:eek:
Where the heck do you live??? Can’t you get, like, heroin cheaper than that?
If I had to guess, I’d say LolaCocaCola lives in or near New York City.
Thank you very much but if you reread my post I think I made it clear that I was not replying to the OP but to the statement that regulating smoking in public would be comparable to regulating fatty foods and alcohol. The difference of course is that I can be in the room where you eat fatty foods without being force fed fatty foods. I can be in a room where alcohol is being drunk without being forced to imbibe. I cannot be in a room where someone is smoking without being forced to inhale the smoke.
Sorry I thought I was clear the first time by quoting the remark I was replying to.
My apologies for my misapprehension.
Since Winston Smith was specifically complaining about the laws in MA, not the laws in NYC, Degrance inferred, as do I, that Winston Smith objects to all such laws, not just the specific example of Bloomberg and the cigar bars.
FTR, I agree that the notion of applying these laws to cigar bars, as per the OP’s comments about Michael Bloomberg IS absurd. Anyone going into or applying for work at a cigar bar does so knowing that the entire purpose of the place revolves around smoking. I think Bloomberg is an ass for not realizing this.
But to compare second-hand smoke laws to banning the consumption of fatty foods or alcohol is disingenuous. The latter are examples of the notion of a “nanny state” run amok. On the other hand, second-hand smoke laws AS A RULE are not about protecting people from themselves – they’re about protecting people from detrimental health effects from smoking by others. You’re still free to smoke, just not around unwilling victims. **
[/QUOTE]
[flame]
If business owners want to cater to non-smokers only, that’s their business. Not yours. If you choose not to frequent a resteraunt because they allow smoking, that’s your problem, not mine. Do the noble thing and get take-out. Or better yet, stay home and starve. We need free thinkers to evolve. Not a bunch of Drone Bees. I know my hot cofee is hot. I know smoking is bad for me. I know the Superman costume will not enable me to fly. I know fast food will clog my arteries and make me fat. I don’t need you making laws about it. We already have more than enough laws. Comparing anti-smoking laws to banning consumption of fatty foods is certainly not “disingenuous”. And “nanny state”? Not on my watch, bub. What you are defending as “Protecting The Innocent” is a perfect example of the political left’s dream - a huge beurocracy of lawmakers and governers restricting everything they deem “dangerous”, based not on the “Publics Best Interest” as they claim, but on their own self-interests - power, money, lobbying strength, and more power, coupled with a bunch of Sheep and Manufactured Criminals that swallow everything they serve up. Please don’t try to speak for me or sum up my position. Ever.
[/flame]