Replies

"Well, let's see, the property owner has to pay taxes on that property each year in order to enjoy the use of it, and if he doesn't pay, the property will be taken from him by threat of force. I'd say that sums it up."

I agree. The problem is, you seem to think that the owner paying the government to use his own property justifies any interference that they see fit to impose upon the restaurant owner.

"Whether you like it or not, the government, in effect, controls all private property through this mechanism."

Agreed. My answer is "not".

"That control is extended even further in the case where the property owner decides to open a business that is open to the public and is subject to government regulation. There have always been restrictions placed on the operation of restaurants for the health and safety of both patrons and employees."

You have a good grasp of what the law is, but speak little to whether or not it is right or wrong. Blindly following along with whatever law comes down the pike seems, historically, to have been a good way to legitimize the persecution of people.

"These regulations have undergone change from time to time. This is simply another change."

No, it's not simply another change. It's another usurpation of power; the transfer of rights from an already persecuted citizenry to an already bloated and corrupt centralized government. All so you can dine out.

"If the business owner doesn't like it, he should move his or her business to another state that continues to allow smoking."

So, instead of a restaurant patron finding another establishment, you would instead have the restaurant owner, at great expense, move his business to another area? Why does your right to enjoy a restaurant for 30 minutes once or twice a week deserve more protection than the business owner who's hard work has not only fed his family, but also created jobs for people in the area and contributed to the economy? Is your smoke-free meal more important than the wages of a business owner with a kid in college or a waitress struggling to make ends meet, so much so that you would suggest they move to another state if they want the freedoms that were supposedly guaranteed to us as Americans?

And, did you ever hear of "take-out"?