by sinis 30 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
http://www.forces.org/evidence/hamilton/other/nicotine.htm
http://healthfreedoms.org/2010/03/31/nicotine-shows-potential-medical-benefits/
http://www.scienceagogo.com/news/20031012195753data_trunc_sys.shtml
http://www.mayoclinic.org/medical-edge-newspaper-2010/may-14b.html
A bunch more out there. I have some friends who are researchers that work with nicotine and are finding some very useful properties for it...
Its not the nicotine its the carrier, ie tobacco. King James taxed the hell out of it because:
While the whole world was excited about the newly discovered tobacco, there were some people unhappy with it. King James I wrote, "Smoking is a custom loathsome to the eye, hateful to the nose, harmful to the brain, dangerous to the lungs, and in the black, stinking fume thereof nearest resembling the horrible Stygian smoke of the pit that is bottomless."
King James I did not like the idea of smoking and tried a lot of things to stop tobacco. Since doctors were using tobacco to cure diseases, they were upset that people were buying it without prescription because they were losing money. Knowing James' opinion about tobacco, they came to him for help. The next year, in 1604 the king increased the import tax on tobacco by 4,000 percent: from 2 pence/lb to 6 shillings 10 pence/lb.
At that point the using tobacco grew so much that there were 7,000 sellers in London alone. However, the tax increase really did its job. People were not able to pay a high price like this. The country officials were working hard on proving to the king that tobacco tax could have brought a really high profit to the treasury if it went lower, so he lowered the tax to 2 shillings/lb and the tobacco fans started buying it again.
Although James I had to change his intension to eliminate tobacco use by high taxes, he was still a staunch anti-smoker. In 1604 he wrote a book, Counterblaste to Tobacco, which clearly showed his attitude to smoking and unveiled all known tobacco-use flaws.
First of all, the king pointed out that the herb was introduced neither by king, nor by great conqueror, nor by learned doctor of physics, but was adopted from "unbaptized barbarians [Indians in the Americas]". Because of such doubtful origin of tobacco James wanted the users to "prove both necessary and profitable" application of it...
It would seem Gubermint does not want anyone to have any pleasure...
I usually read the thread before writing a comment, but this one was a no-brainer after reading the OP ...
CONTROL CONTROL CONTROL
tal
not to diss your thread,,, it's a valid question ... it was immediately clear to me, though, since I have a lot of distance due to my many years out of the cult ....
t
I wondered about that some time ago too. Nicotine gum, the patch, inhalers, etc would make it far easier to conceal the use of nicotine, just by virtue of the absence of the distinct odour of tobacco smoke.
I spoke with my doctor this week about a food addiction. The brain is so mallelable for bad behavior. I am older so addiction was a moral vice. So I am older but I am not brain dead. Addiction science has focused on addiction itself more than substances. Reading about how the brain can be affected at a very biolgical level, not any will power arguments, I could see Jesus, knowing this as a human and not limited by his historical time, embracing addicts. Shunning is the last thing He would do. Rather, He would definitely want no tobacco, alcohol, opiates used as an addiction. The Church would embrace rehab programs and further brain research.
Nicotine would be illegal in the State were it not for the millions in revenues it brings. Al Gore really ticked me off when he accepted the nomination. Remember he told such a moving story about his sister dying from nicotine. She was so young. The family had no idea. I was crying buckets for Al. Years later, the New York Times reported that Al and his brother-in-law kept the death crop for years afterwards. They received federal financing. She had notice. I wish I could report the details better b/c they showed a crass politician pulling at everyone's heart strings.
I do think the govt. should ban it as a public health measure. Shunning has not helped one person. I do not shove food down b/c I am evil and lust to be bad. Addiction. They should look it up in a dictionary. Addiction is so genetic, too. Some people inheirit bad systems. What Would Jesus DO?
Ban it??? Are you crazy? Since when does the government have the right to tell a citizen how to live, oh thats right in a socialist Eutopia. Drinking water can kill you just as fast as most "poisons" - everything in moderation. Who cares what jesus would do... figment of the imagination, just like pink unicorns...
the Watchtower tried to put themselves in the place of God and make the decision for you. . . . james_woods
Agreed james . . .
The problem they create all stems back to rule making . . . rather than leaving it to individual conscience. As soon as you make a rule . . . there comes the exceptions, contradictions, fallacies, hypocrisies, judgementalisms and controls. Son of God or not . . . it was the first thing Christ kicked into touch and laid into the Pharisees for.
IMO I think it has a lot to do with money. What the average smoker spends a week on cartons of cigarettes (and other banned items, e.g. lotto tickets) is a similar figure to a weekly donation into the KH contribution box. By controlling this aspect of the R&F's lifestyle, the WTBT$ ensures a small disposable income compared with that of your typical non-JW smoking window cleaner/caretaker/carpenter etc.
In my old congo the elders would deliver service meeting talks actively trying to discourage us from buying non-essentials such as a daily newspapers to ensure we'd make regular contributions!
