Smoking at the crag

"light up or leave me alone"

Mike Mellenthin wrote:

Burroughs would have smoked at the crag.

Good point.

Probably would have used a hip belay to safeguard his wife too. 

Marc801 C wrote:

If you bothered to understand what I wrote you'd see I'm not attacking his religion. Admittedly there are still lots of things I don't fully understand about LDS doctrine - in this case why his church insists on treating their believers like children instead of adults with actual free-agency, but a lot of churches do that - but I was more bothered by his choice to rationalize violence and murder yet feel that nudity and sexuality are something he shouldn't see. 

One of the things I didn't realize until I moved here is that if you're from away, living in Utah constitutes a graduate level crash course in comparative religion. I've had similar  conversations on other topics with Mormons, lapsed Mormons, non-Utah Mormons, Jack Mormons, and ex-Mormons. Trying to understand the nuances is sort of fascinating. So far you're the only one rude enough to call me an asshole.

I mentioned some of the other stuff 'cause I know a lot of non-Mormons on this site don't know any doctrine. And frankly, a Mormon bishop is a low-level position as compared to bishops in other Christian religions - a point of confusion for many non-Mormons. 

And Spencer is 34 according to his profile, so let's stop calling him a kid.

With the way I talk, and my obvious immaturity and naivety, it's no wonder people consider me a kid.  Anyhow...

I can't speak for the LDS church, and the MPAA doesn't speak for the LDS church either.  As I said before, I think that our sensitivity to various forms of media and content has to be gauged by how it makes us feel.  If it makes us feel bad and we know it's offensive to the Spirit (the Holy Ghost), then it's clearly something we should stay away from.  If it is uplifting, wholesome, praise-worthy, and of good-report, then it's probably okay.

My personal choice to watch movies like Lord of the Rings (which have lots of violence) instead of movies that have some kind of nudity, thinking one is less bad than the other, is based upon how bad I've felt experiencing either type of content.  In the strictest sense, if I was being as obedient to the principles of my religion as possible, then there would be almost nothing I could safely watch on TV or at the movies.  So yes, I am guilty, and I'm not going to argue with you if you also label me a hypocrite.

I know that many are probably turned off or immediately offended in some way whenever I mention the terms "Holy Ghost" or "spirituality," etc., and I'm sure MP is not the appropriate place to bring it up anyway.  (Sorry.)  In any case, I found a really good scripture the other day that I think touches on this idea.  FWIW, here it is...

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/nt/1-cor/2.14

It's hard to imagine a person living in the SLC valley thinking a few whiffs of second hand smoke is a threat to their health.  I was there in March and had a sharp painful cough, and this is coming from Denver air. There were four of us and two had the painful cough.

My personal choice to watch movies like Lord of the Rings (which have lots of violence) instead of movies that have some kind of nudity, thinking one is less bad than the other, is based upon how bad I've felt experiencing either type of content.

violence is more acceptable than the human body.

wow.

simplyput wrote:

My personal choice to watch movies like Lord of the Rings (which have lots of violence) instead of movies that have some kind of nudity, thinking one is less bad than the other, is based upon how bad I've felt experiencing either type of content.

violence is more acceptable than the human body.

wow.

thread drifting again: but violence being more accepted than sexuality was/is culturally spoon fed to us repeatedly through out our lives.
it is so sad that bombs/war is aired, footage of people being killed is fine, but the nipple....fear the nipple, etc

someone drill a pipe in a rock for me...

Jim Turner wrote:

It's hard to imagine a person living in the SLC valley thinking a few whiffs of second hand smoke is a threat to their health.  I was there in March and had a sharp painful cough, and this is coming from Denver air. There were four of us and two had the painful cough.

So I think you're right.  A little 2nd hand isn't going to kill anybody.  All the same, I'd really rather not breath it in.  Thanks.

I'm really surprised that smoking isn't some kind of activity that has died off.  Smoking only continues to be a problem, because people who have never smoked, despite all recent medical evidence against smoking (which I'm sure they have access to in some form or another), have chosen to try smoking for the first time, then they become hooked on it.

We've talked about a lot of stupid things people can do and say in this thread (I'm a prime example), but trying your first cigarette has got to be the dumbest of them all.  Why does anyone think smoking is cool?  Why is smoking weed cool?  Besides the marijuana, when you smoke it, you're inhaling cancer-causing smoke into your lungs.

I'll never be a slave to nicotine.  No thanks.

I don't think anyone said or implied smoking cigarettes as cool. But it is enjoyable.

No one said or implied smoking marijuana was cool. But it is enjoyable.

we're not teenagers anymore man trying to be cool went out the window a LONG time ago. 

Spencer Parkin wrote:

I'm really surprised that smoking isn't some kind of activity that has died off.  Smoking only continues to be a problem, because people who have never smoked, despite all recent medical evidence against smoking (which I'm sure they have access to in some form or another), have chosen to try smoking for the first time, then they become hooked on it.

Recall that nicotine is more addictive than heroin, cocaine, and opioids.

Besides the marijuana, when you smoke it, you're inhaling cancer-causing smoke into your lungs.

You inhale far less smoke from weed than from cigarettes simply because far less is needed for the desired effect.

s.price wrote:

Why does anyone think following the teachings of an obviously hallucinatory man cool? 

I can think of no religion that does not have ample aspects of sheer lunacy and fantasy. Magic man that lives in the sky?? Really? WTF?

Marc801 C wrote:

Recall that nicotine is more addictive than heroin, cocaine, and opioids.

It doesn't matter how addictive it is if all we're talking about is not doing it in the first place.  No one is born addicted (unless, of course, the mother smoked during the pregnancy.)  The point is that new smokers are being created every day.  And how is that happening?  Is it a social thing?  Do they not believe the prevailing medical wisdom?  Are they being convinced that it's harmless by those who already smoke?  Are they just curious?  I don't know.  But I wish smoking could become extinct.  I also wish the modern combustion engine could become extinct in favor of electric vehicles.

Spencer Parkin wrote:

It doesn't matter how addictive it is if all we're talking about is not doing it in the first place.  No one is born addicted (unless, of course, the mother smoked during the pregnancy.)  The point is that new smokers are being created every day.  And how is that happening?  Is it a social thing?  Do they not believe the prevailing medical wisdom?  Are they being convinced that it's harmless by those who already smoke?  Are they just curious?  I don't know.  But I wish smoking could become extinct.  I also wish the modern combustion engine could become extinct in favor of electric vehicles.

I'd venture that it has to do with the fact that not everyone is born with a moral compass shaped like a church official and the curiosity of a deflated tire...

Which in the case of tobacco is a good thing.

Spencer Parkin wrote:

It doesn't matter how addictive it is if all we're talking about is not doing it in the first place.  No one is born addicted (unless, of course, the mother smoked during the pregnancy.)  The point is that new smokers are being created every day.  And how is that happening?  Is it a social thing?  Do they not believe the prevailing medical wisdom?  Are they being convinced that it's harmless by those who already smoke?  Are they just curious?  I don't know.  But I wish smoking could become extinct.  I also wish the modern combustion engine could become extinct in favor of electric vehicles.

Don't guess. Facts are your friends:

https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/adult_data/cig_smoking/index.htm

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/11/12/smoking-among-u-s-adults-has-fallen-to-historic-lows-these-7-charts-show-who-still-lights-up-the-most/?utm_term=.18ed9635590c

Spencer Parkin wrote:

It doesn't matter how addictive it is if all we're talking about is not doing it in the first place.  No one is born addicted (unless, of course, the mother smoked during the pregnancy.)  The point is that new smokers are being created every day.  And how is that happening?  Is it a social thing?  Do they not believe the prevailing medical wisdom?  Are they being convinced that it's harmless by those who already smoke?  Are they just curious?  I don't know.  But I wish smoking could become extinct.  I also wish the modern combustion engine could become extinct in favor of electric vehicles.

In addition I also believe that current study suggests that there are biological elements that factor into addiction which individuals are born with. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Addictive_personality

In the U.S., there are about 600 chemicals approved for use in cigarettes.  Many of them are added to speed nicotine delivery to the brain, which means that they are intentionally added to make cigs more addictive.  Many people know this, but they may not know that all 600 are also approved food additives.  They are almost entirely made from natural gas, coal, crude.

But I still don't care if people smoke at the crag.  Just don't smoke in my truck or house.  I've been living with or around chain smokers for 47 years so maybe I'm just desensitized.

just out of curiosity, is anybody as shocked/amazed as i am at the number of young folks that continue to start smoking?  i find it pretty mind boggling.

slim wrote:

just out of curiosity, is anybody as shocked/amazed as i am at the number of young folks that continue to start smoking?  i find it pretty mind boggling.

With E-Cigs as popular as they are I am not in the least bit surprised.  

IDK lung cancer and heart disease are pretty lit.

eli poss wrote:

What's the issue, provide weed is legal in that state?

I'd rather see that than a bunch of roaches on the ground 

It is still illegal to smoke weed in any public space even in Colorado.  So if you are smoking weed at the crag, you are technically breaking the law.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

But why not just carry up a pipe?

I personally don't like to smoke when I'm climbing because weed makes climbing seem more like work than play. However, as a climber, I think the idea of smoking out of a rock is a lot cooler than a piece of glass. Also, the creative challenge of creating various smoking devices such as bubblers or bongs out of a rock seems like a fun activity.

I don't think I will actually go out and make a rock bong but if I did I would put it somewhere discrete. I think that a discretely placed smoking rock is not an issue in a place where smoking weed is legal and acceptable.