In the last post in this series I took a look at the motivation to use intoxicating substances with which this article primarily deals—medical reasons. At this point I'd like to begin to observe the inconsistency with which most of us approach this topic and make a plea, for the Church anyway, from the special revelation of God, for us to consider this topic very carefully; and for the rest of the world, by the revelation of God's wisdom that all can enjoy through what we know to be true in nature, to make the very same careful considerations.
In addition to the motives behind use, it is also the purpose of this article to compare and contrast the "nonessential" ingestion of drugs to what is increasingly alleged as their "essential" use for the purpose of what is professed to be an improved quality of life. So in light of the Scriptural teaching of the moderate use of alcohol (and by extension, other “non-essential” substances), how is the Church to view the use of medically “essential” substances such as mao inhibitors or even medicinal marijuana? And as related inquiries: why don’t we tolerate the use of alcohol as an antidepressant the same way much of the Church tolerates the use of Prozac or Paxil? Is it unacceptable to use those drugs in moderately recreational ways as alcohol is used? Why also, where legal of course, is it objectionable to moderately use marijuana to modify mood or behavior, or to ease the bitterness of those who are suffering physically and emotionally, or to anesthetize the dying? As we consider these questions we must also admit that it is different to suggest or condone the use of a substance such as marijuana as a mood altering medication than it is to suggest its use in a situation where a person is dying of cancer and the pain is lessened in some small way by its use. Mood-alteration lends itself to the highly subjective “art” of trying to improve one’s quality of life, while the use of pain killers and other such drugs during death is a less speculative way to ease one’s suffering at a hopeless stage, and is widely accepted in nearly all cultures which probably lends credibility to its wisdom via “creational” or general revelation. Additionally, in the case of marijuana in particular, the method of use must also be considered. There is a substantial difference in the inhalation of its smoke and taking a pill containing THC isolated from the plant. In the case of alcohol, coffee and tobacco, as I mentioned earlier, they have an aesthetic value that synthetic anti-depressants and other mood-altering drugs such as Ritalin do not have. So it also is with substances such as marijuana, cocaine, opium, heroin, and the like. Though they have a functionally recreational value (right or wrong) they do not have in my estimation—which I believe to be grounded in Scripture—any aesthetic recreational worth. Also, due to the degree and quality of intoxication that is produced by their minimal use (which in a sense causes the tendency for their abuse) those substances are almost impossible to use moderately. And I am not speaking of moderation in the sense of occasional use, but moderation in the sense of limited intoxication at even one use. As Americans I believe we tend to think of and accept medicines as being more likely synthetic and substances that are intended for aesthetically recreational use are less likely synthetic. What is more is that substances such as cocaine, heroin, morphine and opium are further down the spectrum of synthesis thus making their use more culturally accepted in medical applications than in recreational applications; whereas less synthesized substances such as alcohol and tobacco, due in some measure to their intrinsic properties, are more likely regarded by the culture as recreational—both in the functional and aesthetic sense. This would, in addition to the limited application of their function, tend to delegitimize the use of synthetic medications as aesthetically recreational, both from a cultural and biblical perspective. Some cultures that are less consumer-driven or which do not have the same taboos in place may not see a functional distinction between the use of alcohol and say, Prozac. If the fact that Prozac and Paxil and other prescription drugs are synthetic does play into the cultural consideration, then we should all ask if humanity wasn’t better off fighting melancholy and anxiety with an occasional glass of wine or mug of beer. But to exhaust that inquiry would of course require the entire scope of another article.
In addition to the motives behind use, it is also the purpose of this article to compare and contrast the "nonessential" ingestion of drugs to what is increasingly alleged as their "essential" use for the purpose of what is professed to be an improved quality of life. So in light of the Scriptural teaching of the moderate use of alcohol (and by extension, other “non-essential” substances), how is the Church to view the use of medically “essential” substances such as mao inhibitors or even medicinal marijuana? And as related inquiries: why don’t we tolerate the use of alcohol as an antidepressant the same way much of the Church tolerates the use of Prozac or Paxil? Is it unacceptable to use those drugs in moderately recreational ways as alcohol is used? Why also, where legal of course, is it objectionable to moderately use marijuana to modify mood or behavior, or to ease the bitterness of those who are suffering physically and emotionally, or to anesthetize the dying? As we consider these questions we must also admit that it is different to suggest or condone the use of a substance such as marijuana as a mood altering medication than it is to suggest its use in a situation where a person is dying of cancer and the pain is lessened in some small way by its use. Mood-alteration lends itself to the highly subjective “art” of trying to improve one’s quality of life, while the use of pain killers and other such drugs during death is a less speculative way to ease one’s suffering at a hopeless stage, and is widely accepted in nearly all cultures which probably lends credibility to its wisdom via “creational” or general revelation. Additionally, in the case of marijuana in particular, the method of use must also be considered. There is a substantial difference in the inhalation of its smoke and taking a pill containing THC isolated from the plant. In the case of alcohol, coffee and tobacco, as I mentioned earlier, they have an aesthetic value that synthetic anti-depressants and other mood-altering drugs such as Ritalin do not have. So it also is with substances such as marijuana, cocaine, opium, heroin, and the like. Though they have a functionally recreational value (right or wrong) they do not have in my estimation—which I believe to be grounded in Scripture—any aesthetic recreational worth. Also, due to the degree and quality of intoxication that is produced by their minimal use (which in a sense causes the tendency for their abuse) those substances are almost impossible to use moderately. And I am not speaking of moderation in the sense of occasional use, but moderation in the sense of limited intoxication at even one use. As Americans I believe we tend to think of and accept medicines as being more likely synthetic and substances that are intended for aesthetically recreational use are less likely synthetic. What is more is that substances such as cocaine, heroin, morphine and opium are further down the spectrum of synthesis thus making their use more culturally accepted in medical applications than in recreational applications; whereas less synthesized substances such as alcohol and tobacco, due in some measure to their intrinsic properties, are more likely regarded by the culture as recreational—both in the functional and aesthetic sense. This would, in addition to the limited application of their function, tend to delegitimize the use of synthetic medications as aesthetically recreational, both from a cultural and biblical perspective. Some cultures that are less consumer-driven or which do not have the same taboos in place may not see a functional distinction between the use of alcohol and say, Prozac. If the fact that Prozac and Paxil and other prescription drugs are synthetic does play into the cultural consideration, then we should all ask if humanity wasn’t better off fighting melancholy and anxiety with an occasional glass of wine or mug of beer. But to exhaust that inquiry would of course require the entire scope of another article.
The next post will conclude the plea for consistency.
No comments:
Post a Comment