Posted on 08/13/2004 5:24:43 AM PDT by Hatteras
Mom Sent To Jail For Smoking Around Kids
POSTED: 6:43 am EDT August 13, 2004
BOWLING GREEN, Va. -- A woman was sentenced Thursday to 10 days in jail for defying a court order not to smoke around her children.
Tamara Silvius was banned last year from smoking around the youths, now ages 8 and 10, as part of a custody arrangement with her ex-husband.
(Excerpt) Read more at wral.com ...
I'm curious if you think that bars that mainly serve alcohol should be outlawed from permitting smoking as well.
But this is great in theory, but impossible in practice.
Before smoking bans there were very few non-smoking facilities. There were, however, a mishmash of smoking sections. Some places even put them in the front where non-smokers had to wade through the foul air to get to the non-smoking section.
The rights and health of non-smokers has to come first. We're all born non-smokers -- those who choose to take it up are altering their default behavior and if it requires a little more inconvenience, it should not be a problem.
I respect that we will disagree on this issue -- but my main goal is simply to point out the fact that it's not a liberal issue -- Rush is 100% wrong on that (blinded because he's a smoker I presume). It is an issue that crosses ideological lines, as I've proven with the abortion issue.
"....she didn't go to jail for smoking around her kids, she went to jail for defying a court order."
Well that perspective tidies things up nicely. Not much more to say on this issue. If the events in Eastern Europe circa 1940s were viewed in this enlightened manner, we could understand that the Rabbi wasn't shot through the lungs for not getting on the train, but for defying a court order.
No confusion on my part at all. I am equating liberalism with selfishness.
And your logic says let the market decide if theft is okay, murder is okay, abortion is okay. Don't enact any laws to protect the rights, safety, and health of others.
Nope.
Because I daresay that majority of drinkers are also smokers -- so smoking would be expected in that establishment.
THe majority of eaters are not smokers, however.
No, I think crimes against person and property should stay crimes. On the other hand, your logic, which suggests any behavior resulting in minor discomfort to you should be illegal, could readily be extended to cover other things you don't like: the perfumes that waft by you or the wrong kind of music, for example.
On the other hand, if you want to shift your argument and suggest that smoker's jeopardize your health, then we can argue the point on grounds other than your own convenience.
Ugh! Why'd you want to do something awful like that? I could have gone all day without seeing Meathead! Thanks for nothing :-)
My father smoked 3-4 packs a day in the house. I cannot breathe around cigarette smoke. I have no asthma or any other breathing problem apart from being around smoke. It causes headaches as well.
Second hand smoke is a danger, period. This is not based on some study, but on personal experience. The studies only enhance that awareness.
Sounds clever, but it assumes that the United States and Nazi Germany are one and the same. If the irony of your remark here is really indicative of your point-of-view, try anarchy someday. You'll love it.
I have to admit that it wouldn't bother me if there were zero nonsmoking facilities. Until there is good evidence that a single dining experience can endanger a nonsmoker, I just don't see where the government gets off telling private business owners what services they can offer. It makes sense that someone who repeatedly dines in the company of smokers might take on some kind of risk. But shouldn't we then outlaw open air stadiums? The fair-skinned are at risk of skin cancer due to the selfish desires of the sun-worshippers.
By the way I am a nonsmoker who can't stand being around the stuff. I won't eat in a smoky place and suffered on many a plane flight before the laws were passed.
I agree favoring smoking laws doesn't automatically make one a liberal.
Should she also be sent to jail for driving her car near her kids? The car tailpipe is far more hazardous.
Enough said. :)
Have a great weekend.
SheLion wrote "I believe that God cares more about what comes out of our body's then what goes in."
In fact he put it like this starting in Mark Chapter 7, verse 14.
14 ¶ And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me every one of you, and understand:
15 there is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.
16 If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
17 And when he was entered into the house from the people, his disciples asked him concerning the parable.
18 And he saith unto them, Are ye so without understanding also? Do ye not perceive, that whatsoever thing from without entereth into the man, it cannot defile him;
19 because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
20 And he said, That which cometh out of the man, that defileth the man.
21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
22 thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:
23 all these evil things come from within, and defile the man.
I'll answer your question with a rant, if that's ok? I suspect I know where you're going with it (if I'm off base, I apologize in advance for "going off" on you), so here goes.
I have no problem with common sense legislation to put in place a certain amount of regulation to ensure we don't ravage our environment with rampant disregard for the future.
I don't advocate making cigarettes illegal. You wanna smoke - fine. Kill yourself. I do not believe it is fair, however, to force non-smokers to "go somewhere else" if they don't feel like smelling the stench of self-polluting smokers.
*** NEWS FLASH: The overwhelming majority of Americans are NON-SMOKERS!!!!***
They "get it", if you know what I mean?
What if a minority of people in this country decided that they like the smell of feces so much that they wear that scent everywhere they go...and they expect to have that right guaranteed and no infingement upon that right will be tolerated....the same old blah blah blah about smoking? What's the difference? You want to sit next to a stinking pile of crap when you're trying to eat? Well, to non-smokers, that's exactly the case. No difference whatsoever -- except that the smell of feces hasn't been PROVEN to cause cancer.
You know, not that anyone really gives a damn, but I am a moderate conservative. I say that proudly because I can state with complete certainty that "total lefties" and "total righties" don't accomplish much other than making progress even harder than it already is.
Guess what -- most Americans are pretty close to the center on social and political issues. Can the 15% of the "righties" and the 15% of the "lefties" both realistically believe that the 70% of the moderates are as wrong as their 15% opposites? Is that practical thinking?
Don't we get so enraged when the extreme lefties go about their fruitcake business and wag their fingers at us? Yeah, we do. Are we really any better when we take our principles to the diametric opposite extreme? I say "No, we are not."
No wonder this country is so polarized.
I don't advocate activist judges socializing this country from the bench. I must say, however, that I don't condone zealots pontificating from their self-righteous pulpits either.
I don't believe that mankind is the sole cause of "global warming", "the Ozone Hole" or any other cataclysmic, Earth-destroying phenomena. However, I do believe that we should be aware of our potential to cause harm if we allow our excrement upon the only planet we have to go unchecked.
Is that a concept that is so tough to grasp? What is so hard about exercising a little common sense when we proclaim our stands on these things? Can't we acknowledge that some things are just inherently bad without completely selling out to the interests -- on either extreme?
And can't a man do so -- and freely post his views on this "open forum" -- without being labeled a troll or having his words taken completely out of context? Don't we get really pissed when our adversaries label us in such a way?
Does anyone have so much of a complete grasp on these issues that he/she really and truly feels that drawing a complete and unwaivering line separating black and white is practical....and digestable to someone who is educated and refuses to be influenced by B.S. rhetoric and propaganda -- FROM EITHER SIDE???
Always remember...when you point your finger, there are three more pointing back at you.
I agree that what comes out is very important, however what we put in IS what will come out. What we or our children absorb is what will come out, absolutely....so what goes in definately affects what comes out. That's why its important what our children watch on tv, what they see as examples of parents and what they learn in school...it will all eventually come out in their behavior!
What is this woman teaching her children....defiance, smoking, rebellion, disregard for authority, and "if it feels good do it"...no matter what anyone else says. Great parenting skills don't you think?
It's ridiculous that the father was allowed to include no smoking around his children as part of the custody arrangements.
Get over the emotionalism of your own personal issues and your vindictive desires and start thinking with your brain, if you've got one.
A ridiculous and unconstitutional court order at that.
Have a great weekend, too. With any luck we will both avoid the smoke :)
Interesting. Those who point out that tyrannical court decisions, and unrestrained police conduct head us in a direction toward a police state, are somehow advocating anarchy? It's the same tired old "freedom of speech doesn't mean you can yell fire in a crowded blah blah" There is a middle ground between tyranny and anarchy. It is called liberty. It has been tested. It works. It is currently fighting for its life against assault by preposterous court rulings like this one.
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.