*SIGH*
I simply pointed out that MY view was equally conservative. Which is true.
We require businesses to meet building codes.
We require businesses not to restrict service based on race, sex, etc.
We require businesses to provide safety exits.
We can require businesses to provide a normal breathing environment untainted by the selfish desires of a few. Secondhand smoke DOES affect the health of others even if for the short term only.
We were born not to breathe in such and no one should have their God-given right to breathe properly trampled by those who choose to breathe dirty air.
Not a one of these requirements is liberal in nature. If a business owner doesn't like basic common sense restrictions, then they can choose to operate elsewhere.
Now again, I respect the conservative pro-smoking view as conservative. However, I have shown how good conservatives can oppose smoking without being labelled liberal by those who disagree.
So all your screaming and whining will not change the fact that this is a conservative view. You can cry about private property rights, but there are valid restrictions to private property rights all that time -- for the common defense or the general welfare of all.
And common sense and for your general welfare, it means go to an establishment that doesn't allow smoking, and let those who want to be where smoking is allowed to go there.
Anything else smacks of unecessary government regulation - the height of Leftist Doctrine.
Smoking should be banned everywhere. If a business owner doesn't like basic common sense restrictions, then they can choose to operate elsewhere. /kerryism
Good grief, it does not, unless there is a pre-existing health issue.
Health and safety codes are in existence for the hospitality industry in order to protect the general public from things they can NOT see.
You are miing apples and oranges.