Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Applebee's will ban smoking
Tribune Chronicle ^ | 05/11/04 | Staff, wire reports

Posted on 05/11/2004 5:17:10 AM PDT by MissTargets

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 361-367 next last
To: Phantom Lord
Some people have fatal allergies to peanuts. Should peanuts and peanut products be banned from public places?

Yes -- I think the throwing and rubbing of peanuts over random strangers should be banned. Its easy to be a jerk when you don't have family with these types of allergies.

121 posted on 05/11/2004 7:52:29 AM PDT by Naspino (HTTP://NASPINO.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
Not on this thread, because this is about a business making a decision about their private property...........however.....
122 posted on 05/11/2004 7:54:11 AM PDT by Gabz (Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than second hand smoke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Madam Dufarge and I were at a biker bar late Sunday afternoon. At this time of year, with the great weather we've been having, the place used to be packed to the rafters.

Sunday there were seven of us. At one point all seven of us were outside smoking, including the bartender and the one non-smoker.

We couldn't help but laugh at the absurdity of the situation.

123 posted on 05/11/2004 7:55:06 AM PDT by metesky (You will be diverse, just like us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
Naspino, I ask you a serious question?
Should smoking be outlawed, or banned in any way by the government, because your wife is allergic to tobacco smoke?
124 posted on 05/11/2004 7:55:44 AM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
I didn't know it was legal to throw and rub peanuts over random strangers. Is it? Last I checked that would be called simple assault.

Just the presence of peanuts in the vacinity of food being prepared can cause serious reactions to those with allergies. Should the governments power for force be brought to bear on businesses and ban the use of and presence of peanuts? Especially those bowls of free peanutes that some bars put out!

125 posted on 05/11/2004 7:57:03 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
All the behaviors I mentioned are personal choices. No one should be coerced to bear the costs associated with the choices of another. To the extent that government or business does so, it is a form of theft.

That means that all government education and public health programs are confiscatory.

126 posted on 05/11/2004 7:58:06 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Should smoking be outlawed, or banned in any way by the government, because your wife is allergic to tobacco smoke?

No -- I already said I'm not against cig. smoke. I'm against people that state that it doesn't harm others because they are fearful of losing their cigs. If a private business decides to ban it then there is obviously NOTHING wrong with that. Just move your patronage elsewhere like we've been doing for decades.

127 posted on 05/11/2004 7:59:07 AM PDT by Naspino (HTTP://NASPINO.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: Sloth; Don'tMessWithTexas
funny you should mention homosexuals.............I have seen many of the anti-smoker gnatzie types who continually attempt to equate smokers with homosexuals.......while they continually fail in the attempt, they nevertheless continue trying.

You will be interested to know that one of the most vocal, powerful and highly paid anti-smoking crusaders is not only a homosexual but is a nationally known proponent of gay adoption. He is actually of the mindset that 2 gay men are a better family environment for children than a married heterosexual couple when one or the other of them are smokers.
128 posted on 05/11/2004 7:59:10 AM PDT by Gabz (Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than second hand smoke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
If a private business decides to ban it then there is obviously NOTHING wrong with that. Just move your patronage elsewhere like we've been doing for decades.

We are in agreement then.

129 posted on 05/11/2004 8:01:27 AM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
Its not hard to understand why. Socialists want workers and population control. Homosexuals provide population control and cigs damage worker efficiency. Better to be dead than inefficient.
130 posted on 05/11/2004 8:02:03 AM PDT by Naspino (HTTP://NASPINO.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
No one should be coerced to bear the costs associated with the choices of another.

Then why, in the face of smokers paying more, are you saying that smokers force a higher cost on nonsmokers? They don't. No matter what the insurance companies or the government says the facts say different.

131 posted on 05/11/2004 8:03:32 AM PDT by Just another Joe (Warning: FReeping can be addictive and helpful to your mental health)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: Skooz
"I couldn't care less if credible studies proved that second hand smoke was good for you and full of nutritious vitamins and minerals. I still don't like to inhale the crap. "

Uugghh...then don't?

Though you might want to try more fiber in your diet.....just a suggestion....

NeverGore

132 posted on 05/11/2004 8:04:33 AM PDT by nevergore (“It could be that the purpose of my life is simply to serve as a warning to others.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
You are losing it. I never advocated govt. action to restrict smoking in private establishments. I merely suggested that individuals bear the costs associated with their own choices. Therefore, your attempt at sliming me is off target.

But since you tried to confuse things, isn't it interesting that the trailer-park babe giving the thumbs up on the nekkid Iraqis had a cig in her mouth?

133 posted on 05/11/2004 8:07:52 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
If what you say is true, and I am in agreement with you, the last thing on earth any of the anti-smoker gnatzies should be doing is comparing smokers to homosexuals.
134 posted on 05/11/2004 8:07:53 AM PDT by Gabz (Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than second hand smoke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: nevergore
I try my best to avoid it. Sometimes I can't. Sometimes a thoughtless smoker who believes his right to smoke trumps my right to breathe lights up in confined quarters and down my lungs it goes.

I never call on government to ban smoking, though.
135 posted on 05/11/2004 8:09:38 AM PDT by Skooz (My Biography: Psalm 40:1-3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: Phantom Lord
I didn't know it was legal to throw and rub peanuts over random strangers. Is it? Last I checked that would be called simple assault.

I would push for attempted murder as the case warrants. CSI did an episode where peanuts was used as a murder weapon. When you have someone in your family that can die from these allergies you might have a different take on the issue. I'm not for forced bans -- but I'm not going to argue with people that choose it for themselves. What would you say to a day care that won't let your child eat a peanut-butter sandwich for lunch because another child has an allergy? Screw the kid with the allergy?

136 posted on 05/11/2004 8:10:05 AM PDT by Naspino (HTTP://NASPINO.COM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
Just because someone pays more, it does not necessarily mean that they are not engaging in cost shifting. If I, as a non-smoker have to bear ANY of the cost of treating a smoker, that is immoral.
137 posted on 05/11/2004 8:10:34 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Just another Joe
And who would they be?

What, you want a list of names? I am talking about an attitude I've seen, on FR and elsewhere, that attacks anyone who merely expresses a desire to be in a smoke-free environment, or suggests that smoking is an unwise/unhealthy choice.

Most of the people I am aquinted with are not "pro-tobacco crusaders" but private property rights crusaders.

Good. I am on their side. Government should not be compelling such decision by private businesses, and this Applebee's exec sounds like a statist jackass due to his support for a municipal ban.

I personally do not demand active approval or endorsement of my lifestyle choices. I really don't care if most people approve of or endorse my choices. I can be swayed but mostly by family, friends, or personal experience, just like most other people.

Fine. Then you are not one of those I was talking about.

138 posted on 05/11/2004 8:11:50 AM PDT by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: Naspino
CSI did an episode where peanuts was used as a murder weapon.

CSI is fiction for one. And a daycare center that bans peanuts is perfectly fine with me. No problem. The question was however, should the force of government be used to ban said substance?

139 posted on 05/11/2004 8:12:01 AM PDT by Phantom Lord (Distributor of Pain, Your Loss Becomes My Gain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
I was not attempting to slime anyone...............you were included in the "To:" line out of courtesy since I was poking into a conversation between 2 other posters.

My abject apologies that you miscontrued my attempt at politeness.
140 posted on 05/11/2004 8:14:58 AM PDT by Gabz (Ted Kennedy's car has killed more people than second hand smoke.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 361-367 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson