If we are going to go down this road, we need to also not hire others with risky behaviors, such as homosexuals. Homosexuals have much higher risks of various illnesses.
At least if we are to be intellectually honest, we can’t just single out smokers. We need to also track homosexuals, those with elevated blood pressure, overweight people, diabetics, promiscuous people, drug users, and many many others at higher health risk.
AMEN! To discriminate against people for doing something that is 100% LEGAL is sheer stupidity.
What about those who:
drink alcohol?
ride motorcycles without a helmet?
skydive?
The list can go on and on and on....
I heard a pot activist gleefully describing how possession of alcohol (even in the privacy of your home) in banned in some cities in Alaska while private use of pot was legalized there under privacy grounds in a Supreme Court case in 1975.
I think I saw an article about diet being the next target for employment discrimination. If you are not compliant, it would be grounds for termination. We are heading for broad discrimination on genetics ground.
But faggots are on the board of directors and CEOs these days. They will not be terminated for risky lifestyle choices.
Exactly, while we're at it we could charge females more. Statistically they live longer, and use more medical services. If we're charging people for medical insurance the way an insurance co charges for life and auto, liberals should be ready to see a lot of their protected groups get penalized.
What you said, plus I assume they are also going to fire everyone who is over 30 lbs overweight, those who drink alcohol over a certain number of ounces daily, and all who engage in any other activities with elevated mortality, such as foreign travel, car racing, mountain climbing, etc. And while they are at it, should also fire everyone who lives in “high crime” areas if the murder rates exceeds a certain # per hundred.
And those who engage in risky sports/activities, and those with any history of DUI arrests, and so on. And we wonder why unions still hold some attraction for many people? When employers are arrogant, condescending and abusive to their employees, people look to anything that they think might defend their interests. Of course these days even unions probably won’t go to bat for smokers, who are total pariahs in much every venue these days. Except when it comes to fleecing them with cigarette taxes way out of proportion with any costs that smokers really impose on the public purse (in the big picture, over a lifetime).