 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5453 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 05:49 pm |
|
Connie wrote: WOW Rick. I can really see how Cradle Catholics had many hang-ups.
When I was a kid, it was a non-issue. The movie theatres in our neighborhood closed during Lent. You had to go downtown or "to the city" if you lived in a smaller town. Bars, dance venues, and just about every other form of entertainment shut down for the 40 days of Lent, usually opening either not at all or just on Sundays.
It's easy to form an opinion that behavior is a sin if all opportunity to behave in that manner is removed. Imagine if the stores stopped selling potatoes. Don't you think you'd get the idea pretty quickly that there was something wrong with potatoes?
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Connie
User on Probation
| Joined: | Fri Jun 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| First Name: | Connie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic Convert from Presbyterian, then Episcopalian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:01 pm |
|
That's wonderful Rick, that this was the case when you were young. How I wish it'd be this way again in America these days. It is in Europe actually. In Paris, when I was last there last year, no shops barely were open on a Sunday, or restaurants even. It was really wonderful. And everyone flocked to Mass at Notre Dame Cathedral. Sunday should be a family day, of no shopping/movies/entertainment, of relaxing, being with family/meditating, and prayer and worship.
Our Priest is quite adament however, that missing Mass is not a sin like it used to be. I feel I can really understand the view that it is a sin. For when we give up weekly at least being filled with Jesus, how can we Christians go into the world equipped? We need Mass!!! I just have never felt right if I ever miss unless I'm very sick.
God Bless You CajunRick~
____________________
~Connie~
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 475 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:05 pm |
|
CajunRick wrote: There is some validity to that, since if you truly believe something is a sin and do it anyway, you are guilty of disobedience. However, in no case could such a sin be a mortal sin. At worst, it would be a minor venial sin.
I remember that my mother was mortified when the nuns told my sisters they could go to a movie during Lent. To my mother that was a mortal sin! Her belief did not make it sinful but if she (my mother) had gone to a movie during Lent, she would have been guilty of what would have been (to her) gross disobedience to the faith as she had been taught, and she would have been wracked with guilt until she confessed her "sin" and received forgiveness.
Good points Rick. The liberty vs. liscense issue has caused problems since St. Paul talked about it in Romans. Then, it was meat sacrificed to idols. In my parents day it was cards, smoking, movies, bobbed hair, drinking, you name it. I had a church in Reno and I spoke on this issue. I had no problems eating in the restaurants in the casinos. They were the best buy in town. But some of my parishoners took offense because they assumed anything connected to casinos was sin because it was associated with gambling...which was to them sin. So I became judicious and respected my "weaker brethern" as St. Paul described them. But was it sin? Of course not. Was my exercise of liberty as sin? Of course not. But did it give others an opporturnity to sin? Sure. How? It tempted them to go against their uninformed belief system which for them meant they would sin against their own conscience. There is where the sin comes in. If we believe it to be sin due to our uninformed conscience, then we have sinned against our conscience. But have they sinned against God? Only in the sense that they sinned against what they believed to be true. My sin would be to do something that would force them to sin against their conscience.
Now, what if through proper education (catechesis) they came to believe that eating meat, gambling was not a sin, then when they do go out and, for sake of arguement, eat in the casino restaurant and even maybe crunch a few quarters in the slots, then they have not sinned against their conscience or God.
I hope I've been clear on that issue. This has been an argument in all ages of church history. Usually it's seen when the younger elements violate what the older folks deem to be sin.
Rich
|
|
|
Connie
User on Probation
| Joined: | Fri Jun 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| First Name: | Connie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic Convert from Presbyterian, then Episcopalian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:09 pm |
|
Rich said:
"I had a church in Reno and I spoke on this issue. "
Are you a former Pastor Rich?
What are you doing now may I inquire?
____________________
~Connie~
|
|
|
Dave Armstrong
Network Apologist
| Joined: | Fri Nov 2nd, 2007 |
| Location: | Melvindale, Michigan USA |
| Posts: | 1845 |
| First Name: | Dave | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Evangelical (1977): Diverse Protestant Influences / Catholic in 1990 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:33 pm |
|
Candlemass wrote: We are talking about things that are not directly labled as sin by Sacred Scripture or the Church, things that are a matter of the conscience discribed by St. Paul.
I think it's a bit more complicated than that, though. Let me try to make a somewhat tentative argument. I'm "thinking out loud"; not trying to speak in "dogmatic" terms. The Church teaches that it is a sin to mutilate our bodies; for example to have a vasectomy. It's wrong because it is doing things to our bodies that are harmful and not intended to be that way by God. The Church would also oppose the practice of clitorectomies, that take place in, for example, Africa, so that women will not experience as much sexual pleasure. These things are intrinsically wrong.
In the case of vasectomy, we are trying to avoid causing a conception altogether and to engage in contraception, which is itself an intrinsically disordered, sinful act. So it is already wrong on those grounds, but it also goes against the natural way a (male) body is supposed to operate.
The analogy to smoking isn't perfect (very few analogies are), but I would say it is reasonable to argue that if we know beyond any doubt that smoking is anthithetical to lung functions, and yet keep doing it, that this is wrong, and indeed, may be a sin, because by our action we are deliberately causing physical injury to ourselves. What would we say if we stabbed someone in the kidney and they had to have it removed? That is wrong not only because it was attacking another and causing them pain, but because that person's body is now not fully operative in the way it was intended to be.
Now, is it essentially different when we are talking about our own bodies? No. It is a serious sin to commit suicide. The Church doesn't agree with assisted suicide and euthanasia, because our bodies are not our own, and we are made in the image of God, with eternal souls created directly by God, and we are the temples of the Holy Spirit. The Church is not libertarian: we don't "own" our own bodies; God does. We don't own the bodies of our preborn children, and so cannot kill them as we please. It is a serious sin.
Therefore, if it is wrong to cause harm to other persons' bodies, it is also wrong to cause harm to our own, by the same principle of our bodies being given to us as a gift of God, so that we are stewards of them. In a sense, we're "renting" our bodies from God the Creator.
Nor can we say in the case of smoking, that it only affects us -- just as libertarians argue that drugs and pornography and homosexual acts only have consequences for those who are doing that and no one else. And that is because we know now that second-hand smoke also can do harm to other people (not nearly as much, but still some).
I grew up my entire childhood, breathing the smoke from my father's cigarettes. I also grew up in southwest Detroit breathing the pollution from the Ford Rouge Plant, just a mile and a half away (the largest factory in the world, at least at one time). Pollution was sort of like smoking on a huge scale. These factories were belching out harmful smoke with little or no control, until the 1970s and a greater awareness of the environment (and it's not just radical, wacko, far left hysteria: pollution of air and water is objectively, demonstratively a bad thing).
So Ford (where my dad worked, like a typical Detroiter) and other companies got up to speed and did a better job there. In fact, Ford is doing quite a bit environmentally, now, because I just took the tour of the factory in the last few weeks, and they were describing a number of (rather fascinating) environmental programs that the plant is now promoting and practicing.
Cigarette smoke is known (without any doubt) to harm our lungs especially. Why would anyone want to do that (even apart from the sin question)? There is an aspect of this (I agree with another commenter) that is just plain stupid, whether it is technically a "sin" or not. Who would go around bashing their foot or hand with a lead pipe, so that it became increasingly damaged? Who would stab their ear so that 47% of the hearing were lost over time? Who would scrape their back with a sharp object so that it became raw and infected and permanently harmed, or try to deliberately break a finger or a toe?
All of that is considered irrational, "nutty" behavior. Yet if someone smokes and smokes and destroys their lung capacity and sets themselves up for cancer, is that not wrong and dumb, too, on the same grounds? I don't see any difference. Perhaps someone can explain to me what the difference would be.
Who would make a theoretical choice where there were two doors (like Let's Make a Deal) and two paths to choose from?:
Door A: a "healthy" lifestyle which is less "fun" but which will render it statistically probable that you can live a healthy, fairly happy life up to age 75-85 or even longer.
Door B: a lot more fun of a life with stuff like excessive alcohol intake and smoking and junk food that will "fulfill" the person at the time but which will cause a great statistical likelihhod of cancer and other debilitating diseases and a loss of 10, 15, 20 years off of the person's lifespan, so that they have a much greater likelihood of dying "early" (and often in horrible, tragic fashion).
Now, would a rational person who cares about his own life and body and about his loved ones, deliberately choose Door B (and, by the way, Door B is also the "choice" of the active homosexual, because we know beyond a doubt, that this lifestyle is unhealthy and takes many years off of lives, statistically)? Yet with the issue of smoking, in effect, millions choose Door B and seem to think little of it.
Whether smoking is a sin or not, I'm not sure. Now I am curious and woUld like to research this, in terms of what Catholics and other Christians have thought. I suspect that it will be a borderline thing. But at the very least it is an irrational and stupid choice, and I think there are strong arguments to abstain from it whether it is a sin or not. Not everything that is "legal" is necessarily "good", which is a far smaller category. The Christian ought to pursue what is good and life-affirming and edifying.
And I say this without the least judgment of persons at all (and not the slightest pretense that I am "better" than anyone else). I'm just looking at the thing itself, and I see no good coming from it at all. If the pleasure of it is sought, certainly are plenty of other pleasures that can substitute, without the harm done. I would say it is an act of charity to try to reason with the smoker to stop. After all, it is their life and the life of their loved ones who is harmed. My own father has lung cancer, as I write, because he wouldn't listen to reason and stop smoking years ago.
Someone argued that "Nicotine, like caffeine is a neurotransmitter analogue and in small doses can relieve stress." I'm sure it can. But there are tons of natural tranquilizers and sedatives that can do the same with absolutely no harm or side effects. Niacin from Vitamin B does that. So does calcium and magnesium. There are a number of herbs that are quite calming, like chamomile or valerian root. There are now a great many natural anti-depressants, such as St. John's Wort and SAM-e. My wife takes natural amino acids to relive her tendency to mild depression (as I have written about). There need not be the risks or side effects involved, and there is no addiction, either. Even exercise is known to relieve stress. Talking and laughing does that. Why should anyone seek that benefit from something that is known to harm and to be addictive? It's not a rational choice.
Last edited on Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:40 pm by Dave Armstrong
____________________
I'm happy to offer whatever theological & personal assistance I can. My blog, Biblical Evidence for Catholicism, contains 2000+ papers & web pages (absolutely free) & 16 apologetic books (for sale):
http://www.biblicalcatholic.com/
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 475 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 06:35 pm |
|
Connie wrote: Rich said:
"I had a church in Reno and I spoke on this issue. "
Are you a former Pastor Rich?
What are you doing now may I inquire?
Hi Connie. Yes, In my "yoot" many years ago. It's a long story, but my ministry ended when my first wife decided to leave me for another man. The organization I belonged to didn't, and still doesn't believe divorced men should occupy the pulpit. I voluntarily took myself out of the ministry to investigate my options and decided my particular gifts didn't fit will with being a senior pastor's responsibilities. Looking back, I probably would have done well as an assistant or associate pastor rather than the senior pastor. After I remarried I decided to eliminate any questions and concentrate on being a good husband and work in the church as a Bible teacher and small groups facilitator. As it has turn out, it's been a good choice. Funny thing, many years ago I took one of the interest analysis tests given by the Richard Bolles book "What Color is Your Parachute." It ended up I came closest to the interests of a Catholic Priest. I thought that was hilarious since I was very anti-Catholic back then. Subsequent Myers-Briggs tests and others have come to similar conclusions. Who knows, maybe I should have never married and gone into the priesthood?
But I was young, empetuous and immature back then and probably would have been excommunicated after the first pretty girl I met. That's the one area where I didn't fit in to the priest mold. 
I work now at Stanford University in the Property Management Office reviewing contracts and grants to make sure they comply with local, state and federal regulations, especially in the area of flow-downs to our subs. Yes, we do more than educate students here.
|
|
|
mg57
Member
| Joined: | Mon Oct 9th, 2006 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 206 |
| First Name: | mg57 | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Infant Baptised Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 07:02 pm |
|
Thanks for you kind remarks Judi.
Concerning smoking, in my own mind / circumstance, my thinking / realization went from a "morally neutral coping habit" to having an understanding of what me being a good steward of what I've been given means.
That having been said, while the penitential rite at the beginning of Mass will capably serve to remit venial sins, it really is an advantage to speak it / state venial specifics to the priest, ie., person to person, as it's been shown in the many forms of AA. If a priest I'm confessing to for example, tells me I'm under no obligation to do so, .. too bad. I respectfully give him the AA example, and I receive his priestly blessing to boot, - it's a win-win situation as they say. This is not an issue of scrupulosity, but just of laying things out there as we await the grace.
|
|
|
Connie
User on Probation
| Joined: | Fri Jun 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| First Name: | Connie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic Convert from Presbyterian, then Episcopalian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 07:11 pm |
|
Dear Rich:
All in all, sounds like your job is awesome! And at Stanford--how wonderful!
God Bless You Rich in all endeavors~
____________________
~Connie~
|
|
|
Candlemass
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Hudson, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 477 |
| First Name: | Mark | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, AOG, Baptist, non - denominational, Anglican, RCC for life! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 07:37 pm |
|
| When I was a young boy my parents both smoked, neither do now, heck I think the whole family smoked back in the late 60's early 70's! I hated it, I used to have to go next door to get ciggarettes from my aunt, I hated touching the things, I remember even throwing them away behind my parent's backs. I also know w/all that I am going through at this time, quitting would cause me to end up in a depression ward, so I ain't gonna do it. I also smoke outside and away from others, smoking in public places has been banned in Ohio anyway. I think a lot of folk in the Church pass judgement on folks w/out knowing the details of their lives, what they're going through, nor do some of them care, they cast burdens on them and won't lift a finger to help! Now I'm not saying that's what is being done here, but I've been around the "righteous" long enough to know the score. Last edited on Mon Feb 25th, 2008 07:39 pm by Candlemass
____________________
"For I the blind who once could see, the bell tolls for me!"
|
|
|
Connie
User on Probation
| Joined: | Fri Jun 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| First Name: | Connie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic Convert from Presbyterian, then Episcopalian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 07:40 pm |
|
Candlemass:
Do as you must. Live your life as you see fit.
Yep, we are all products our our pasts, no doubt. But to be overcomers, this is the question/issue.
Bless You~
Jer. 29:11
____________________
~Connie~
|
|
|
Kim M.
Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 11th, 2008 |
| Location: | Georgia USA |
| Posts: | 415 |
| First Name: | Kim | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Baptist, Assembly of God, Church of God, Assembly again, PCA, ... |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 08:38 pm |
|
Mark, with as much as you have to cope with, quitting smoking is probably pretty low on the list. Until you deal with the bigger stuff, let the little stuff go for now. Keep things in perspective. Someday you may just quit.
I grew up around smokers, too. Thankfully, my dad quit. My mother quit when I was young. My grandparents on my dad's side always smoked. I have several family members who died from cancer. Almost all were smokers. So look at it as a health issue to tackle another day. I certainly don't judge you for smoking. It's a physical addiction and is not an easy one to give up. You have my support. 
____________________
"A joyful heart is the health of the body, but a depressed spirit dries up the bones." Proverbs 17:22
|
|
|
Connie
User on Probation
| Joined: | Fri Jun 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 71 |
| First Name: | Connie | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Catholic Convert from Presbyterian, then Episcopalian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 08:43 pm |
|
Nor do I Kim, judge anyone if they smoke. For their life, as ours too, is only between us and God.
Hey--God Bless You Kim!~
____________________
~Connie~
|
|
|
MysticalRose128
Member
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 09:26 pm |
|
Thanks, Mitch! I, too, had a 3-yr. break from smoking back in the early '90s, and before that in the mid-'80s when I was pregnant with my son, and each time went back to smoking for one reason or another. (Hmm ... one "quit period" per decade?) This might be the last time I quit -- but then again, it might not. I'm praying for strength! I'll read Romans 14 tonight ... 
Judi
____________________
Mater Dolorosa, cause of our joy -- pray for us!
|
|
|
MysticalRose128
Member
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 09:42 pm |
|
rbo4u2 wrote: Personally speaking, I agree with Mother Angelica. Smoking is not so much a sin as it is just stupid. (That ought to bring down a hailstorm of wrath on my hide)
Amen, Mother Angelica and Rich!! Now why is it I can't get addicted to exercise and foods with no carbs??? Hmmmmmm????
And in an earlier post, Bprof wrote: "Always err on the side of holiness." Great advice!
You guys are wonderful!
____________________
Mater Dolorosa, cause of our joy -- pray for us!
|
|
|
rbo4u2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Jan 16th, 2007 |
| Location: | Sunnyvale, California USA |
| Posts: | 475 |
| First Name: | Rich | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Formerly Christian & Missionary Alliance then became Presbyterian |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 09:45 pm |
|
MysticalRose128 wrote: rbo4u2 wrote: Personally speaking, I agree with Mother Angelica. Smoking is not so much a sin as it is just stupid. (That ought to bring down a hailstorm of wrath on my hide)
Amen, Mother Angelica and Rich!! Now why is it I can't get addicted to exercise and foods with no carbs??? Hmmmmmm????
And in an earlier post, Bprof wrote: "Always err on the side of holiness." Great advice!
I'll take my cue from Mother Angelica anyday.
You guys are wonderful!
|
|
|
LOVECC
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 40 |
| First Name: | Lisa | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 10:55 pm |
|
Connie wrote: Our Priest is quite adament however, that missing Mass is not a sin like it used to be.
It is my understanding that it is still considered a mortal sin if one misses Mass deliberately (Sundays and Holy Days of Obligations only), without a valid reason (i.e. sickness, dangerous weather conditions, etc.). I don't think that changed post-Vatican II.
Moderators, please correct me if I am wrong.
|
|
|
LOVECC
Member
| Joined: | Fri Dec 28th, 2007 |
| Location: | Columbus, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 40 |
| First Name: | Lisa | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Cradle Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 10:57 pm |
|
Kim M. wrote: Mark, with as much as you have to cope with, quitting smoking is probably pretty low on the list. Until you deal with the bigger stuff, let the little stuff go for now. Keep things in perspective. Someday you may just quit.
Kim - that is great advice! I couldn't have said it better myself.
|
|
|
MysticalRose128
Member
|
Posted: Mon Feb 25th, 2008 11:34 pm |
|
Hi, Connie ... about your priest who says missing Mass "isn't a sin like it used to be" ... wha????? 
I'd like to personally ask him what has made it any less of a sin "than it used to be"? Attending Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation is one of the Church precepts -- then, and now!! Better yet, I'd like to see my pastor go head to head with him on that one!
____________________
Mater Dolorosa, cause of our joy -- pray for us!
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| Joined: | Fri Sep 29th, 2006 |
| Location: | Houma, Louisiana USA |
| Posts: | 5453 |
| First Name: | Rick (& Kermie) | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Lifetime Catholic, Latin Rite |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26th, 2008 02:41 am |
|
Dave Armstrong wrote: Door A: a "healthy" lifestyle which is less "fun" but which will render it statistically probable that you can live a healthy, fairly happy life up to age 75-85 or even longer.
Door B: a lot more fun of a life with stuff like excessive alcohol intake and smoking and junk food that will "fulfill" the person at the time but which will cause a great statistical likelihhod of cancer and other debilitating diseases and a loss of 10, 15, 20 years off of the person's lifespan, so that they have a much greater likelihood of dying "early" (and often in horrible, tragic fashion).
Well, let's see -- in 1987 my health insurance company offered us an evaluation, and the results predicted I would live to be 77 years old if I continued my current lifestyle. Three months later I was in intensive care waiting for them to slice my chest open to overhaul my heart. The reason? I smoked three packs a day. The evaluation indicated that smoking would cut six months off my life expectancy. They were very nearly wrong. I was 36 years old at the time.
My doctor said those pains in my jaw, neck, back and arm could not be related to my heart. In a way he was right. I still have trouble related to a pinched nerve in my back, but it's not the same pain. I've had two heart attacks but only once have I ever had a chest pain, and that was the one that laid me out.
Was I committing a mortal sin by smoking? No, I don't think so. The reason, quite simply, is that I didn't believe it would ever happen to me. I knew the statistics, and I knew the dangers, but I was immune to all of that. I was still young enough to be immortal. Dying is something old people did. I would quit when I was ready, and when I quit, I would never start again.
Well, that was true. I haven't so much as touched a cigarette in 21 years. I have no desire to ever smoke again (although I still reach for them in my pocket). I will never smoke again. Cigarettes, cigars, marijuana, lettuce, spinach, peyote, crack, or oregano. I will never smoke again. Nor will I chew, dip, or do anything else with tobacco.
My father suffered horribly with emphysema at the end of his life, more than 35 years after he quit smoking. The damage was irreversible. I pray that those who still smoke will not suffer the same fate.
I sympathize with those who still smoke, including my wife. All I can say is "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."
____________________
Understanding is the reward of faith. Therefore seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. - Augustine
Rick Luquette
Luquette Lane
|
|
|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 369 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26th, 2008 03:17 am |
|
Well, as they say, "Everything in moderation." That would be my view, anyways.
Both of my parents smoke and have smoked since their high school days. Probably close to a pack a day, or a pack every two days. Each. I'm tempted to add up that cost and just see how much of all that money spent on cigarettes would amount to. I'd probably have my entire college paid for and a good start in Grad school.
The way I see it, excessive smoking is bad. I don't know if you could label it as a mortal sin, though, because usually with excessive smoking (like my parents) comes addiction, which slights culpability. It is stupid, though, especially regarding the effects such excessive smoking has on your health. But then again, my grandma smoked excessively and lived to her late 80s, dying of non-smoking/cancer relating problems this past October.
Done in moderation, however, I don't think there is any sin involved. Many, many activities and foods we eat have negative side effects on our bodies. Most have good ones that accompany the negative as well. If you look around, nearly everything causes cancer nowadays.
Just like with those prone to alchoholism, those who could become addicted need to stay clear completely. Otherwise it is a sin, deliberately placing oneself in the near occasion of sin.
My two cents, for what it's worth.
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Candlemass
Member
| Joined: | Tue May 1st, 2007 |
| Location: | Hudson, Ohio USA |
| Posts: | 477 |
| First Name: | Mark | | Gender: | Male | | Faith History: | Catholic, AOG, Baptist, non - denominational, Anglican, RCC for life! |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26th, 2008 03:27 am |
|
| Man I'm so broke right now I can't afford to pay attention, much less give my 2 cents worth!
____________________
"For I the blind who once could see, the bell tolls for me!"
|
|
|
Kayla
Member
| Joined: | Mon Jul 30th, 2007 |
| Location: | Emmitsburg, Maryland USA |
| Posts: | 369 |
| First Name: | Kayla | | Gender: | Female | | Faith History: | Atheist, kind-of Mormon, Catholic |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Tue Feb 26th, 2008 03:47 am |
|
Ya know, if I could get paid 2 cents for everytime I shared my opinion, I'd be rich! At least then there would be some perks to being so opinionated... but instead, I have to pay 2 cents everytime I give my opinion, and I'm with you-- broke!
Candlemass wrote:Man I'm so broke right now I can't afford to pay attention, much less give my 2 cents worth!
____________________
I believe, Lord, help my unbelief.
Jesus, I trust in You!
There's not a lot of job security for us after death. I suppose that's one advantage of being a philosopher. - Peter Kreeft
http://kayla23mount.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
CajunRick
Network Helper
| | |
