Posted on 08/31/2010 7:56:06 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
TACOMA, Wash., Aug. 30 (UPI) -- Officials in Washington state say they'll consider moving the health battle over secondhand smoke into a new and contentious arena -- people's homes.
The Tacoma-Pierce County Health Board will consider a proposal next month to classify secondhand smoke as a "nuisance" in multi-unit housing, The Tacoma (Wash.) News Tribune reported Monday.
Backers of the measure say they want it incorporated in the state's landlord-tenant law.
"This is the last piece of the puzzle that needs to be placed," Nan Hogan, who helped write the proposed legislation, said. "We've got smoke-free motel rooms, smoke-free restaurants, smoke-free bars, smoke-free office buildings and even prisons. Why should we go home and have to breathe it there?"
Hogan is a member of the group People United for Smoke-free Housing.
In most multi-family structures, the group says, there is no practical way to seal one apartment from another.
(Excerpt) Read more at y100.com ...
Well I’m happy to tell you I had a nice Graycliff 1666 cigar...a pint of beer, and ate some peanuts...last night.
To be more accurate, I wrote, “I hate pompous Papists about as much as I hate careless smokers.” If you’re a conscientious smoker, I’m fine with that. And if you are a mere Roman Catholic, I’m fine with that. Lots of Roman Catholics are Christ-followers, and brothers and sisters of mine.
But it’s the *pompous* ones, who exalt Rome over Christ and who say that those who aren’t part of their denomination are not saved, that I cannot tolerate. If you have exalted the Roman Catholic Church over mere faith in Christ, then yes, that leaves us very little common ground. If, however, Christ is your Savior, as He is mine, then we have sufficient common ground.
Of course, I wouldn’t want to hang out with you. You’re too crass and bitter and cynical.
I see your tagline says, “Hail Mary Full of Grace, The Lord Is With Thee...”
Maybe you can ask her to share some of her grace with you, as I sense none in your communication.
If you wanted a non-smoking place to live then why was that not one of your questions when first inquiring? I have lived in many apartments and always inquire of that which might concern me of the tenants of those properties I rent from.
When you rent you have to adjust to various habits and such of other tenants. It just goes with the territory of renting. I don’t like late night party animals who bring the bar home with them because they work second shift....so you put fans on and drown out the noise.
If smoking is an issue than you need to be sure ahead of time the other tenants are not smokers....move on to something else if they are.
Re: “There are some Freepers who will love this ... can you believe that? I’m continually stunned here (or would that be stuned?) when freepers come out for more regulation and then get extremely ugly if they are challenged.”
*******************
I would not be in favor of ‘regulation’ if people would be a little considerate of their neighbors.
For many years I lived in a condo complex and units were grouped in fours around stairwells. People would go outside their units and sit in the enclosed stairwells to smoke, and the rest of us would get the stench coming around doors and through ducts.
Unfortunately, even when smoking INside the units, the smoke or smell came right through — through shared pipes, ducts, etc. Cooking odors were another issue but not so annoying to others as the smoke and certainly not health hazards.
So yes, in multi-family housing I do think this should be addressed though it would be REALLY NICE if people would try to accommodate their neighbors a little so more regulation would not be necessary.
Well I have a problem with foul language...it hurts my ears...many use it with no regard for the listener. I have no control but I can walk away.
Our ability to tolerate others habits and behaviors is growing intolerable. We live, still, in a free country. So people who have difficulty adjusting need to find a place more ridgid and more regulated to live. But even then something else will be a bone of contention....we are fast becoming a society that desires too much regulation...if we keep it up not only will business and industry move out...but the citizens will as well. And you know what will be left here.
The fact that you would support a LAW such as this tells me all I need to know about you.
You posit that you are a Christian. If so, can you point out to me just where in Scripture Jesus suggested, even HINTED, that we should get laws passed against bad (or sinful, even) behavior, instead of teaching the simple truth, that He has a better way to offer?
Sorry, but you are so wrong on this... and, yes, I have seen too many JUST LIKE YOU.
“Thank God there’s a law restricting your freedom to punch me.”
Who said anything about punching someone? I merely offered my observation that your statement: “Laws restricting your freedoms can be good.” was disgusting.
So, instead of defending your position that “Laws restricting your freedoms can be good”, you make up something about the imaginary “freedom” to punch someone. I would say “My freedom to swing my fist ends at your nose”. This is about liberty and freedom, and your willingness to restrict someone else’s liberty and freedom if you don’t like what they’re doing with their’s.
bfl
My point was that laws exist to restrict freedoms. You’d not allowed to grow and sell pot, for example. You’re not allowed to drive 100 MPH down a side street. You’re not allowed to put a mosque in an area that’s not zoned for such buildings. Those laws restrict your freedom. And such laws can be good.
We do not have complete freedom in the U.S. If we did, it’d be anarchy.
The difficulty is to determine which freedoms to restrict.
To be honest, I can’t think of anywhere in Scripture where Jesus even addressed legislation. He wasn’t about that.
Do you believe that laws are categorically *not* about legislating morality? The thing is, they often are, whether it’s drug use, or the age of consent, or laws about marriage, or polygamy.
Again, no, you don’t know me.
Here’s a question, my animated friend:
Are you against *all* laws restricting the “freedom” to smoke? Should smoking, for example, be permitted in hospitals and schools and McDonald’s? Should 10-year-olds be allowed to smoke?
Feh. Sometimes my bitterness and cynicism make me funny as hell to hang out with. The Church considers baptisms in other denominations to be valid and does not claim that you can’t get into heaven if you’re not a Catholic. Certainly there must be Mel Gibson style Catholics out there who believe that but, ironically most of them don’t accept Rome because they say the true seat has been vacant since Vatican II.
That’s right, He WASN’T about that. Nor should anyone who professes His Name. We should be taking moral concerns back to where they belong: to the CHURCHES and families. Government should ONLY be involved where individual rights are threatened by outside parties; things like, oh, let’s reach out somewhere in the outfield here, murder, robbery, fraud, rape, child molestation, you know, things that have actual VICTIMS, not some made-up crimes. Because when you go down THAT route, you leave the door wide open for any other big government liberal to go through, as with the “laws” in question in this thread.
And THAT is what this is all about and that is why I KNOW YOUR TYPE. Too lazy to do your own work, you want government to do it for you. “There oughtta be a law.” That used to be a theme in the Sunday funnies. “A tip of the Hatlo Hat” to whomever came up with the goofiest idea for a new law... Only now folks like you take that seriously.
I didn’t see whether you answered the questions I posed in my second paragraph. Are you saying that laws are not based on some sort of morality other than how they “threaten” individual rights? Would you agree that the definition of marriage *should* be redefined to include homosexual couples, since nobody’s individual rights are clearly “threatened”?
And cut the personal attacks. That’s not befitting a FReeper.
No. I am not saying that marriage should be “redefined.” However, a case COULD be made that the State should not be involved in marriage in any way, shape or form. That it is when GOVERNMENT gets involved in the proper domain of the CHURCH is when we have many more problems than we can handle, and, for the most part otherwise PREVENTABLE problems.
In fact, when you look back in history, government involvement in marriage and other things was because the local lord wanted control over his serfs and every aspect of their lives so he instituted all these formerly abominable things, often with the help of the early Church, which likewise wanted control over others’ lives. Then of course, there was the quaint notion that the local lord could exercise his “right” to be the one to spend the wedding night with the new bride. Kinda gives you a nice warm, fuzzy feeling, doesn’t it?
Over time, such barbaric customs died off, but the interference of the State into marriage and other private affairs was pretty well established by then, sad to say.
But, yes, I am saying that the LAW should ONLY come into play when someone’s INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS are threatened or violated by someone else. That’s it and that’s ALL. Isn’t that enough for you?
And there are no personal attacks. Saying that I know too many like you is not an attack; it’s a statement of fact. A most unfortunate fact and one that I shouldn’t have to point out on FR, but a fact nonetheless.
“Laws restricting your freedoms can be good.”
This was your original statement. I’ll stick by my original response: “disgusting”.
I don’t need you, or any other nanny state, do-gooder restricting whatever freedoms you deem expendable, unneccessary or inconvenient.
Smoking is a voluntary activity ..........If a voluntary activity imposes unwanted consequences on others ... it is permissible to control that voluntary behavior.
__________________________________________________________
Yes, I see your point and as a smoker I would appreciate your help in controlling the following voluntary activities that irritate me and/or put my life and loved ones in danger:
DUI’s
Illegal Immigrants with drug resistant TB and other diseases
Pedophiles
Felons
Animal abusers
Eating Disorders
Big Government
War
Sin
Greed
Sloth
Hoarding
Gorging
Purging
Liberalism
Muslims
Mexican Cartels
Marxism
Socialism
Prison Riots
Street Riots
Biases
Prejudices
Hatred
Apathy
Discrimination
Name Calling
Well, I’m sure other FRiends can add to the list of things people do that are voluntary and should be controlled. Makes smoking look like a petty crime in comparison IMO.
Now, I just want to enjoy a smoke in the privacy of my own home in the middle of nowhere on my own acres.
This isn't new and it will keep creeping.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=73#73
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=78#78
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=85#85
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=87#87
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=89#89
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=90#90
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=92#92
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=94#94
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/703734/posts?page=96#96
If anyone wants thread from the 2 or 3 years after this just let me know.
Do you smoke?
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.