Let’s hope Americans make the right choice tomorrow – by legalising cannabis

 At the risk of going off-topic, what ‘assault’ exactly is being proposed against the Catholic Church in America?

Also, for what it’s worth, some religious freedom is at stake. The Rastafarians are the most well-known religion for whom cannabis is a sacrament – I expect there are other ones I don’t know about – and they are currently prohibited under US law from practising that aspect of their religion. So if you are genuinely concerned about religious freedom you ought to be on their side on this one. Sure, they believe some daft things, but all religions look daft to people outside them – religious freedom has to apply to them all – and in the same way (i.e. you are free to believe anything you want to believe, but you are not free to cause harm to others or discriminate against them on the basis of your religion) or it is not worth anything.

There is no ambiguity in Gen 1:29, tell me why my ‘interpretation’ is ‘blatan’t and or ‘partisan’. Could it be because it doesn’t serve your point of view?

There you go, we don’t need modern ‘context’ to understand a basic principle, in that things are there for persons to use. Just because a person abuses something does not mean that person ought to be criminalised.
People abuse all kinds of things, but to drag all ‘drugs’ into one basket is ridiculous. not all ‘drugs’ are equal. Here we are talking about Cannabis.

I am no ‘fundamentalist’. It was an observation, maybe you are a higher authority and know better though …

“Why, on this scale, does there have to be only one variant of prohibition, but many variants of legalisation?”

You’re quite right; there doesn’t. There is a world of difference between a prohibition system which prescribes fines or other slight punishments for drug possession and a prohibition system which prescribes the death penalty. But all variants that include the default position that no recreational use of a drug is permitted by law are bunched up at the one extreme of the spectrum whereas legal regulation runs the full gamut of widening numbers of circumstances in which recreational use of the drug is permitted by law.

I am not religious, so I am not going to get into theology with you here, but if you genuinely think a Catholic should never wish to “legalise that which is not moral”, are you prepared to go all the way and say that we should never legalise that which is immoral even if it could be proved that legalising it would massively reduce the overall levels of harm that that allegedly immoral thing caused? In which case, you would have to admit that you are happier with a system that causes more harm but allows you to maintain your ideological purity than you would be with a system that causes less harm?

(Needless to say, in this specific case, we would still need to prove that drug use in and of itself is immoral before we could use that as a reason for not legalising it, and I am a) unpersuaded by any of the arguments I’ve heard so far, and b) quite sure on present evidence that even if drug use is immoral, criminally penalising people for drug use is even more immoral)

“[A]re you prepared to go all the way and say that we should never legalise that which is immoral even if it could be proved that legalising it would massively reduce the overall levels of harm that that allegedly immoral thing caused.”

Yes. One of the basic axioms of Catholic moral thought is that it is never permissible to do evil so that good may result. CCC 2291 states pretty clearly what the Catholic position on the use of drugs is, and that has necessary implications in terms of what sort of political policy Catholics can or should support. 

“In which case, you would have to admit that you are happier with a system that causes more harm but allows you to maintain your ideological purity than you would be with a system that causes less harm?”

I would only have to admit that if it is the system that causes the harm, rather than the individuals within the system. In any given system, there is always a choice for the individual to do good or evil – the system can make choices easier or harder, and thus can be describe as moral or immoral in a certain sense, but the system itself does not make the choice; unlike a person, a system is not a moral being. 

And in any case, with regard to drugs, I think it is possible to have a “less harmful” system in which drugs are still illegal. Even if I wasn’t religious, I would still see far too many risks and possible unintended consequences involved in any sort of legalisation of drugs to be able to support it.

 ”One of the basic axioms of Catholic moral thought is that it is never permissible to do evil so that good may result.”

That may be true, but doing evil is not the same as not criminalizing evil, which is what we’re discussing here. Are you prepared to concede at least that?

“I would only have to admit that if it is the system that causes the harm, rather than the individuals within the system. In any given system, there is always a choice for the individual to do good or evil ”

Well, the system is the result of some of the individuals within the system as well – namely those who make the laws … and if someone makes a law, knowing that it will be widely flouted and that it will cause harms greater than those it is meant to address, surely that lawmaker bears some responsibility for those harms? That is to say – when prohibition was first proposed, it was possible for intelligent people to believe that it would reduce drug use to negligible levels, and thus reduce harm overall, but the evidence of the last several decades has been so strongly against that hypothesis that anyone proposing to continue prohibition really is accepting a share of responsibility for the consequences of prohibition. Are you willing to accept that?

And again, note that we still do not have a good reason to believe that personal drug use is evil in and of itself.

“I think it is possible to have a “less harmful” system in which drugs
are still illegal. Even if I wasn’t religious, I would still see far too
many risks and possible unintended consequences involved in any sort of
legalisation of drugs to be able to support it.”

You are quite right, it would be possible to have a less harmful system in which drugs were still illegal. But note what this system would look like. We would have to devote the lion’s share of drug policy budget towards harm reduction measures, and away from law enforcement measures that exacerbate gang violence and make the drugs less safe by making the supply chain sporadic. We would have to move to the ‘prohibition-lite’ end of the spectrum … and in that situation, there’d be no reason to dismiss out of hand a further move in the same direction, into the ‘legalization but with heavy restrictions’ zone, and see if that doesn’t reduce harms still further.

But the risks and possible unintended consequences will become better known the more evidence we have … and if one of these ballot initiatives passes, we’re about to start getting a lot of evidence, which will reduce our uncertainty about what the risks and benefits are. Note also that we have centuries of experience of legally regulating two of the most popular recreational drugs, alcohol and tobacco, and while these are both undoubtedly harmful in at least some circumstances, there is neither any significant weight of opinion behind adding them to the list of currently-prohibited drugs as a means of reducing harm, nor very many people who would say that the use of these drugs is immoral. So would you at least be prepared to say that, in the event that certain harms do not materialise within a given timeframe in Washington or Colorado (or, indeed, if certain harms measurably lessen), then you would be willing to support legalization here as well? Or is there no conceivable evidence that could change your position on this question?

Father, I disagree. It might be because I live in Brazil, which is a quite differente place. But I think the problem is when one believes that “then it goes to responsible hands”. If the cultivation is in ilegal places, like South America, if these dealers earn millions by making it ilegal and not paying salaries and taxes, it doesnt make sense for me that this industry will suddenly become legal. It seems more reasonable that these dealers will become “partially leagal” and still earn millions though violence and so on…the governmet control will not enlarge by legalisation. And also, the kids exposure to drugs will increase. We can not say the war on drugs failled, some education programs here in Brazil are quite succesfull, but they depend on low levels of exposure to work and a honest comparision would be between a country with and without legalisation, even if the consume rose, we can not count “how many people didnt become addicts”, and there is certainly a point on that…

http:\coracaoconfiante.blogspot.com

 ”Denier of science”. LOL! What is this ‘science’, Mr Reynolds? Scientists can’t agree among themselves, but laymen are ordered to believe in ‘Science’. You will have to try harder than that.

1) We’re discussing legalising evil, not “not criminalising” it. The latter would only be true if we had no laws about drugs and were discussing the possibility of making them. I would consider it evil to legalise evil. 

2) The Catholic rationale for drug use being morally wrong is found in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 2288-2291 in particular. It is to do with the fifth commandment and the virtue of temperance.

3) The moral law against lying is widely flouted. Does that therefore make God responsible for people’s lies? No, individuals are responsible for that – they make free choices and decisions, just as they do with regards to current drug laws. 

I was quoting from Gen:1:29, shame you didn’t spot that, it is there for people to use.
The fact is that you are against Cannabis being legal, so you will twist anything to support your view.
You start to try to smudge the issue by generalising about ‘drugs’, when in fact we are here talking about Cannabis, for instance….

My position is based on the real evidence of the harmful effects of cannabis as presented in the literature(a small and realitavly old sample but this is what is directly to hand: British Journal of Psychiatry, i.e. “Psychiatric effects of cannabis” 2001. Johns. A., And World Psychiatry i.e. “Cannabis use and the risk of developing a psychotic disorder” 2008. Hall., and Degenhardt. And the British Medical Journal i.e. “Cannabis use in adolescence and risk for adult psychosis: longitudinal prospective study” 2002. Arseneault et al) and on my own experiences as a primary and secondary care health professional of dealing with drug addicts who are at various stages of addiction and treatment. Please don’t make uninformed judgments me and about where I’m coming from on this, it may lead to prejudice and bias on your part.

Well i cannot believe what you have said and in Christ i pray you really meet him, because you know nothing about drugs. Where as i do. Most of my life i took drugs including my friends and family and all it ever does is destroy the human spirit. It is a stumbling block to Christ. It clouds the mind and stop you hearing the Holy Spirit. How do i know. BECAUSE I WAS ADDICTED TO DRUGS AND I KNOW. You do not and i suggest you repent before God for such liberal views stuck in false reasoning and such puffed up pride. The west is falling apart because people are to afraid to stand up and speak the truth. Liberalism and modernist views, what ever they really are as its all folly, are destroying young peoples minds. Pope Gregory said the goverment of souls is the art of arts! You need to learn from those who suffer. Try livng with the Grey friars for a few weeks and you might understand why drugs are so destructive to the human soul!

How i wish you were either cold or hot!

Why am I not surprised, isn’t it usually the Catholics who have major substance abuse problems, a la the Irish with alcohol, and the Church sits back and watches gleefully as families are destroyed for generations.

I SUGGEST ALL THOSE WHO THINK ITS OK TO START USING IT NOW FOR A YEAR AND THEN AFTER A YEAR OF EXPERIENCING THE AFFECTS ON YOUR FAITH AND BRAIN COME BACK AND SAY THE SAME.

YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE SAYING

Cannabis destroys your faith period, so stop pretending its ok. I have first hand experience and you are wrong. Can you say then same. I think not.

Abortionist dope-fiend adulterers everywhere — rejoice !!!

“safer than aspirin” = propaganda and lies

What a load of b-word — you’re just inventing whichever c-word out of thin air.

It is as close to a fact as anything is in science that cannabis is safer than aspirin.

If you deny this then we are back to witchcraft.  Face the facts.

My comment was a bit tongue – in – cheek, but he seems to be a very strong supporter of liberalisation of psychoactive drugs. 

I am in recovery from alcoholism and worked in  the treatment sector for many years.  I have a very strong preference for 12 Step recovery.  Twelve Step recovery  is not based on the latest research but on the actual experience of  those who have suffered from the disease.  

The debate on drugs is often hijacked by “experts” who who quote the “literature” as if it were the last word. Many of them dispaly an arrogance that mirrors the secular attacks, a la Hitchens on the Church.  While experts have something to say and should be listened to thier effectiveness in the treatment of addictions and social problems is not great.  They can be very far removed from the coal face.  

In my exprience the debate on liberalisation is enthusiastically supported  by middle class yuppies who do not give a hoot about anyone else.

There are thousands of intergenerational welfare dependent people in my country whose whose efforts to get out of the welfare trap are frustrated by the use of cannabis as a source of income and chemical relief.  However if the experts think that these social problems will be helped  by making access to drugs easier ????.

The War on Drugs is an unhelpful political slogan.  Slogans are an unfortunate fact of life in western politics.  Those who manufacture and distribute illegal drugs will stop at nothing to protect their activites.  They should be opposed at every turn.  

There are many of us in our communities who will for whatever reason will be attracted to chemically induced euphoria and confuse it with happiness.  The alcohol industry recognised this centuries ago when they went from brewing to distilling in order to get a bigger hit in a smaller dose.  Drug users are no different. They have a ready market and will be rejoicing at having the support of catholic clerics.  

Nice one Father.

Say what you like, the people have spoken, and it’s legal in more states.

As for your insults, carry on, it only serves to reduce your position and I will not go there… Just sayin’.

 As an American, I believe the cause of our immense number of drug users
is high levels of unhappiness with our materialistic and workaholic
culture. In America we have two main life choices; to be an underemployed hippie type
drop out, which no one respects, or to be over- employed, dedicating life, health, and
freedom to an all time consuming career. Both our dominant options are
out of balance; the human is body, mind, and soul and each must be taken
care of. The dropout lives without dignity because he doesn’t develop
his God given potential; the workaholic lives without dignity because he
has no time for spirituality, family, or health. We need to restore
balance in our society.

Yeah, we’ve heard it all before, about pornography, prostitution, abortion, sodomy, you name it, we were told that “it’s only a problem because it’s illegal, make it legal and the rates will go way down.” Well they did and the rates skyrocketed. We’re not falling for that again.

Father I understand the necessity of improving the methods in the battle against drugs. But legalisation will increase the exposure to kids and make it more difficult for parents to  monitor, also, if US stops importing from Latin America, the prices will fall making it more accessible here and/or drug dealers will migrate to order ilegal activities, fighting for “new territories”, increasing violence. Legalisation will not enforce the law on criminals, they will only migrate. And there is no point in increasing access to canabis while fighting against tobacco. The legalisation is the flag of a small minority trying to impose their world view and that is all.

So come on why dont you talk to me you learned men. So full of wisdom and knowledge. Are you afraid that I may show you what is wrong with the great folly you are preaching. I cannot vouch for an Alcaholic or a Pornography abuser, because my wisdom allows me to listen in humility as I cannot understand. But I know drugs and have grown up with them. I have lost friends physically and mentally. I can speak out becuase i have first hand knowledge. So speak to me and have some dialogue and we can see who is right and why especially since talking the way lots of you are here is just typical disobedience to the Holy Father. I pray you speak to me and I can then appeal to your God given reason. Blessings to you all……