Can I ask you what you expect non-smokers to do? Seriously, do you want them to open up new restaurants across the state so that they can eat without having to come home stinking like a trashfire?
That's a good start. Where's the problem there? The anti's would skreech like Hillary on a program cut if someone proposed opening a restaurant which explicitly catered to smokers and the reason is that a restaurant opened as such would become chic and cool and pretty soon non smokers would be going and wanting to once again screw up a good thing.
You don't have some kind of right to eat at a private smoke free establishment in any world which honored the Constitution and the right to free association. There are these things called "stoves" and "cookbooks" you know...
Do you consider non-smokers to be the real rude ones?
I consider non-smokers who think that they have a right to impose their will upon the proprietor of an eating establishment to be the rude ones. It kills me that there are non-smokers who'll bitch about smoke in eating establishments but won't pony up the time and effort to open their own establishment or the capital to invest in one that follows their ideology. Noooo, they have to run to Ma Government to find a fix and that makes me want to puke...
For the life of me, I just don’t understand people who smoke. Everyone has to cater to them. They trow their trash all over the gound. They burn stuff down. They go to sleep with a cigarette in their mouths killing themselves, family members and neighbors. They start forest fires.
Oh C'mon Dough, you can't tar every member of that group any more than you can tar everyone who drinks etc... as some highway mayhem generating neer'do well. That's just weak. If you see someone smoking who throws their butts on the ground, step up to the plate and chastize them. As for fires, sheesh, lets ban space heaters and lightning for pete's sake...
Honest to God, does smoking really affect your judgement to the extent that you think the state should build non-smoking venues across it’s landscape, simply because you won’t share the clean air with others?
I don't smoke, used to, but I'm not one of those crusaders who, upon quitting, became miserable and deemed it my personal mission to make sure everyone else who continues to pursue something I gave up becomes just as miserable and petty as I am (and that mentality covers a hell of a lot more peoples reactions to stuff than just smoking).
What I AM is someone who understands freedom, including that of association and business. A non smoker doesn't have some "right" to have any given restaurant be smoke free, especially as decreed by the long arm of the state. You can ask restaurants to go smoke free, you can start your own restaurants, or you can capitalize those who would start them and have them smoke free but to demand that the government step in and force PRIVATE business owners to conduct business based on the desires of some SPECIAL group is loathsome and pathetic and fitting of more of democrats and socialists than of anyone who calls themselves a conservative...
Thanks for your response. I appreciate your difference of opinion on the subject.
Isn’t the libertarian motto (or what passes for one) supposed to be something like everything should be legal that doesn’t impact someone else?
This does impact others negatively.
They only want to breathe. You want to smoke.
I appreciate you expressing the views you have in order to defend your stance. You should if that’s the way you feel.
Take care.