It Is Normally Sinful for an Underage Wisconsin Catholic Farm Boy to Regularly Use Chewing Tobacco

Thanks to tbhidc for his opening arguments and rebuttals.Rebuttals1. Legality and Underage & 2. Health combineda. P1P1. Catholics are morally bound to obey just laws of the land. Con provides an example of a trivial law. Such a law is neither based on Natural Law nor Divine Law, it is merely custom. However, such a law has no bearing on this debate as the law we are debating is not trivial in nature.The Church has a history of obeying Laws which it considers worse than the one we are discussing:Though innocent, Christ himself was obedient to the Jewish and Roman authorities unto death.St. Paul ordered Christian slaves to "be obedient to those who are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling, in the sincerity of your heart, as to Christ" Eph 6:5, though he invited them to buy their freedom: "Were you called while a slave? Do not worry about it; but if you are able also to become free, rather do that." 1 Cor 7:21If Jesus can be obedient unto an unjust crucifixion and St. Paul encourage Christians to endure slavery under Roman Law, the obedience of the underage to tobacco laws is laughably simple to obey.It is humorous that Con rails against a burden of proof about the law being unjust, when he implicitly acknowledges this requirement with 2 arguments.b. P2P2 The Tobacco Laws are JustCon makes 2 arguments regarding the unjustness of these laws.I) The law "extends beyond the limits of the government" because "the government does not exist to keep every single person healthy and happy. It exists in order to secure the public welfare of man."Con goes on to state "that the government is an instrument of God which must serve the common good. Not the private good."and;II) The law "deprives an individual of a good for no justifiable reason" because "chewing tobacco is not as unhealthy as you might think"On the surface these seem like strong arguments. However, they do not address the debate topic properly. Though Con presents these as two separate arguments they are really one in the same. They are both addressed through an understanding of the health consequences of chewing tobacco.If soil contamination in your City was equivalent to another Chernobyl, I believe all can agree that the Government has a duty to intervene on the public's behalf. When a drug like Thalidomide was introduced and numerous children suffered defects (including: deafness, blindness, disfigurement, cleft palate, many other internal disabilities, and of course the disabilities most associated with thalidomide: phocomelia [12]) we can justly expect government to intervene in defence of the common good. Governments were justified as a defence of the common good in banning asbestos as a construction material due to serious associated health issues. [13]So we can see that it is a matter of common good for the Government to limit or restrict materials or drugs in certain circumstances. The issue is a matter or proportionality of the negative consequences versus the restrictions on personal liberties. So let's analyze the health effects of chewing tobacco:i) Addictive [14]Nicotine is:• 1000 X more potent than alcohol• 10-100 X potent than barbituates• 5-10 X more potent than cocaine or morphine• Tobacco is addictive as heroine (as a mood & behavior altering agent)Withdrawal symptoms include: [14]Irritability, anger, hostility, anxiety, nervousness, panic, poor concentration, disorientation, lightheadedness, sleep disturbances, constipation, mouth ulcers, dry mouth, sore throat-gums- or tongue, pain in limbs, sweating, depression, fatigue, fearfulness, sense of loss, craving tobacco, hungerThese "Symptoms may last from a few weeks to several months. After withdrawal subsides... urges for nicotine (for the effects of the drug) occur in response to all kinds of cues to smoke or chew." [14]Research suggests that children and teens may be especially sensitive to nicotine, making it easier for them to become addicted. [15]ii) Heart disease:The results of 11 studies from Sweden and North America were compared: "...among users of smokeless tobacco products compared with non-users. Smokeless tobacco caused 0.5% of all heart attacks in the United States and 5.6% in Sweden. The products were also the cause of 1.7% of stroke deaths in the United States and 5.4% in Sweden." [16]iii) Other Health EffectsA Meta study of smokeless tobacco products (STP), including Swedish snus, was conducted and the results examined [17]:• All STP contain nicotine, a potent addictive substance• The major group of carcinogens in STP includes non-volatile tobacco-specific nitrosamines (TSNA) and N-nitroamino acids• TSNA levels in one brand of Swedish snus to be 2.0 microgram/gram• TNSA levels in 6 American brands varied from 1.3 to 9.2 microgram/gram• Use of moist snuff results in localised lesions• gingival retractions caused by moist snuff are not reversible• a wide variety of STP causes cancer... the pancreas has been identified as a main target organ in two Scandinavian cohort studies... several studies from the USA have provided additional support for a causal association between the use of smokeless tobacco and pancreatic cancer94% of pancreatic cancer patients die within 5 years. [18]The addictive nature of STPs was omitted in Con's arguments. Con's health based arguments focused on oral cancer from Swedish snuff. However Swedish snus only accounts for 6% of US snus consumption. [19] At 6% market penetration, this cannot be consider normal usage in Wisconsin. There seems to be contention as to the effects of STP on heart disease between Con's 2007 study and the 2009 study I presented. [16]3. SexualityThough Con jokingly uses Dahmer & Gein as a debate point, he has unwittingly provided a devastating argument for Pro. The argument of the actions of Dahmer & Gein being caused by their sexuality is false according to Catholic doctrine which states that one's sexuality is good and a gift from God [20]. Thus they were personally guilty of a lack of chastity through concupiscence.However, the effect of STPs on the male's sexuality is twofold:Con noted that nicotine can cause erectile dysfunction. This can result in: [21]• Insecurity• Low self-esteem• Guilt• Fear• Anger & AggressivenessChewing Tobacco can also cause damage to the man's sperm. In frequent STP users, 14% of semen samples were absent of sperm. Additionally, sperm concentration, motility, and morphology were all affected by STP users. [22]Thus use of STP can affect men's ability to fully partake in his sexuality and may also result in additional deaths or deformation of his unborn children.ConclusionCon asked how bad does something have to be to make it immoral. The immorality comes from non-adherence to a just law. While the justice of various laws is debatable, this debate concerns the use of chewing tobacco by underage males in Wisconsin. Wisconsin has chosen a fair and just balance regarding the use of an addictive substance.This law is just due to the highly addictive nature of nicotine (which is even greater for minors), and the associated negative health effects for him and his potential children. Once the individual has reached the age of majority, he has the ability to choose to consume these products. This is a fair balance of liberty vs common good and in keeping with Catholic doctrine.As Catholics are bound to follow just laws, the only conclusion to the debate is that: It Is Normally Sinful for an Underage Wisconsin Catholic Farm Boy to Regularly Use Chewing Tobacco just as Christ Himself was obedient to the law unto death.[12] http://tinyurl.com...[13] http://tinyurl.com...[14] http://tinyurl.com...[15] http://tinyurl.com...[16] http://tinyurl.com...[17] http://tinyurl.com...[18] http://tinyurl.com...[19] http://tinyurl.com...[20] http://tinyurl.com...[21] http://tinyurl.com...[22] http://tinyurl.com...