Posted on 11/07/2002 2:04:46 PM PST by prman
Irrelevant to the argument.
Entirely relevant to the argument.
So, your argument is that, because the law has been changed to ban smoking in workplaces, bars, restuarants, etc. we should accept it and "get over it"?
You do leap to conclusions. My argument is that the "state has the right to ban smoking. If you disagree then it is your right to work to repeal those laws or move to a more friendly jurisdiction.
lewislynn,
Reviewing my last post to you, I feel I do need to retract it. Calling someone an "anti-smoking nazi" is one thing. It is said in a semi-satirical/semi-serious context to make the point about the absurdity of hating us for our lifestyle choice.
However, my last post sailed too close to the wind, in almost directly comparing you with Hitler's nazis.
Now, obviously no-one in this argument wants to exterminate smokers (literally). So direct comparisons with Hitler's nazis is abhorent to anyone and not what I intended.
Being a smoker, I do tend to get very worked up about this issue from time to time, as it is very personal to me.
I disagree with you and your attitude towards smokers - we are ordinary people, worthy of your respect and consideration regardless of how much you dislike our smell - however, I know you are not suggesting smokers be exterminated, as the nazis did.
Now, having made my mea culpa, let's get back to it - you are wrong and I am right!!
Can you explain to me exactly why smokers should not be allowed to enjoy their smokes in some restuarants and bars?
Afterall, we make up about 25% of the population.
Given a choice, owners of eating and drinking establishments would cater for us. Why shouldn't they be allowed to do so, and why shouldn't we be catered for?
You have plenty of non-smoking places to go. Why is it so abhorrent to you that we might have a few places to go?
They can in some; in some others it is against the law. Simple.
I still remember when there was no place to go without smokers. One of the reasons there is a total ban movement is because the owners played only lip service to setting up non-smoking areas.
Is it your position that government should dictate how a private business has to be run? What ever happened to personal responsibility and choice? If I elect to allow smoking in my restaurant, and you, as a nonsmoker, chooses to patronize, what right do you have to dictate how I have to run my establishment? In the words of Norma Vincent Peale, choose another restaurant more to your liking.
"I think you ought to take that down to about 50% at the most. For every smoker there is ,at least IMO, one family member or friend that doesn't really care about ETS.
They do care but are too polite to say anything. Also, you forgot about all the smoker's kids that are free to breathe cleaner air."
If you think cleaner air is advantageous, why aren't you working to prevent diesel exhaust, pesticides, and chemical waste into that air?
For every smoker there is ,at least IMO, one family member or friend that doesn't really care about ETS...
...and for every smoker, there is at least one closet smoker who, in public, demonizes tobacco but lights up the garage or back yard "when no one is around."
Tobacco is still a legal substance but smoking is illegal where non-smokers have a right to breathe clean air.
Get over it and live within the law.
BUMP
I want it made illegal completely. And then I want eveyone on the record as being an anti-tobacco zealot sent a monthly bill to make up the tax difference. I would be immensely satisfied with that solution.
Is it a state's right to run a business in a free enterprize country? If I allow smoking in my restaurant and you have the freedom of choice as to whether you patronize my establishment, who has the responsibility for you?
Tobacco is a legal product and my business required a considerable investment. If a state or municipality endangers my business, shouldn't the tax payers be required to reimburse me?
BTTT
If a state or municipality endangers my business, shouldn't the tax payers be required to reimburse me?Endangers your business? Did the state/municipality say anyone in particular can't patronize your business or did the state/municipality say simply no one can smoke there?...Do your customers come to your restaurant to smoke or to eat?
Alcohol is a legal product too but you can't sell it or even drink it anywhere you want to either.
Remember this anti-smoking insanity the next time some stupid Rat tries to say he believes in personal freedom from government and we don't. The Rats believe in four "freedoms" only: Abortion, drugs, porn, and flag-burning. The rest is strictly up for grabs.
Following site may be of use to you. Hope you don't posess the cancer genes
http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/cgi/content/full/8/12/1065#T1
If you think the kids have fresh clean air to breath, check out the EPA's report on Diesel Exhaust. Much more dangerous than secondhand cigarette smoke, more carcogenic, smaller particles to clog lungs, and more prevalent in the air. Besides, its unescapable.
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.