I am a conservative who values personal freedom. And I disagree with wrapping the smoking issue in the mantle of personal freedom. Citizens have the personal freedom to jump off a roof, but they don't have the personal freedom to land on innocent bystanders.
I have a similar story to dallasgop. My mother smoked many years because, goshdarnit (not the word she used) it was her right to do so. She is currently dying from small cell lung cancer. It's not a good way to go. As was mentioned in another post, it was her decision to smoke. But did the use of her "personal freedom" to smoke affect anyone else? Disregard the issue of SHS. Who takes care of her? Who pays for her medical bills? (We all help, she goes to the VA.) Other people are attending to the consequences of her "personal freedom". So you see, smoking is not a "personal" freedom issue. No man is an island.
I guess I wonder why a conservative would use smoking as a banner for personal freedom? Someone mentioned in an earlier post that their mother is ill because of her poor nutritional choices. Big difference, we all must eat, but there is no necessity to drag on a burning piece of weed hanging out of your mouth.
I'm glad that NYC has given businesses the ability to not have smokers on their premises. My mother wouldn't go anyplace where she wasn't allowed to smoke. Smoke free environments might have given her the impetus to stop or never start.
Donning flame (and smoke) resistant suit.
As was mentioned in another post, it was her decision to smoke. But did the use of her "personal freedom" to smoke affect anyone else? Disregard the issue of SHS. Who takes care of her? Who pays for her medical bills? (We all help, she goes to the VA.) Other people are attending to the consequences of her "personal freedom". So you see, smoking is not a "personal" freedom issue. No man is an island. But where do you stop? Alcoholics often need new livers because of their lifestyle choices (and if they're celebrities, they usually get to the front of the line, but that's for another thread.) People get AIDS from their own lifestyle choices. Obese people have all sorts of health complications due to their lifestyle choices. Do you see what a slippery slope there is once you start legislating against these things?
I will keep your mother in my prayers.
I don't see anyone wrapping smoking in the mantle of personal freedom, including myself. My references generally regard to rights of private property owners.
I'm glad that NYC has given businesses the ability to not have smokers on their premises.
NYC did no such thing, all businesses have always had that ability. What NYC (and NYS, as well as California, Delaware, Maine, etc)have done is remove the ability of businesses to have smoking on their premises.
I am pretty sure those of you extolling the virtues of the smoking bans would be the first to scream if the government mandated that all business be required to permit smoking. However, it is the same principle, if you agree the government has the right to do one, you then agree it has the right to do the other.
This has nothing to do with my being able to smoke in someone else's establishment, I happen to patronize establishments that voluntarily prohibit smoking for a variety of reasons....just like I have a variety of reasons for patronizing those that permit smoking. However, except when absolutely necessary, I do not patronize establishments that have been forced at gun point (government edict) to ban smoking. My reason is the government obviously isn't interested enough in my tax dollars to accomodate me, so I have no intentions of further giving them any more of my tax dollars than is absolutely necessary.