Ah,,, ochlocracy, the last line of defense for those who disregard rights.
Unless smoking were specifically protected by the constitution like guns, the press, speech, religion etc then its perfectly alright for the majority to ban it.
That's a non starter for anyone who has a rudimentary understanding of where rights derive from. Please review the Declaration of Independance for an explanation even a child can understand.
BTW, in case you don't even get the fundamental issue, it's not smoking rights being addressed, it's property rights.
Damn it's pitiful what is dressing up as a conservative around here lately.
TJ: Groups of resturant owners acting to squash competition by using government to deny rights are every bit as evil as those who would do it for other reasons. 83
VRWC_minion: Thats majority rule.
So many groups. Gender/sex, sexual preference, anti-smoking, races, religions, age groups, political parties, environmentalists... on and on the list goes.
With each group there is a common denominator that joins each individual to the group. Once that is done new common denominators are proclaimed to exist among the group members. In order for a group member to be in good standing with the group they must adhere to the common denominators affixed to them by the herd-mentality manipulators -- elites that have the most power within the group -- the leaders.
At first, each person in the group is encouraged to sacrifice a tiny bit of their individuality for the "greater good" of the group. It begins small but quickly advances to larger and larger portions of the person's individuality being sacrificed for the greater good of the group. Those that fight to not sacrifice their individuality run the risk of becoming an outcast -- being ostracized by the group.
No group can withstand for long competing ideas within their group. Thus they shun competing ideas and the people that inject them into discussion. Among the several groups, far to many to list, there are individuals that chose to leave the group. When that happens new members must be recruited to maintain the size of the group or else the greater good of the group will diminish toward irrelevance.
History shows that the number of groups in existence increase over time. Especially in the last fifty years. Each group with it's own ideology to compete among other groups with their respective ideologies.
The manipulation of the heard mentality is stretched so thin that most people choosing to leave a group today do not take up membership or alliance with any other group -- save for one. They chose to be an individual and stand among other individuals. Among that group there are no leaders or members. Just the common denominator that each person is first an individual and that no individual is worth sacrificing for any "perceived" greater good of the group.
They've been there, done that.
In a world of competing groups and group ideas/ideologies competing among one another, all sacrificing the individual for the greater good, will be out-competed by the individual. For the one common denominator of all persons is that each person's individuality is more valuable than than any supposed greater good that sacrifices individuality.
How much harm to individuals and loss of human life has occurred in the name of religion and government? How much harm to individuals and loss of human life has occurred in the name of business, science and art? History shows that government and religion have the least respect for individuality. History also shows that business, science and art have the most respect for individuality.
Damn it's pitiful what is dressing up as a conservative around here lately.
It happens with every group. Yet, the most grossly misrepresented group is that of the individualist.