RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 Well, there's this, which seems pretty weak to me. The reliance on using only one translation of the meaning of the Greek pharmakeia, the use or the administering of drugs rather than the use of magical arts is pretty tenuous at best, especially given the context in which it is used. So by that interpretation, wine is also bad, and they drink wine in Holy Communion ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 Actually many on here have stated that they believe cannabis improves, thats IMPROVES, driving!! The only thing I've read like that is people saying that it makes you be more careful when driving, which the Department of Health seems to agree with... "4.7 There is some disagreement about how long such impairments persist after taking cannabis: most assume that they last for only a few hours (e.g. Kendall p 266); but Professor Heather Ashton of the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, principal author of the BMA report, suggested that subtle cognitive impairments could persist for 24 or even 48 hours or more (Q 72), whereas the DETR say "probably .... 24 hours at most" (Press Notice 94/Transport, 11 February 1998). On the other hand the impairment in driving skills does not appear to be severe, even immediately after taking cannabis, when subjects are tested in a driving simulator. This may be because people intoxicated by cannabis appear to compensate for their impairment by taking fewer risks and driving more slowly, whereas alcohol tends to encourage people to take greater risks and drive more aggressively (POST note 113; cp DH p 240). " from this But I agree, it should carry the same penalty as drunk driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I think it's the concept of "sin" in general. Whilst it can be applied to moral issues that we can all agree with, it also applies to harmless pleasures and actually make them obsessional, harmful even. It's the second type that are intrinsic to religion, because they tie it's adherents to it, and make them dependant on it for "forgiveness". When "sin" can be applied to things that we enjoy, what we eat, what we drink, what we do with our private parts, things that many of us do, and make us feel guilty for doing them, then we become reliant on the very thing that makes us feel guilty. Sin and forgiveness is the foundation of the type of Christianity found in the US these days. Christians aren't more likely to be against drugs because their book informs them so, neither are they less likely to be using drugs than non-Christians. It is simply the way that Christianity has evolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 <snip> As for your second question I would think that is pretty obvious "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" jb That's Old Testament and certainly not part of Christ's teaching. He was more of the "turn the other cheek" persuasion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuy Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 The only thing I've read like that is people saying that it makes you be more careful when driving, which the Department of Health seems to agree with... "4.7 There is some disagreement about how long such impairments persist after taking cannabis: most assume that they last for only a few hours (e.g. Kendall p 266); but Professor Heather Ashton of the University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, principal author of the BMA report, suggested that subtle cognitive impairments could persist for 24 or even 48 hours or more (Q 72), whereas the DETR say "probably .... 24 hours at most" (Press Notice 94/Transport, 11 February 1998). On the other hand the impairment in driving skills does not appear to be severe, even immediately after taking cannabis, when subjects are tested in a driving simulator. This may be because people intoxicated by cannabis appear to compensate for their impairment by taking fewer risks and driving more slowly, whereas alcohol tends to encourage people to take greater risks and drive more aggressively (POST note 113; cp DH p 240). " from this But I agree, it should carry the same penalty as drunk driving. "people intoxicated by cannabis appear to compensate for their impairment by taking fewer risks and driving more slowly" That could just as easily be said about many that get behind the wheel of a car that are over the legal drink-drive limit; not everyone over the limit drive like maniacs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 "people intoxicated by cannabis appear to compensate for their impairment by taking fewer risks and driving more slowly" That could just as easily be said about many that get behind the wheel of a car that are over the legal drink-drive limit; not everyone over the limit drive like maniacs. No it can't, read the next bit in purple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Erikson Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 It's religion. It can be used as a reason to stop people doing pretty much what they want. The horrid bit is that we allow this to go on. There seems to be a horrid undercurrent of labelling anyone who challenges a religion as racist. It won't change. I heard that politicians are simply threatened by cannabis as its users tend to be more liberal thinking and question more. Politicians don't like that. They like people to misbehave when intoxicated. That way they have a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borderline Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Give to Rome what is Romes if it's legal it would still be a bad judgement to smoke it. I've seen what it can do its a slow ticking bomb no better or worse than alcohol just more deceptive As Christians we should not be here to judge but to help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmyR Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I heard that politicians are simply threatened by cannabis as its users tend to be more liberal thinking and question more. The implication being that cannabis makes you more liberal thinking and question more? Not in my experience! Or is it that people who are more liberal thinking are more likely to smoke cannabis? That may hold some water. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted March 14, 2012 Author Share Posted March 14, 2012 It's religion. It can be used as a reason to stop people doing pretty much what they want. The horrid bit is that we allow this to go on. There seems to be a horrid undercurrent of labelling anyone who challenges a religion as racist. It won't change. I don't know about that, I've never heard the excuse (of Christian belief) being used over here. The implication being that cannabis makes you more liberal thinking and question more? Not in my experience! Or is it that people who are more liberal thinking are more likely to smoke cannabis? That may hold some water. Tony didn't say it makes you more liberal thinking and question more. Read again: I heard that politicians are simply threatened by cannabis as its users tend to be more liberal thinking and question more. Politicians don't like that. They like people to misbehave when intoxicated. That way they have a purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.