Posted on 08/05/2002 5:09:05 AM PDT by SheLion
"A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke" -- Groucho Marx
Frankly, I'd far rather have the companionship of a woman than even a good cigar, but that's the way one of the greatest comedians in the world expressed his love for cigars.
But, I'll give it to Groucho, in a free society an individual should be allowed to make their own choices.
Duck Soup Groucho died at the ripe old age of 87, which surely shows smoking cigars was not bad for his health.
Sir Winston Churchill, arguably the greatest man of the 20th century, smoked cigars incessantly, drank like a fish, and ate as much red meat as he could get his hands on.
Winnie lived to be 91.
Adolf Hitler, along with Josef Stalwas one of the most evil men of the 20th century, was a vegetarian, abstained from alcohol, and would not allow smoking anywhere he was. Hitler shot himself in despair at the age of 64.
Now, would you rather pattern yourself after Winston Churchill or Adolf Hitler?
Well, the anti-smoking zealots surely don't want to you to pattern yourself after Churchill and from their rigid, fanatical authoritarian and totalitarian psyche, you might well wonder just how far they'll go if they successfully ban smoking.
Some are already pushing the vegetarian agenda, others animal "rights."
Junk food and fast food are already being targeted, and some 'animal rights' types don't believe people should be allowed to keep pets -- that's enslaving an animal.
Yes, we're dealing not only with zealots here, but 100% proof crackpots. It's amazing politicians -- even Calgary's city council -- listen to them.
In my column "Orwellian dreams" (July 30) I pointed out how mean-spirited, petty busybodies --- some of them on city council -- are threatening to bring financial disaster to hundreds of small bars, restaurants and pool halls.
And at the same time throw thousands of young waiters and waitresses out of jobs as they enforce draconian smoking bans on these enterprising people.
I centred on Charlie Mendelman, owner of The Garage Billiards Bar and Restaurant in Eau Claire, who is typical of small owners who are now at the mercy of the city's stringent anti-smoking committee.
That column was well-received -- Charlie's a popular fellow in town -- but a couple of readers said I had neglected to mention an extremely valid point.
It is this: While the city plans to ban smoking entirely in "public" places, a bar, restaurant, pool or bingo hall or casino are not "public" places.
A "public" place is owned by the public -- through a government agency, usually -- but none of the bars, restaurants and other businesses now under threat from our aldermen are owned by the city or any other government.
They are owned by men and women who have often invested their life savings in them.
In a free society, such places are called private property.
That they are not public property where any citizen can freely enter is also evidenced by the fact that Charlie and his fellow bar owners are legally entitled to refuse admission to anyone they do not want in their establishments -- and can throw you out should your behaviour upset them.
Neither Mendelman nor any other bar or restaurant owner I have spoken with wants to prevent any other owner from voluntarily banning smoking in their establishments, they just want customers to have a freedom of choice in whether they want to go to a bar that allows smoking or one that doesn't.
Seems sensible to me.
Now here I'm indebted to American author and consultant Craig J. Cantoni, who put the matter of freedom of choice in a nutshell in a column in the Arizona Republican.
This is what Cantoni had to say: Free markets work this way: Person A allows smoking in his Mexican restaurant. Person B believes in the second-hand smoke hysteria spread by the anti-smoking fanatics, so he chooses to eat at a Mexican restaurant that bans smoking.
Person C refuses to eat at any Mexican restaurant because he does not want to clog his arteries with lard-drenched refried beans.
Person D does not worry about secondhand smoke or secondhand beans, so he patronizes Person A's restaurant.
All four people have made their own free choices and taken their own responsibility for their own decisions.
Seems pretty sensible to me.
To you, too, probably.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jackson, associate editor of the Sun, can be reached at paul.jackson@calgarysun.com. Letters to the editor should be sent to callet@sunpub.com.
Just wondering if you've ever been close to, or had to watch someone you care about, die of cancer. Lung, breast, prostrate, doesn't matter.
Sound like your the self rightous one.
Everyone here knows that smoking is bad for your health, just as is drinking too much, eating too much, speeding while driving, and a host of other things humans do in their daily routine.
The point is, many chose to engage in risky behavior and its none of your business unless they seek you advice.
By the way, what is the life expectancy of a medical doctor? Is it longer or shorter than that of a ordinary mortal?
YOU GO, METESKY!!!!!
(I think this Doktor Luv left. He sure got quiet, didn't he!)
Be back soon. Save my seat!
The overwhelming majority of lung cancers, greater than 90%, are caused by cigarette smoking.
"all I can tell you is that there is no sympathy in my mind for those who wimp out and cry at the end."
Everyone "wimps out" and cries in the end - everyone. When the 40 year old father and life-long unrepentant smoker realises that he won't get to see his children grow up, watch his wife grow old or enjoy retirement - he cries - buckets. As does his wife, children, parents, friends, co-workers and occasionally his oncologist.
As they lie on their beds facing the inevitable, they all look up and say one thing: "Why did I do this to myself and my family?"
A good question...
I have this strange suspicion that they don't put the same stuff into cigar(ette)s today as they did back when Chruchill and, presumably your grandfather, was kicking around.
The point: comparing smoking in times of yore to smoking today is likely comparing apples to oranges.
Tuor
Depends if they smoke or not...
I've also had friends and family that died slowly from other causes and some that died quickly from gunshot wounds.
I'm almost sixty years old, smart guy. I've seen lots of people die from lots of diferent causes and never respected the weak wimpoid cop-out ending.
That OK with you, sir.
What's your particular boo-hoo screed and why should I feel sorry for you, some one I don't know?
Come on, you were leading up to something, your personal anecdote about a relative or friends tragic death. Spill it, Weepy.
PUFF for the Good Life...
Lies, Damned Lies, and 400,000 Smoking Related Deaths
Everyone "wimps out" and cries in the end - everyone.
You must see the weak ones then, because that has not been my experience with the friends that I've carried out of the church.
Yes.
My father died at 73 from prostrate cancer.
He never smoked a cigarette in his life.
Then what's to account for all the apologists on this thread? One third of the population of our country (current and ex-smokers) is at high risk for this terrible disease and for multiple other tobacco-related diseases, including cancers of the mouth, tongue, throat, larynx, esophagus, pancreas, bladder and kidney, and also at risk for coronary artery disease, peripheral artery disease, gangrene of the legs and stroke.
Idiot. I see the weak, the strong, the young and the old. At some point everyone cries and everyone regrets...
Tobacco is only one of many substances that are suspected as a cancer cause.
Here is a partial list of cancer causing activities from the National Cancer Institute.. Should we all jump on the ban bandwagon?
That they are not public property where any citizen can freely enter is also evidenced by the fact that Charlie and his fellow bar owners are legally entitled to refuse admission to anyone they do not want in their establishments -- and can throw you out should your behaviour upset them.What needs to be remembered is the Health Crusaders don't approve of bars, period. We should all be going to community action rallies or prayer meetings (depending on the political orientation of said busybody) instead. People not only consume "bad things" there, they might even :gasp: have fun. Can't have that you know, it's socially counterproductive.
I had to throw a guy out Saturday night for sleeping on the bar. One of these days that might be considered a civil rights violation.
-Eric
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.