Why, in your published opinion, does a smoker have more rights than a nonsmoker?
I think you are misunderstanding the issue. This is not about a contest between smokers and non-smokers. It's about whether or not the state should be able to dictate to a private property owner his policies with respect to smoking.
Conservatives agree that private property owners should generally be allowed to use and enjoy their property as they see fit, yes? That is, the default position is to allow the private property owner to establish all policies and settle all disputes according to his will, so long as the issue is on his property.
That's why conservatives defend the right of a businessman to set his own prices, to choose the products he wishes to sell, and to set the rules customers must abide by when visiting his property. Therefore, in applying this default conservative rule, we would say that neither the smoker nor the non-smoker has a right to their preferred environment on someone else's property, any more than the customer has the right to force a property owner to sell at a price lower than he is willing to accept. It is the decision of the property owner to decide whether or not he wishes to permit smoking on his property.
It is only the property owner who has rights at stake in this issue. Those rights are denied when the state overrules the property owner's decision and forces a no-smoking policy on private property.
Nicely said, Timm...and spot on.
Regards,
Thanks for laying it on the line.