We're defending property rights, while you're defending the mythical "right" to force a property owner to conform to your personal wishes.
Health regulations regarding what goes on in a restaurant kitchen are necessary because the public can't see what's going on in the kitchen.
Restaurant or bar patrons are aware of whether an establishment allows smoking or not before they enter or shortly thereafter. They then have the choice to leave or stay.
Much of your argument seems to swerve toward the health effects of second-hand smoke, although the thread is concerned with private property rights and non-interference by the government in the free marketplace.
You have no more "right" to prevent a business owner from deciding to allow his patrons to smoke than smokers have a "right" to prevent a business owner from deciding to make his establishment non-smoking.
It's very simple, really.