You Know Who You Are...

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='Marie-Therese' date='14 June 2010 - 07:25 PM' timestamp='1276557913' post='2128869']
Actually, what is around his neck isn't a scapular, though it looks like it at first glance. It's actually a Native American style tobacco pouch. However, I doubt that this dude has tobacco in there.
[/quote]


[quote name='aalpha1989' date='14 June 2010 - 07:26 PM' timestamp='1276558018' post='2128871']
What else would people put in tobacco pouches?

....
[/quote]

this reminded me that no one had the guts to answer my question in the question and answer thread...

...i'm still waiting....

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='14 June 2010 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1276572876' post='2129118']
this reminded me that no one had the guts to answer my question in the question and answer thread...

...i'm still waiting....
[/quote]
how dare you suggest...

which question? marijuana?

[dominicansoul]

...still waiting...

[ardillacid]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='14 June 2010 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1276572876' post='2129118']
this reminded me that no one had the guts to answer my question in the question and answer thread...

...i'm still waiting....
[/quote]
Smoking marijuana is not in itself a mortal sin. However, there is some point where you lose all reason, imo, and I think at that point you are the equivalent of drunk. So it can be a sin. imo. But I don't have a cool theology degree.

[tinytherese]

The van in the first post reminded me of the mystery machine from Scooby Doo.

As far as the marijuana goes, since it is illegal in the states the Church would definitely take an issue with that. A little bit of it supposedly relaxes you, but more than that is harmful.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='14 June 2010 - 11:34 PM' timestamp='1276572876' post='2129118']
this reminded me that no one had the guts to answer my question in the question and answer thread...

...i'm still waiting....
[/quote]
I responded to that question.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='15 June 2010 - 04:07 AM' timestamp='1276589261' post='2129181']
I responded to that question.
[/quote]
Unfortunately,your answer is falso.

[ardillacid]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='15 June 2010 - 02:25 AM' timestamp='1276583117' post='2129170']
[b]CCC 2291[/b] [i]The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.[/i]

My understanding is that the Church has been against the legalization of marijuana, and has very much condemned the drug trafficking industry and the drug culture. The recreational use of hard drugs is in itself contrary to the dignity of persons and the virtues. Pope John Paul II once said that marijuana ought to be classified as a hard drug.
[/quote]

Common sense dictates that marijuana is not a hard drug. If it were, then alcohol would have to be considered one as well, since it is much more physically addictive than marijuana. In fact, marijuana is not addictive. Period. Putting it in the same category as meth, hillbilly heroin, coke, etc, is just ridiculous. As far as JP2 goes, I doubt that he had the qualifications to determine the 'hardness' of a drug. As far as the trafficking industry goes, if the government would legalize weed, there would be no trafficking industry. Do you buy illegal booze even though there is legal booze sold everywhere?

[quote]In 2001 the Pontifical Council for Health Pastoral Care public a handbook on drugs and drug addiction that might be of interest. I wish I had a copy of it at this moment.

[url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/hlthwork/documents/rc_pc_hlthwork_doc_20011101_chiesa-droga-presentation_en.html"]CHURCH: DRUGS AND DRUG ADDICTION[/url]

My best answer is that in light of the Catechism, the speeches of Pope John Paul II, and the handbook mentioned above it is reasonable to suppose that recreational marijuana use would constitute grave matter.[/quote]

I believe you should reconsider your position on this, rather than perpetuating the system's unquestioned POV.

[tinytherese]

Oh and I looked at my last post on this thread and realized that I didn't express myself properly. It made it look as if the Church didn't like that it was illegal. What I meant was that the Church would list smoking marijuana as very serious because it is illegal in the states.

[Laudate_Dominum]

[quote name='notardillacid' date='15 June 2010 - 11:33 AM' timestamp='1276616019' post='2129245']
Unfortunately,your answer is falso.
[/quote]
I hope you are right.

[quote name='notardillacid' date='15 June 2010 - 11:49 AM' timestamp='1276616949' post='2129249']
Common sense dictates that marijuana is not a hard drug. If it were, then alcohol would have to be considered one as well, since it is much more physically addictive than marijuana. In fact, marijuana is not addictive. Period. Putting it in the same category as meth, hillbilly heroin, coke, etc, is just ridiculous. As far as JP2 goes, I doubt that he had the qualifications to determine the 'hardness' of a drug. As far as the trafficking industry goes, if the government would legalize weed, there would be no trafficking industry. Do you buy illegal booze even though there is legal booze sold everywhere?

I believe you should reconsider your position on this, rather than perpetuating the system's unquestioned POV.
[/quote]
If it were up to me I'd be inclined to say that weed is just good old fun so I hear ya. It really seems to me, based on the few pertinent statements that I'm aware of, that marijuana use is a pretty serious thing in the eyes of the Church these days. I need to get a copy of that drug handbook... But believe me ardill, I'd love to find a loophole some place, not because I have any interest in smoking weed but because I honestly don't feel like weed is that bad. However, it is probable that my conscience is just not well formed on this issue and I need to submit to the wisdom of the Church. My answer in the QA thread was my best attempt at representing the mind of the Church. I can think of problems and arguments against such a strong condemnation of weed, such as papal use of cocaine or something else like that, but there would still be the current Catechism and Papal/Curial statements to deal with.

Oh, and I doubt it was John Paul II's lay opinion, I'm sure he had lots of highly qualified advisors that influenced his views on marijuana. That handbook I linked to is clearly quite learned based on the TOC for example.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='15 June 2010 - 01:57 PM' timestamp='1276628258' post='2129358']
I hope you are right.


If it were up to me I'd be inclined to say that weed is just good old fun so I hear ya. It really seems to me, based on the few pertinent statements that I'm aware of, that marijuana use is a pretty serious thing in the eyes of the Church these days. I need to get a copy of that drug handbook... But believe me ardill, I'd love to find a loophole some place, not because I have any interest in smoking weed but because I honestly don't feel like weed is that bad. However, it is probable that my conscience is just not well formed on this issue and I need to submit to the wisdom of the Church. My answer in the QA thread was my best attempt at representing the mind of the Church. I can think of problems and arguments against such a strong condemnation of weed, such as papal use of cocaine or something else like that, but there would still be the current Catechism and Papal/Curial statements to deal with.

Oh, and I doubt it was John Paul II's lay opinion, I'm sure he had lots of highly qualified advisors that influenced his views on marijuana. That handbook I linked to is clearly quite learned based on the TOC for example.
[/quote]
I'm definitely with you on having a significant bit of confusion on the matter. Intellectually, I'm not satisfied with any arguments I've heard against it.