Okay, Einstein, I'll explain it to you with small words, so you might understand it. Smoking around children increases their risk of harm. That is a bad thing. We should rightly describe it as "child abuse," but don't out of a misguided notion that it might offend the junkies who like to inhale shit into their lungs. I am opposed to harming children, even if it inconveniences these same drug addicts, on a pragmatic, intellectual and moral basis. Should another action cause similar harm (such as feeding children arsenic, running over them with a car, hitting them with a shovel, or damaging their bodies by using poison for cleaning products), I would oppose these other things for the same pragmatic, intellectual and moral reasons.
Boy, you sure are an ignorant nasty one, aren't you? For a FReeper! CSM can understand a lot more then you might think! Jerk.
I am opposed to my kids bull riding a nuclear missle, like Slim Pickens in doctor strangelove. Other than that, I'll decide how to raise my kids, not you, or the miserable government. Hell, the government can't even fix it's own problems, let alone mine.
"Smoking around children increases their risk of harm."
Transporting children in automobiles is a greater increase in the risk of harm for children. In addition, explain how the rates of asthma and allergies in children have increased as the smoking rates decrease. Based on that correlation alone, then not smoking around children increases their risk of contracting harmful life long health problems. We better mandate that all parents smoke around their children.
Isn't lifestyle projection great!
Your arguments would be better received if you were to temper the language and the personal insults.