Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lane3 who wrote (99261)	2/8/2005 10:31:55 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 793738

I don't consider smoking to be equivilent to defecation. On many levels, the most important one being that defication "in public" can spread contagious disease. If you go somewhere where people are smoking you might get sick, but if you don't go there you will not get sick. If human wastes are handled in an unsanitary way than the result can be disease that spreads beyond the unsanitary area. I don't buy for a moment the right to smoke I don't see a specific natural or constitutional right to smoke, but I do see a general natural right to do what you want withing limits to keep it from harming others. An enclosed space and clear warning on entering it would qualify for me. You are not harmed in the sense I am using the term if you can not enter someone else's place of business because you literally do not like the atmosphere there. More than the right to smoke I see the decision to be part of the property rights of the owner. Maybe we should allow restaurants to make that decision but make them put a warning label on the door... <g> I could actually agree to that as a policy. It might be considered to entail a little bit of "nannysim", but if so not much, its fair warning for those who do not like smoking, and more so to those like you will might get ill from being in its presence. Tim