Anti-Smoking Campaign Is Anti-Freedom

Toogood ^ | 11/9/03 | Alan Caruba

[philetus]

I rest my case.

[Just another Joe]

Smoking is not a right.
Smoking is a freedom.
Even in a republic, freedoms can sometimes be taken for verifiable reason.

A govt imposed smoking ban on a privately owned business has no verifiable reason for it.

The three largest studies on ETS to date have found no valid statistical evidence that ETS causes any harm to a person that doesn't have a pre-existing medical condition.

While smoking can be correlated to an increased risk for some medical conditions, ETS cannot be correlated to ANY medical condition.

If you don't like the smell of tobacco don't frequent businesses that allow the smoking of tobacco.

Personal responsibility - what a concept.

[185JHP]

Sorry! My mistake!

[185JHP]

QUIX, I misakenly sent a reply to someone else, that I intended for you! (15). Government exists to govern, not to protect drugist outrages

[185JHP]

Make that (16). Sorry.

[Quix]

Personal responsibility, what a concept.

What a concept to avoid assaulting people in public places with offensive and hazardous substances they'd rather do without.

I've sometimes been inclined to respond to people who ask if they may smoke around me--that it's OK with me if I can fart in their face.

But actually, rarely has such a question really been a question.

Almost always it's been a statement--

"I'm going to smoke whether you like it or not. But I want to go through the charade of giving you a choice. If you decline to 'allow' me to--I'll smoke anyway just to show you I have the right--or--I'll not for a time and resent you for it and it will hazard our relationship. So--I'm really giving you a double bind. You can't answer honestly and win, with me. But I'm pretending by asking you a hollow question that I'm a polite person and that your air quality matters to me--when, in fact, my nicotine habit matters far more to me than whatever priorities or sensibilities you may have in the situation."

Great personal responsibility, that.

[Quix]

You'd be better off and richer in $$$ and relationship good will regarding those who love you to give your smoking a rest.

[Quix]

THANKS TONS for your kind words--certainly rare enough toward me on this thread!

[Just another Joe]

What a concept to avoid assaulting people in public places with offensive and hazardous substances they'd rather do without.

If you know that the proprietor of a business allows smoking, and you know there are people smoking in that business, wouldn't it be YOUR reponsibility to stay away from that place if you dislike tobacco smoke that much?

Just like if a proprietor did not allow smoking, if I wanted to smoke, it would be MY reponsibility to stay away from that business.

I notice that you don't provide anything other than the vaunted, "I don't like the smell", position to preclude any owner from allowing smoking.

What a position to take away a property owners rights.
"I don't like it so it should be against the law for the owner to allow it."

[Just another Joe]

THANKS TONS for your kind words--certainly rare enough toward me on this thread!

Quix, I may not give you kind words but I will respect you enough to debate you, reasonably, and not flame you.
Does that count for something?

[Quix]

COUNTS for a LOT, in my book.

Thanks.

Though, warning, I can get weary of some debates sooner than others. But I do TRY to respond as I'd prefer being responded to MOST of the time. I think I AT LEAST manage to respond on a par with what I'm responding to.

Besides, I don't pretend to know it all by a several-galactic-clusters margin.

But I love collecting puzzle pieces and anticipating, conjecturing, predicting, watching, seeing what happens.

And I'm convinced history as we have known it for hundreds to thousands of years is drawing to a close . . . more or less in our lifetime. . . .

[Quix]

I have a moderate allergy to cigarette smoke.

A friend has a life threatening allergy to cigarette smoke.

I do my best to avoid establishments where smoking is allowed. It's not always so workable to do that given social dynamics and relationships in a group.

You still seem to avoid the INHERENT "IN-YOUR-FACE" attitude, stance, body language, habit features of smoking. Yet you ask me to take personal responsibility. It rings hollow.

[Great Dane]

Good article........... printed and filed for a slightly ignorant daughter or two, who bought into the overkill.

[Great Dane]

#4..... You make absolutely no sense.

[Great Dane]

#7...... perfect turnabout, well done.

[Great Dane]

we nonsmokers know about patches and gum...

We smokers know as well, matter of fact, it's mostly big Pharma funding the anti smoking fanatics.......... guess why, bet you never thought of that....follow the money.

[Great Dane]

Just shut up about it.

Who are you to tell anyone to shut up, you come on this thread of your own free will, and you can leave the same way, the door isn't locked.

[gcruse]

Heh. That was rather rough, wasn't it? I apologize.
We own our own lives. And if we don't have the perfect right to commit suicide on the installment plan or any other way, how free are we? I concede.

[Great Dane]

Dark times are coming.

And you are happily helping it along.

[185JHP]

I know well that "corporats" are looking to grub for $$$. That has nothing to do with people like me that loath and despise the stench and ash residue. I like the bans and want them extended. That doesn't mean I consider smokers to be devoid of any human value. I just want their olfactory assaults controlled.