Good. If that was the rule, it's the rule.
This is Rush Limbaugh's blind spot. Anti-smoking laws are not a liberals-only issue.
You're right. It's a tyranny issue.
Nope. Anti-smoking laws ARE an all liberal issue. Only a liberal would turn to the government to prevent other people from engaging in an otherwise legal activity.
The market should decide whether smoking is permitted or not in restaurants, theatres, and other places.
The way people feel about smoking bans is an indication of whether you are a liberal, or someone that thinks they are conservative, but is actually a liberal.
I don't like the risk posed by the fumes from fiberglass construction of boats and other structures. If you work in that industry, you can wear a mask with cartridges that will take care of the fumes, but still it isn't an industry I want to be in.
I'd say the risk of harm at an FRP facility is way, way worse than the risk of harm working the bar at the local smoking permitted tavern. We aren't banning FRP construction. We aren't banning a lot of things that pose way more risk to the health of humans than smoking or second hand smoke does (does working the barbecue pose similar risks to smoking? If so, why hasn't charcoal been banned?)
Liberals want to make that choice for us. Conservatives want to leave that up to the individual.
Here's one you'll enjoy.
>>Anti-smoking laws are not a liberals-only issue.
No doubt about that. Conservatives have shown themselves only way too willing to see the notions of freedom of assembly, property rights, private activities as the bailiwicks of the state, albeit for all the valid reasons.
Based on what has been achieved with tabak, I wonder what defence could be used against gun confiscation, mandatory vehicle choices, not to mention implanted chips by HMO's, etc etc.
I think this judge is nuts. Talk about judicial activism.
If this is conservatism, one wonders what's the difference with liberalism.
Both seem to worship at the altar of the state.
Marry a fag, just don't smoke one!
Hail America, Land of the Fr....never mind.
Welcome to FR.
Nanny.
Yeah, it's a Nanny State, anti-freedom issue. Why not just turn over all kids to the State, since it's obvious that we don't trust parents to parent anymore?
Conservatives who applaud decisions like this need more education about what it means to be a free human being, and more education about the evils of governmental paternalism.
Government is NOT the answer. I will wager that THIS INCIDENT will scar the kids and the mother far more than her smoking ever did. Involving the courts when it comes to smoking around your kids is paternalistic, do-gooder nonsense.
I'm sure she cares more about her kids than you care about her kids, so why not leave her the hell alone?
Sounds like a dick of a husband to me.
And yet more idiotic rulings based on moronic secondhand-smoke propaganda.
If and when her kids sneak their first smoke, sometime, somewhere, THAT amount of tobaccy will be more than Evil Mom exposed them to. Americans are becoming supreme wimps with no backbone, and to see that thread of wimpy humanity expressing itself on FR is a disappointment, where individual liberty is supposed to be a cherished value, not some throwaway concept.
If the "government" wants to make smoking illegal then mayby the "government" should quit subsidizing tobacco farmers.And doubling the taxes on tobacco products.( I'm not a smoker)