio.htm
Crohns Disease
Gastrointestinal Disorders
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
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
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
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
Fibromyalgia
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
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
Hepatitis C
Hepatitis C
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
Cannabis and Driving: A Scientific and Rational Review. Armentano P. NORML Foundation, Washington DC 2010
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/
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
Muscle Spasms
Dystonia
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
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
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
Chronic Pain
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#
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
[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
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
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
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
“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
The priest is drinking the blood of Jesus during Mass.Most of the perverts of the Catholic Church and one was way too many, they used alcohol, pot, heroine etc to sɛҳuąƖly groom their victims. One big Pagan orgie is Future Church.
Most of The fruits of the Catholic Church are not good. Communists who hijacked the Church are always seeking pleasure via sex, heroine, pot and other sin.
I wonder what they think of St Augustine? He wrote about his past sins? Was he a pervert and blowhard?
https://youtu.be/32bFPD36M8g
St. Augustine never projected his own sins on others—not once!Neither did St. Paul. Both used them to speak of their own failings and dispositions, but they never pointed at others as if they had the same wounds from sin.
The priest is drinking the blood of Jesus during Mass.Oh no! The Communists like Marvel movies. Time to throw them all out /s
Most of The fruits of the Catholic Church are not good. Communists who hijacked the Church are always seeking pleasure via sex, heroine, pot and other sin.
Oh no! The Communists like Marvel movies. Time to throw them all out /sHow funny.
her·o·ine | ˈherōən |
noun
a woman admired or idealized for her courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities: she was the heroine of a materialist generation.
her·o·in | ˈherōən |
noun
diacetylmorphine; chemical formula: C17H17NO(C2H3O2)2.
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.RVMpX1cX3dEDHWBIuQkUHwAAAA%26pid%3DApi&f=1)
The priest is drinking the blood of Jesus during Mass.The Catholic Church is not a building and not the hierarchy. It is the Faithful.
Most of The fruits of the Catholic Church are not good. Communists who hijacked the Church are always seeking pleasure via sex, heroine, pot and other sin.
A stack of cards, built on assumption on top of assumption, on top of assumption, on top of assumption...... a total end run everywhere one looks.There you go again, putting words in people's mouths.
Here are all the unproven assumptions they use to reach the conclusion that it is OK for anyone and everyone to smoke marijuana recreationally. All the observable history ofMJ recreational use being a scandal, being a danger to the family, and being a danger to health, the 32 points are totally dismissed by a sleigh of hand
They assume that recreational use will no longer be scandal, because they say so.
They assume that it will not be danger to the family because they just say so.
They assume that it is not a danger to health because the US medical industry has some articles on the medical benefits. They do not listen to the US medical industry on anything (covid, cancer remedies, vitamins, natural remedies, ivermectin), but on this they ignore the 32 points and the actual experience of MJ use since the 1940's, and use ONLY the so-called medical benefits (not proven) and sentimentalism for the sick, to turn EVERYTHING around, do an end run to teach that anyone can smoke MJ, even young girls and boys.
They assume that it is no different than alcohol, then proceed to use the Moral theology on alcohol.
It is all a stack of cards, built on assumption on top of assumption, on top of assumption, on top of assumption...... a total end run everywhere one looks.
There you go again, putting words in people's mouths.
It is impossible to have a reasonable discussion when you put words in people's mouths.
The way you write makes it clear you are a narcissist.
That's narcissism to a T.
And not only from his writing style (to use the term loosely), but also from the simple content.
He posts content about the world revolving around his disordered experience, his "functionality," and being a "jock."
Nauseating. Pathetic.
Bumping an older thread here but I have been thinking about the morality of illicit drugs, namely marijuana and cocaine. Since there has been no definitive Church teaching on those two drugs in particular, I would equate their sinfulness with that of drunkenness as "loss of reason", among other things, seems to be why some consider said drugs mortally sinful. I have read that there are three degrees of drunkenness with only the third being mortally sinful, unless circuмstances render the first and second mortal. They are;I am curious. Did you read the thread? If I remember well this has been well and truly thrashed out right here in this thread. I don’t like to see a dead horse thrashed.
First Degree: Reason becomes slightly disturbed
Second Degree: The disturbance extends to the bodily organs
Third Degree: Complete privation of the use of reason
The signs of the Third Degree: inability to distinguish between good and evil, forgetfulness of what one has said or done while drunk, an unusual or foolish behavior
Now I do not use marijuana or cocaine, but to the extent of my knowledge neither (used in moderation) leads to a complete privation of the use of reason. Does anyone have thoughts on this, or traditional teaching regarding these drugs?
I am curious. Did you read the thread? If I remember well this has been well and truly thrashed out right here in this thread. I don’t like to see a dead horse thrashed.I skimmed it. Saw quite a bit of personal attacks and nonsense posts from the first page onward, so I didn't read it carefully. I guess I should have made a new thread as I am actually more interested in user's thoughts on cocaine usage, but I included marijuana to fit the subject of the thread.
Good points. Could the same be said for cigarette smoking? Nicotine dependency can develop very soon after one begins smoking, and cigarette smoking is said to be the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the US
I do not believe the same can be said for cocaine because of the risks to your temple of the Holy Ghost.
• high potential for rapid development of addiction, especially for free-basing, crack, and IV use
• pre-COVID the cardiac irritant combined with coronary artery spasm effects made cocaine the #1 cause of heart attacks in teens and young adults
Good points. Could the same be said for cigarette smoking? Nicotine dependency can develop very soon after one begins smoking, and cigarette smoking is said to be the leading cause of preventable disease and death in the US
People have their vices and some are worse than others. One reason out of many not to believe Medjugorje is that the BVM is said to have first appeared to the kids while they were smoking cigarettes out behind a shed. I don't believe the BVM's going to appear to anybody smoking cigarettes, and that's way before weed. I think smoking weed's another vice and worse than alcohol or tobacco.
Why not? In and of itself, smoking tobacco is no sin.Haha, I like the conversion story. I had many a good deep conversation with my brother sneaking a cigarette on the roof at 1:00 am. He would never smoke, I was the degenerate, but he would hang out with me :).
I was sneaking an illicit cigarette in my high school boys' restroom when I got to talking to another student (who did not smoke) about becoming a Catholic, he said "so why don't you?", and I called the priest that afternoon. (I didn't mention the smoking.)
I was received into the Church a few months later, baptized and confirmed.
Who can say what I would have done if I hadn't been in that restroom, smoking that cigarette, and getting in that conversation? (To be fair, it had been on my mind for some time.)
Why not? In and of itself, smoking tobacco is no sin.
I was sneaking an illicit cigarette in my high school boys' restroom when I got to talking to another student (who did not smoke) about becoming a Catholic, he said "so why don't you?", and I called the priest that afternoon. (I didn't mention the smoking.)
I was received into the Church a few months later, baptized and confirmed.
Who can say what I would have done if I hadn't been in that restroom, smoking that cigarette, and getting in that conversation? (To be fair, it had been on my mind for some time.)
I hope you’re not serious. Do you really think it would be becoming of the Blessed Virgin Mary to smoke a cigarette?At Medjugorje (if it is to be believed), it was the youths smoking cigarettes, not Our Lady.
Haha, I like the conversion story. I had many a good deep conversation with my brother sneaking a cigarette on the roof at 1:00 am. He would never smoke, I was the degenerate, but he would hang out with me :).
Obviously I'm not a good person to go to for advice, seeing as I am sort of new coming back to the Faith. However, I know many good people who smoke, and I have a good friend who does weed occasionally. He's not a Catholic, but he is still able to regulate and to be in control of his senses, and he's a good guy. I wouldn't recommend getting into drugs, because I also know many folks who ruined their life with the stuff. I work in an area where there are needles everywhere and hoboes all over the place. People usually don't start off with the big drugs, they work their way up. It could lead down a bad road.
Since there has been no definitive Church teaching on those two drugs in particular, I would equate their sinfulness with that of drunkenness as "loss of reason", among other things, seems to be why some consider said drugs mortally sinful.
At Medjugorje (if it is to be believed), it was the youths smoking cigarettes, not Our Lady.
It's a hard thing to imagine, but if smoking a single cigarette (as opposed to yielding to temptation to habit which could be dangerous to one's health, and often is) is no sin, then if they had existed in Palestine in the first century, then I can't exclude the possibility that she might have done it to help with digestion (and it does), similar to how one might have a cup of coffee. Tobacco is an herb of the earth that can have medicinal uses, again, digestion, calming of nerves, and so on. I am forced to eschew tobacco (at least until my Medicare kicks in three years from now) to remain in compliance with my health insurance (they impose a $200/month surcharge for smokers), but I can't condemn occasional usage of it as a sin.
When I was working, the surcharge was $50/month, which I was willing to pay, but not $200. I received my first Social Security payment last month, and even with that, my pension, and my 401(k), money is tight and I wouldn't even be able to afford the $50, let alone the $200.
Pius X was a smoker. And God himself appeared to St Paul whilst he was on the way to murder some more Christians. Seems like a profoundly ignorant and superstitious thing to maintain, that smokers are ineligible for apparitions.
ETA: Medjugorgie is bunk, but the seers being smokers has nothing at all to do with it being bunk.