[WyldKard]

First off, before I begin, I want to thank you for your very polite and well-reasoned response. A rarity in this day and age :)

However, wine is mentioned in the Bible as having medicinal value which has been confirmed by modern medical science. Apparently a glass a day is actually good for you. Whether you can include beer or whisky I can't say as I have not heard the study extended to those beverages. They are not mentioned in the Bible, but then I don't think the Jews brewed beer or distilled alcohol. I could be wrong.

And now there are studies that seem to show that pot has some effective medicinal value, especially when it comes to treating the effects of chemotherapy and glaucoma. So would you say then that it is not immoral to use pot as a medicine, if all other treatments have failed?

Also, I am going to infer from your first paragraph that you consider "social drinking" immoral, since it usually involves more than a simple "one glass of wine" a day. Would I be correct in this assumption?

IMO: Jesus taught that all morality boils down to a heart issue. What is in your heart means much more than what passes your lips. One key indicator as to whether a substance is immoral, whether it is pot, tobacco, or french fries, would be the reaction of a person to the phrase, "Maybe you should give that up."

A reasoned reaction indicates that there may not be immorality involved, or if there is the person is open to the prompting of the Holy Spirit to a change of behavior. A knee-jerk, "when they pry it from my cold, dead hands," reaction would indicated there is likely immorality involved.

But what about guns? There are many who claim that the Government can have their guns when "They pry it from my cold, dead hands." Is this immoral as well? Is it an attachment to a material items, or to certain freedoms that said item represents. Many people do not approve of pot, or alcohol, even guns, but I image many of these same people approve even less of the current "War on Guns" or "War on Drugs", both of which usurp the Constitution, and cause more harm than good. Thus, what would you consider moral behavior: Supporting an action, even though it violates the principles of our Constitution, or supporting the Constitution, even if it's in reference to an item you personally do not approve of.

Where is your heart on pot?

The same place it is in alcohol. Prohibition causes more harm than good, and ethics and morality begins at home. All the laws in the world aren't going to make a difference if parents allow the Government to raise their children, and give up their own personal responsibility, because "The Government" will just do the job for them. Banning fatty foods, or tobacco, or anything justified for a Socialist "we must save ourselves from ourselves" reasoning only seems to encourage people all the more to take less personal responsibility in their lives.

I've personally met many people who used pot or alcohol in moderation, and they seemed like otherwise fine, upstanding people to me. So I disagree that enjoying recreational intoxicants is immoral. But I suppose that is just one of those things we won't see eye to eye on. I also enjoy computer games and dancing, and listening to popular rock music, and there are those who would consider those actions "immoral" as well. Where does one draw the line, and how fast can it move in any one direction?

[ArGee]

First off, before I begin, I want to thank you for your very polite and well-reasoned response. A rarity in this day and age :)

As you say, it's easier to do if we thing through our responses. Thanks for keeping it civil.

And now there are studies that seem to show that pot has some effective medicinal value, especially when it comes to treating the effects of chemotherapy and glaucoma. So would you say then that it is not immoral to use pot as a medicine, if all other treatments have failed?

I'm not sure how conclusive either set of studies is. I am more prone to believe the results of the pro-wine studies as I trust the Bible, and it is often on the forefront of scientific inquiry. If a pro-beer study came out I would view it as skeptically as a pro-pot study. But I admit my prejudice and will keep an open mind on pot. I would certainly react differently to someone who truly believes in the medicinal value of pot vs. someone who is obviously making an excuse. Just as I support the use of (chemical) narcotics in medicine but not for recreational purposes.

Also, I am going to infer from your first paragraph that you consider "social drinking" immoral, since it usually involves more than a simple "one glass of wine" a day. Would I be correct in this assumption?

You might be correct in the assumption, but not in the reasoning. Most social drinking is done to "loosen up," and to "have a good time." At the very least I would suggest that people who need those crutches need to examine why? I can loosen up just fine at parties and have a great time without a drop of alcohol. Since I stopped drinking I have never wakened up in the morning regretting what I did under the influence the night before. I also can't see any justification for the tremendous amount of time and money I once spent on booze. However, I am not ready to go so far as to call all social drinking, "immoral." As you saw in my previous post, morality is a heart issue. I can't paint a whole raft of people that I have never met with such a broad brush. I will reiterate my "knee-jerk" position, however.

But what about guns? There are many who claim that the Government can have their guns when "They pry it from my cold, dead hands."

I actually chose that phrase to poke at the gun crowd. There is a moral reason to own firearms, as well as a moral reason not to own them. I don't own them, but I support the rights of others. I question the heart of anyone who loudly asserts a position without being willing to think about it, or to consider an opposing viewpoint. It doesn't matter whether the subject is guns, booze, pot, or condoms.

Thus, what would you consider moral behavior: Supporting an action, even though it violates the principles of our Constitution, or supporting the Constitution, even if it's in reference to an item you personally do not approve of.

I'm not convinced that the war on guns or the war on drugs violate the principles of our constitution. I do submit that our constitution is subject to the higher moral authority of G-d in so far His will can be discerned since our argument in favor of breaking away from Great Britain is predicated on His moral authority. If the Constitution conflicts with His authority it should be ammended. Where it does not conflict, or where clear evidence of a conflict can not be found, the Constitution must be supported by all citizens.

The same place it is in alcohol. Prohibition causes more harm than good, and ethics and morality begins at home.

I will agree on the latter, but not necessarily on the former. How do you feel about social stigmatization in leu of outright illegality. i.e., cigs. are legal but it is becoming harder and harder to smoke because of all the social stigma.

All the laws in the world aren't going to make a difference if parents allow the Government to raise their children, and give up their own personal responsibility, because "The Government" will just do the job for them.

While laws won't change behaviors, some of them do declare who we are as a people. For example, if we could never stop murder (and we can not) I would still want it to be illegal as a statement that Americans value human life.

Banning fatty foods, or tobacco, or anything justified for a Socialist "we must save ourselves from ourselves" reasoning only seems to encourage people all the more to take less personal responsibility in their lives.

Don't fall into the libertarian trap. All social ideals are not socialist. We are social beings, after all, and our nation is more than a simple contractual agreement we make with each other to live together.

Where does one draw the line, and how fast can it move in any one direction?

If you are looking for a judgement from me regarding your habits and whether they are vices I would ask you these two questions. 1) What is G-d telling you? Screen out all other voices and tell me what He is saying to you. Do you ask Him? 2) Under what circumstances would you give them up. If your wife (if not married, substitute any loved one) came up to you and said, "I'd really appreciate it if you would stop." what would your response be?

Shalom.