But here's the question. Does one need to have symptoms of the adverse health effect to conclude that it is adversely affecting your health? If I know that doing an activity is going to lead to an adverse effect, do I actually have to wait until the adverse effect occurs before it is sinful for me to do that activity? Wouldn't doing the activity with the anticipation of harm be pretty bad too? How is this different than say, drunk driving? If I drive drunk some night, knowing that it significantly increases my risk of causing my own injury or death, am I sinning? Even if I don't happen to get in an accident that particular night? Or is drunk driving only a sin if it actually results in injury/death (breaking the law notwithstanding)?

Holy cow. Didn't know that!

Drunk driving is not comparable (for the record, law not withstanding, how sinful that is depends on many factors: arguably when there were very few cars and they were slower, etc, it would have been usually a venial sin)

So, I assume to never drink a drop of alcohol, nor any grilled meat, nor use cosmetics, and presumably you avoid as far as you can being around cars

For example, smoking a cigar even every day does not significantly increase risk of bad health. One must smoke more than two a day for there is be any statistically significant increase in risk. Now everyone is different, and indeed there is a dramatic difference in people with regard to his. Genetically some are predisposed to being affected by nitrosamines and some are genetically resistant. The risk to the latter is far less. So one should use prudence. Do I easily become habituated to things, how has my family that has used it handled it...were they all ocassional smokers or were they chain smokers. How has their health been affected? Same questions that would be involved when there is a concern over alcohol, which also causes cancer apparently.

Fried bacon has nitrosamines, as do all cured meats. Rubber does too. Therefore you are an evil wicked person who is going to hell should you let you child near any rubber, or ever cook bacon, right?


It is very telling that when nitrosamines were discovered in everything from beer to bacon to lipstick steps were take to reduce it and the government accepts certain levels as non harmful. But we are told repeatedly that no level of tobacco smoke is safe, and that any tobacco is evil and dangerous, even Snus which has less carcinogens than many lipsticks.

Heck is that right? The lipstick you mother used? Up to 150 ppm nitrosamines. Standard cigarette smoke? 137 to 238 ppm. American Snuff? 127.9 ppm. Snus? 2.8 ppm. Now modern cosmetics in the US have dropped that level of carcinogenic nitrosamines, varying from 3 ppm to 50 ppm. Funny snus has to have that cancer warning and not your lipstick....

They did dabble in making a "low carcinogen" cigarette but the government sued (of course)

Not unheard of though. Before I got sick (or better said, knew I was sick) I became a smoker. It is at the suggestion of my doctors that I don't quit. To do so would put my health at further risk.

Long term, it would be better for me, but in the short term, the risk of doing so is too high. \

Actually, that is not true either. I was listening to the radio not long ago and there was discussion on stress and how stress does more harm to the body than smoking, than eating poorly, etc. If smoking relieves stress, it most certainly can be a health benefit.

Lisa

But I'm not suggesting that every single cigarette smoked would be sinful, just like I wouldn't suggest that every drink is sinful too. I'm saying that whatever the threshold is - whether it is 2 cigarettes per day, or whatever - where the research shows that it has a significant negative effect on health, that to smoke THAT level might be sinful.

Right, so a person who is not easily addicted, wouldn't be playing with fire as much as a person who does easily get addicted, and perhaps that person's threshold for "sinfulness" would be higher than the highly addictive person's threshold. The few cigarettes I smoked where at a rate of once a week. I recognized the beginning of addiction in myself after about 6 weeks of this. If I had started smoking one cigarette per day, it is very likely that I would've gotten addicted and ended up smoking a lot more than that. Knowing that, and doing it anyway, without a better reason than "it's fun and my friends do it" would have been tempting myself to serious harm to smoke one cigarette per day. I can't see that as anything other than sinful. We've talked a lot on this board about not tempting ourselves with sexual sin - how putting yourself into a situation that makes sexual sin very likely is dangerous, and possibly sinful itself. This isn't different. Why would there be a different standard - if you are at risk for committing sin (like the sinful, immoderate, use of cigarettes), then putting yourself in the near occasion of that sin (which might have different details for different people) is not a good thing.

Now hold on, that's a pretty inflammatory leap from "smoking can be sinful" to "smokers are evil, wicked, and bound for hell" don't you think? I'd expect to hear someone respond that way if I just told them that premarital sex was wrong and they didn't want to stop having it. I see this as an intellectual discussion about a particular activity, not a judgment on any particular person who might partake in it. I know there are smokers on this board, and I don't know if you are one of them - I'm making no judgement on the value or goodness of people who smoke. I hope that smokers can have this discussion without getting overly defensive, just as I would be willing to calmly discuss how sinful my problem with overeating is (and yes, I do believe it is sinful, and no, I don't believe I am evil and wicked).



Well that is where the threshold of risk comes in. First of all, I don't know what the risk is of putting something carcinogenic on your skin is compared to inhaling it, so listing numbers isn't enough to equate harmfulness. But if it became common knowledge that daily use of my mother's lipstick put me at significantly higher risk for cancer, and if I continued to use it at this unsafe level, would that really be reasonable? Honestly, I believe that this would be rather vain of me, and vanity is a sin. I believe this to be true of anything. God gave us our bodies to take care of. Why wouldn't we have an obligation to not do things that are harmful to it? Obviously, sometimes there are risks and benefits to be weighed, and "just reasons" as was mentioned before (ie. Jayne described the "just reason" for her to smoke now that quitting would cause too high of a risk). But take the benefits away, take the just reason out, and find the activity that is knowingly harmful to your body - how can that be ok to do to the body God gave you? It simply doesn't make sense.

I am a moderate smoker.
There are months when I smoke six or eight cigarettes in a weekeend and then I'll go six months without smoking, because it is inconvenient or I just have no desire to. When pleasure is taken when inconvenient, it is not a pleasure but an addiction. Unless I can sit down with my wine in a civilized fashion or with a book, I don't bother to smoke in a hurry in the rain ...... Its not pleasurable to me.

IMHO, the majority of people could smoke the way I do, but, society has them conditioned to think that "one drag and you are addicted and it is worse than a heroin addiction", so, they are either scared to death to have one cigarette or they just think "what the heck, I am addicted" and smoke immoderately.

Cigars are awesome! I just finished a cigar, and drank 2 Guinness while I was at it! On the Columbia River, enjoying the sun, and listening to 70s and 80s music. Fantastic!

double post...

Based on the post you are doubling, I assume that you just finished TWO cigars, drank 4 Guinness, and listened to 140s(?) and 160s(?) music. {OK, the last two doublings don't make any sense.}


Edward Pothier

There weren't any saints who smoke before the discovery of Christopher Columbus on October 15, 1492.

Tobacco grows natively on both Northern and Southern Americas.

I'm agreeing with Doom here.

I drink a couple of beers a night (on average); on CCD night I might have none or one (after classes of course!). Could I drink more? Sure. However I know its unhealthy and would likely lead to drunkeness.

The same applies to smoking. Just because one has a cigarette or two a day doesn't mean they can't practice the virtue of temperance and stop at two.

Nearly anything we do could lead to sin; too much eating, watching too much television and etc. About the only thing I don't see as ever leading to sin is too much sincere praying.

Even the last one, if it causes one to neglect duty, can be sinful!

I had not considered that!

When it comes to the eternal flames, saints don't smoke.

"Smoking isn't a sin, it's just stupid." -Mother Angelica

No offense, but Mother Angelica has no idea what she is talking about here.

People need to get off their brainwashed thrones and stop demonizing smokers and smoking

Have you ever taken care of someone in their death throws of lung cancer - still caving a cigarette, or lighting up while they smoke through the hole they cut in their throat?

Mother is right!