[Leonard210]

Thanks SheLion. I wasn't sure if you were hangin' around. If the Washington Post has quoted from a study, you could have just posted the WP and/or WT articles. I personally don't mind if people smoke, but I don't want THEIR smoke served with MY steak. The question of cancer may be overexaggerated as the above articles point out, but that doesn't make it a right for people to smoke; which is the approach of many on our team.

[SheLion]

The question of cancer may be overexaggerated as the above articles point out, but that doesn't make it a right for people to smoke; which is the approach of many on our team.

Doesn't make it a RIGHT? Since when is it not a right to use a legal commodity?

[Dr. Frank fan]

The question of cancer may be overexaggerated as the above articles point out, but that doesn't make it a right for people to smoke;

You're right, the exaggeration of risks of second-hand smoke doesn't "make smoking a right". Smoking is, by default, a right already, unless reason can be given for why it shouldn't be. One such reason, for example, could have been: because second-hand smoke causes cancer. But, if that risk is exaggerated, then....

[borisbob69]

There are some rights enumerated in various documents formulated by the Founding Fathers and regardless of how people (like you) may feel about smoking...as long as it's legal I (and other smokers) should be able to pursue my happiness without interference from others!

[been_lurking]

but I don't want THEIR smoke served with MY steak.

I wonder how THEY feel about the smoke from YOUR steak???

[metesky]

I personally don't mind if people smoke, but I don't want THEIR smoke served with MY steak.

This is one reason why we believe so strongly in property rights and the free market.

To disallow or to allow smoking should be the owners decision, not the governments anyway and the owner would end up with the clientele he/she preferred.

Some owners don't like smoke and some do; some want a restricted group and some have a "come one, come all" attitude.

All we've ever said on these threads is that the property owner has the right to set his own parameters for the consumption of legal products without government interference.

It is the anti-smokers, the liberals, who can't abide the idea of there being a choice.