Sign in to follow this  
TStevieRob

Word of Wisdom and marijuana. Very serious.

Recommended Posts

and your body naturally produces THC.

Do you have a source that your body produces tetrahydrocannabinol? Your body does create endocannabinoids, such as anandamide, but these are not THC.

Edited by Dravin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anandamide is a form of THC:

Does the human body naturally produce THC

Does this mean God made it different in our bodies and the plant to make sure we'd avoid it? Why did God make the plant to begin with? How many other chemicals could God have made that would get us high that we shouldn't take and why didn't he make those to tempt us with? Oh wait, nature keeps making those randomly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TStevieRob, thank you for your service to this country. I personally know two vets with PTSD very well, and I married someone with PTSD, so I may have maybe a touch more insight into your struggles than the average poster here. That said:

There is the whole argument of "You might be supporting drug cartels" but I think that is a cop-out. Not saying it isn't true, but it is a man created problem and I will address that in a second. Marijuana is shipped en masse (illegally of course) from Mexico, but I think it is becoming so much more common and people have a desire for higher quality, which the cartels cannot supply, so I think the amount of marijuana people get from DANGEROUS illegal sources is not as much as we think. I especially know it in my case (that is all I will say on how I obtain mine).

I'll see your wishful thinking, and raise you my wife's firsthand experience. I see a cop-out happening here, but it's not with my argument. You strike me as someone who has seen so much, you are no longer in the mood to turn a blind eye to the truth. I hear what you are saying about how "things don't have to be that way". Do you honestly bear no responsibility to deal with how things actually are right now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When it comes to your health, you just have to make up your own mind no religion can do it for you. Infact religion is supposed to be there for support. I am facing a similar issue in my state, which is Idaho. The Mormon church seems to take political issues into their concern, when they really should  not, being that there should be a separation of church and state. Maybe someday we make the church pay taxes, and then they can gripe to the state all they want. But until then I guess I will have to stay at odds with the politics of my church.

 

You should listen to your doctor. Doctors are highly educated, and are more educated, they trump over any spiritual advisor you may have. In fact any one that comes between you and your doctor through the church or otherwise, you should really see an attorney about that, to make sure they know thier real role in your health concerns. Basically, if they are not a doctor, they should be quiet. Your church can't go against the grain of state law, cause the bible says you can't. "Obey the law of the land" and that goes for them double.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to tell you all this. but you are still breaking the law even if you state allows medical marijuana. It still against federal law witch for those who don't understand even if your state allows it its still illegal to smoke grow or use in anyway in the united states . your braking a commandment on following the law of the land. if your state allows it and you use it you supporting illegal activity and on top of that there is no way you can go through the temple interview truthfully. SORRY

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal. A new law was set in. So its not illegal if its not against the state. Its a requrement for it to be against both. Law is law, your interpretation is invalid.

 

Thing I don't like is, if the Church goes against the population it will just make people further Attack Mormonism, both states side by side to me legalized marijuana, now there is a huge push here in my state, and people are saying mormonism is why they wont legalize it. I don't think that is why, but you never know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal. A new law was set in. So its not illegal if its not against the state. Its a requrement for it to be against both. Law is law, your interpretation is invalid.

 

Can I get the US Code you are referring to that abrogates Federal statutes concerning marijuana if it is legal on the state level?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

You should listen to your doctor. Doctors are highly educated, and are more educated, they trump over any spiritual advisor you may have. In fact any one that comes between you and your doctor through the church or otherwise, you should really see an attorney about that, to make sure they know thier real role in your health concerns. Basically, if they are not a doctor, they should be quiet. Your church can't go against the grain of state law, cause the bible says you can't. "Obey the law of the land" and that goes for them double.

 

This is not correct.  If your doctor tells you that to cure you from leukemia you will need stem cells infusion from an aborted baby and your spiritual adviser tells you that abortion is immoral, you go get another doctor.  Why?  Because... aborted babies are not the only source of stem cells.

 

Just like marijuana is not the only cure for whatever it is that's ailing you.

 

My brother is a doctor.  Doctors are supposed to heal holistically - that is, take into account the entire person.  Medical treatment, therefore, should not go against the patient's conscience because mental health is an important part of a patient's health. 

 

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal.

 

US Law 101:  Federal Law trumps State Law.  That is why, even if Kentucky and Delaware did not sign the 13th Amendment, all their slaves became free when the 13th Amendment got ratified when Georgia got on board completing the 3/4 of all States requirement to amend the Federal Constutition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Hidden by Just_A_Guy, May 12, 2014 - You know, I just shouldn't ...
Hidden by Just_A_Guy, May 12, 2014 - You know, I just shouldn't ...

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal. A new law was set in. So its not illegal if its not against the state. Its a requrement for it to be against both. Law is law, your interpretation is invalid.

If you're high enough to think that we'll fall for that claptrap . . . Then I want a little of whatever you've been smoking, because it must be some amazing stuff.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe someday we make the church pay taxes, and then they can gripe to the state all they want.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize the First Amendment was a pay-to-play game.

And I'll bet Tom Monson--and in fact, the bulk of active Mormons who weigh in on this issue in their individual capacities--pay a heckuva lot more in taxes than you and the other able-bodied-twenty-something-but-still-inexplicably-and-but-for-marijuana-incurably-ill legalization pushers do.

But until then I guess I will have to stay at odds with the politics of my church.

Yeah, it's just political. :rolleyes:

 

You should listen to your doctor. Doctors are highly educated, and are more educated, they trump over any spiritual advisor you may have. . . Basically, if they are not a doctor, they should be quiet.

Paging Dr. Mengele. Dr. Josef Mengele, please call your office ...

Your church can't go against the grain of state law, cause the bible says you can't. "Obey the law of the land" and that goes for them double.

Which is why churches generally stayed out of the abolitionist movement back when slavery was legal under both state and federal law . . .

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal. A new law was set in. So its not illegal if its not against the state. Its a requrement for it to be against both. Law is law, your interpretation is invalid.

If I start smoking pot, will my legal analyses become as sound as yours are?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree out of necessity is okay. Just my opinion though. I'd talk to your bishop to let them be aware.

And I'd look into how to without needing to smoke it. Vapor inhalation is cleaner and will save your lungs. It also has less bad side effects (like head aches and lung damage).

Thank you for your service. I hope you're able to and you know that you deserve to move on from this and live a full and happy life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are wrong, it has to be against state and federal law to be illegal. A new law was set in. So its not illegal if its not against the state. Its a requrement for it to be against both. Law is law, your interpretation is invalid.

 

Thing I don't like is, if the Church goes against the population it will just make people further Attack Mormonism, both states side by side to me legalized marijuana, now there is a huge push here in my state, and people are saying mormonism is why they wont legalize it. I don't think that is why, but you never know.

 

Bringing up the laws of the land is not the issue here.

 

There are three levels of integrity:

- Legal

- Moral

- Ethical

 

Legal is the bare minimum standard, and really isn't the subject of this thread.  Why?  Because the Word of Wisdom is a personal code of health, so it falls into the Moral category.  It seems that anyone can pass any law they want these days, so basing a personal code of integrity based on "which laws I'm following" is hollow at best.

 

Moral & Ethical - can you tell your Bishop and Stake President that you follow the Word of Wisdom and perform temple (and priesthood) ordinances worthily?

 

Now I agree that you need to take the doctor's advice.  I'm curious about the health benefits of marijuana ever since I saw that article on the infant/baby who would have multiple seizures a day and marijuana has helped to greatly reduce that number.  (I don't know if it's true or not, but it's a good story.)

 

I can guarantee you this:  No 'baby' is smoking the marijuana, and I doubt they are chewing it (like chewing tobacco).

 

If you could take it in a pill form, or in some other way that it is treated more like a medicine instead of a recreational drug (my own opinion here), then that would be more beneficial and avoid destructive habits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not correct.  If your doctor tells you that to cure you from leukemia you will need stem cells infusion from an aborted baby and your spiritual adviser tells you that abortion is immoral, you go get another doctor.  Why?  Because... aborted babies are not the only source of stem cells.

 

Just like marijuana is not the only cure for whatever it is that's ailing you.

 

My brother is a doctor.  Doctors are supposed to heal holistically - that is, take into account the entire person.  Medical treatment, therefore, should not go against the patient's conscience because mental health is an important part of a patient's health. 

 

 

US Law 101:  Federal Law trumps State Law.  That is why, even if Kentucky and Delaware did not sign the 13th Amendment, all their slaves became free when the 13th Amendment got ratified when Georgia got on board completing the 3/4 of all States requirement to amend the Federal Constutition..

 

 

 

If I needed stem cell from an aborted fetus, I would have that too.. Why, cause you can make stem cells for just that purpose. Them cell is the cutting edge of medical science, and I would not have a spiritual advistor get in the way of that. And that is that. And Mormons do believe under the right circumstance, when it affect the mothers life and health, its prudent to even have an abortion. Now we can argue, but that is just a waste of time. I rather just vote as a nation on that one, and in the end keep prying eyes away from private lives.

 

So much of this is opinion, doctors have many different ideas on what medicine is. That is why there are so many different branches of it, and different ethics behind everything. But, when Obama said he would not prosecute, that is a validation of the exectation of the law of the land. Now congress has not passed the resolution yet, but that is all political. Maybe this will be the issue that swings in the next Democrat next election cycle I dont know.

 

"Moral & Ethical - can you tell your Bishop and Stake President that you follow the Word of Wisdom and perform temple (and priesthood) ordinances worthily?"

 

Yes, you can. Because in the end what you take as Medicine is none of their business when it comes to that, as long as you under a doctors care. Bottom line is, Marijuana is too political and the church should stay out of it!!! Now that said, I don't smoke marijuana, I am not incurrably ill!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

 

If I needed stem cell from an aborted fetus, I would have that too.. Why, cause you can make stem cells for just that purpose. Them cell is the cutting edge of medical science, and I would not have a spiritual advistor get in the way of that. And that is that. And Mormons do believe under the right circumstance, when it affect the mothers life and health, its prudent to even have an abortion. Now we can argue, but that is just a waste of time. I rather just vote as a nation on that one, and in the end keep prying eyes away from private lives.

 

So much of this is opinion, doctors have many different ideas on what medicine is. That is why there are so many different branches of it, and different ethics behind everything. But, when Obama said he would not prosecute, that is a validation of the exectation of the law of the land. Now congress has not passed the resolution yet, but that is all political. Maybe this will be the issue that swings in the next Democrat next election cycle I dont know.

 

"Moral & Ethical - can you tell your Bishop and Stake President that you follow the Word of Wisdom and perform temple (and priesthood) ordinances worthily?"

 

Yes, you can. Because in the end what you take as Medicine is none of their business when it comes to that, as long as you under a doctors care. Bottom line is, Marijuana is too political and the church should stay out of it!!! Now that said, I don't smoke marijuana, I am not incurrably ill!!!!

 

So... your God is the President of the United States of America and your doctor...  that's fine...

 

But that's not what we, the LDS believe.

 

If the President of the United States of America all of a sudden declares a Purge Day (it's a movie opening in theaters soon)... that all crimes are legal including murder from 8PM to 8AM on July 4, 2014....

 

It's not all of a sudden going to be MORAL to do so.

 

If your doctor declares that having a Purge Day is the cure to cancer...

 

It's not all of a sudden going to be MORAL to do so.

 

Of course, you are free to choose what moral code you follow for yourself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Hidden by pam, May 13, 2014 - Not necessary to conversation.
Hidden by pam, May 13, 2014 - Not necessary to conversation.

Purge Day will only come in the time of the zombies and only apply to the dead.

Share this post


Link to post

Hobomidget,

 

You can hold whatever opinion you want, you can do whatever you what.  What you don't get to do is selectively choose your consequence, nor do you get to force others to agree with you.

 

If there is someone who chooses to use medical MJ for their condition that is their choice and right.  However if their bishop is of the understanding that medical MJ breaks the word of wisdom.  Then the bishop has every right not to sign off on a recommend for that person and potentially restrict other church worthiness related things.  He is the gatekeeper that is his job, the medical MJ user has no right to expect his desires and understanding to trump the bishops.  That person could appeal to the Stake President (Who could override the Bishop) but that is it, barring a more official church policy being given.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... your God is the President of the United States of America and your doctor...  that's fine...

 

But that's not what we, the LDS believe.

 

If the President of the United States of America all of a sudden declares a Purge Day (it's a movie opening in theaters soon)... that all crimes are legal including murder from 8PM to 8AM on July 4, 2014....

 

It's not all of a sudden going to be MORAL to do so.

 

If your doctor declares that having a Purge Day is the cure to cancer...

 

It's not all of a sudden going to be MORAL to do so.

 

Of course, you are free to choose what moral code you follow for yourself.

That is a rediculouse argument. Your argument, is not to allow the incurribly ill to have a medical treatment that suits them, and not to handicap medical science. Yes, that sounds religouse to me, because it has absolutely no logic.

 

"If there is someone who chooses to use medical MJ for their condition that is their choice and right.  However if their bishop is of the understanding that medical MJ breaks the word of wisdom.  Then the bishop has every right not to sign off on a recommend for that person and potentially restrict other church worthiness related things.  He is the gatekeeper that is his job, the medical MJ user has no right to expect his desires and understanding to trump the bishops."

 

Well than, atleast we will know who to go after on "Purge" day than.

 

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

That is a rediculouse argument. Your argument, is not to allow the incurribly ill to have a medical treatment that suits them, and not to handicap medical science. Yes, that sounds religouse to me, because it has absolutely no logic.

 

"If there is someone who chooses to use medical MJ for their condition that is their choice and right.  However if their bishop is of the understanding that medical MJ breaks the word of wisdom.  Then the bishop has every right not to sign off on a recommend for that person and potentially restrict other church worthiness related things.  He is the gatekeeper that is his job, the medical MJ user has no right to expect his desires and understanding to trump the bishops."

 

Well than, atleast we will know who to go after on "Purge" day than.

 

:P

 

It has absolutely complete logic.  You can't understand the logic because you have this set idea that ONLY medical marijuana is the cure.  There is no proof, not even in the latest medical science, that medical marijuana is the ONLY cure to ANY illness.

 

So, when the bishop says don't use marijuana, he is simply saying, go choose a different medicine.  Like choosing Advil over Tylenol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has absolutely complete logic.  You can't understand the logic because you have this set idea that ONLY medical marijuana is the cure.  There is no proof, not even in medicine, that medical marijuana is the ONLY cure to ANY illness.

It's not seen as a cure, but as treatment for things such as some cancers (gives one the desire to eat, helps relieve pain, etc) and it doesn't have some of the nastier side effects of the accepted medication.

I'd trust marijuana before I trust those other medications...

But ultimately my existance is worth more to me then really anything else. And when faced with my own mortality, who's to say what I would do to prolong it.

People face death in all sorts of ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It's not seen as a cure, but as treatment for things such as some cancers (gives one the desire to eat, helps relieve pain, etc) and it doesn't have some of the nastier side effects of the accepted medication.

I'd trust marijuana before I trust those other medications...

But ultimately my existance is worth more to me then really anything else. And when faced with my own mortality, who's to say what I would do to prolong it.

People face death in all sorts of ways.

 

Sure.  And there are people who prefer to die than go against their deeply held faith.  There are some things I would die for and there are some things that I would probably go against what I understand God's commandments to be - for example, I will sacrfice my life for my kids, but if it is commit murder or have my child murdered, man, that would be very hard but I think in this circumstance I can be capable of murder...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted · Hidden by pam, May 13, 2014 - Per mod discussion
Hidden by pam, May 13, 2014 - Per mod discussion

It has absolutely complete logic.  You can't understand the logic because you have this set idea that ONLY medical marijuana is the cure.  There is no proof, not even in the latest medical science, that medical marijuana is the ONLY cure to ANY illness.

 

So, when the bishop says don't use marijuana, he is simply saying, go choose a different medicine.  Like choosing Advil over Tylenol.

 

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/LegalizationNation/archives/2014/05/13/prevention-of-alzheimers-could-hinge-on-marijuana-science

 

Tetra-hydra-canibinol also slows the growths of many cancers in the human body. You can buy Sythetic Canabinoids, that are sold, but are very expensive, and they cause anxiety, and other things cause its not naturally spun, so the electrons are out of wack. This is just a further example on how Cruel the church can be regarding issues they have no busniness getting involved in.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest

In your scenario it would likely be a self defense issue, so it would not be murder to take out the pos that has your child.

 

I don't know.  I don't think self extends to another person, even if it was the child.  Killing somebody who has my child when my own life is not in danger can be considered vigilante-ism and would still be murder, I think.

 

By the way, I'm using child here as my offspring of any age, and not necessarily my offspring up to the age of 18...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know.  I don't think self extends to another person, even if it was the child.  Killing somebody who has my child when my own life is not in danger can be considered vigilante-ism and would still be murder, I think.

 

By the way, I'm using child here as my offspring of any age, and not necessarily my offspring up to the age of 18...

 

 

It depends on the circumstances.  If there is a threat of imminent serious bodily injury or death, then you are wrong in the above assertion.

 

Most states laws will read similar to Utah:  http://le.utah.gov/code/TITLE76/htm/76_02_040200.htm.  If you read it, you will see what is legally required.  There is a line between justified and unjustified and those who think they are willing to engage in self defense actions better know the difference.

 

Murder is not the same as killing.

 

Anyone who believes they are willing to use deadly force should familiarize themselves with the deadly force laws of their state.

 

If you don't think you could take action with deadly force, then this is all a moot point.

 

Hopefully it is a moot point period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this