[Lucky Dog]

Actually it is, on many levels.........but primarily the fact that all the other restrictions were in place and agreed upon before openning the doors to "some" members of the public.

Do you think that there were no business in existence when any of those previous restrcitions were enacted? Do you think that the owners of those businesses should have been exempted just because their businesses existed prior to the law's enactment?

You dictating his use of his property is selfish.

If he opens his (or her) business to the public, then he or she is restricted by law what he or she can do in the business. This true for any business. For example, a smoker may not smoke in an explosive manufacturing business, even if it is his, nor may a smoker light up in the operating room of a private hospital, even if it his business.

[Gabz]

Mixing apples and oranges only tells me you have no case other than your own selfish desires.

If you want to eat in a smoke free restaurant talk to the owner, not the government, or find another place to your liking.

[SheLion]

You post at FREE Republic because you are all for freedom... but only the freedoms you approve of. Please move to a small country run by one person and then in a few years come back with a real understanding of the word freedom.