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

To: SupplySider

You are correct. There is no law requiring me to eat out in a public place.

In fact, back when getting smoking out of restaurants seems far-fetched, I was for restrictions on smoking areas, but still allowing smoking. Common sense things like bathrooms and waiting areas had to be located in the non-smoking section. Smoking sections must be separate rooms or separated by a non-smoking buffer for those people who don't smoke but don't mind.

However, we got an even better resolution with the complete non-smoking ban.

The bottom line to all this is that this is NOT a liberal issue. As I've said, I'm very conservative and this is a non-contradictory conservative position. It is, with no doubt or question, equal to wanting to prevent abortion because it endangers the child. That too is a conservative view. Liberals want to say "if you don't like abortion don't have one" which is, in fact, the argument you are presenting.


125 posted on 08/13/2004 10:34:21 AM PDT by HawkeyeLonewolf (Christian First, American Second)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies ]


To: HawkeyeLonewolf
It is, with no doubt or question, equal to wanting to prevent abortion because it endangers the child. That too is a conservative view. Liberals want to say "if you don't like abortion don't have one" which is, in fact, the argument you are presenting.

I see your point about the validity of passing laws to protect the rights of citizens from being infringed, but I don't think I'm using the same argument as the "pro-choice" abortion crowd. The unborn child has no say. The wronged smoker can choose to go elsewhere.

154 posted on 08/13/2004 10:53:03 AM PDT by SupplySider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies ]

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