Extremism cuts both ways. Ordered liberty means that the majority does rule on issues other those written in black and white in our Constitution. In the end, even that is an issue for the majority, albeit a super majority. The people are the final arbitrators of the Constitution. We can replace our representatives. We can amend the Constituion. We can revolt.
If you do not like the smoking laws then persuade lawmakers and the people who vote for lawmakers. It is ridiculous and extreme to define everything any individual desires as a Constitutionally protect right no matter who else is affected by it.
Half the time it's boards of health promulgating ordnances.
Other times, voters have not succeed in overturning bans.
US Constitution, RIP.
>>. It is ridiculous and extreme to define everything any individual desires as a Constitutionally protect right no matter who else is affected by it.
So, let me know how you feel when the Food Police and the EnviroNuts really gather steam, based on the whittling away of Freedom of Association in private establishments, among other things.
Conservatives, Liberals, all the same suckers of the Nanny State Teat!
A little insight into the issue might be gained by reading your own tag line.
The bans have been in many cases instituted by unelected boards of health, supported by property-rights averse judges in some instances.
At any rate, the issue is one of property rights, period.
I have no problem with an establishment that goes non-smoking of its own volition. I just don't patronize them, free choice all around.
I do have a problem with business owners being forced by the government to limit their customer base.