| Subject: Re: Are smokers discriminated against? (long) |
Author:
Past Tempted
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 23:27:04 02/06/02 Wed
In reply to:
BSF
's message, "Are smokers discriminated against? (long)" on 12:40:33 02/05/02 Tue
This is the third time I tried to answer this question. I must not be intended to give an answer. Smokers are discriminated against taxwise but so are drivers. Smokers complain about taxes but are ready liberal when it comes to politics. Maybe I'm not a true smoker. I think tax relief can come from less government spending.
Smokers probably outnumber the true antis but they are fragmented. They tend not to form groups or even agree.
Most who do not smoke are rather easy going. They may even sit in the smoking section of a restaurant if they can get seated faster. The people who insist on non-smoking are not only die-hard antis and those who keep a lid on their smoking. They don't want to smell what they are missing.
That's a start on a rather large subject. What do others think.
>I think we'd agree that they are. Not everyone in the
>world would though. There is a thread on a general
>discussion board that is asking that question. Here is
>the original post, and some selected responses to it:
>
>"I don't smoke, but the self-righteous attitude of the
>anti-smoking crowd totally turns me off. To me,
>smoking is a personal choice. If you want to do it,
>it's your decision.
>
>Today, people make a huge deal about someone smoking,
>they turn their nose up at it, frown and gossip about
>smokers. If they're sitting in a non-smoking section,
>and a whiff of smoke drifts over to where they are,
>they raise hell.
>
>I don't think it's right.
>
>I probably should've lived in the 30's 40's and 50's
>when smoking was something everyone did, and it was
>accepted as a normal practice. Of course all the old
>movies with the smoking make it look full of glamour.
>
>Sure, there are health risks related to smoking. But I
>think they are overhyped, and smoking should be a
>individual decision. If someone chooses to smoke,
>we've no right to judge them, or think them less of a
>person."
>
>
>Some responses:
>
>"Don't forget cigarette taxes. One tax, levied against
>a minority of the population, with the intent of
>raising upwards of $200,000,000 a year depending on
>the state.
>I love the reaction I get from the anti-smoking nazi's
>when I tell them I buy my cigarettes dutyfree and
>don't pay a dime in taxes for them. "
>
>"The door swings both ways. Non-smokers end up paying
>for higher health care expenses, have to listen to
>smokers whine about how they can not smoke anywhere
>they desire, etc. etc.
>As long as someone who is smoking around me does not
>let it blow in my air space, does not fling their
>ashes on the ground, does not fling their cigarette
>butts out the window and does not burn holes in the
>chairs or carpet of the establishments that I frequent
>then I have no problem with it."
>
>"Yes. We can't eat and smoke in public anymore, even
>given the choice of an all smoking restuarant or bar.
>They took our smoking areas away from us at work. In
>some places you aren't even allowed to smoke outside.
>We can't smoke in shopping areas where I live. Not
>outdoor ones even. "
>
>"if you want to smoke that is your right, but it is my
>right not to have to suck down your smoke.....I have a
>right to live....you have a right to die....go kill
>yourself without bothering me"
>
>"I don't want to have to breathe anyone's smoke second
>hand and having my clothes and hair smell is the pits.
>So NO,I don't think smoker's are discriminated against
>- I think it's the other way around - those of us who
>want to breathe fresh air should have a chance!"
>
>"absolutely not. as i suck air trying to stay alive
>and breathe because of incurable asthma caused by
>second hand smoke, i do not feel sorry for them."
>
>"You know, I have read a lot of posts here from self
>righteous non-smokers, and I do think that smokers (me
>being one) are treated like lower class human beings.
>I have heard people talking about making smokers stay
>at home, no longer allowed to smoke elsewhere.
>All I can say to that is, if my smoke bothers you so
>much, then why dont YOU stay at home.
>I refuse to cower outside in the freezing cold just to
>have a quick smoke.
>I say smokers should unite, and say NO MORE!! We
>should take back our Public malls and our Movie
>Theatres.
>Smoke wherever we want to, I seem to recall a time
>where certain races were not allowed in specific
>stores/restaurants. This was very wrong, andit was
>considered discrimination. Well here we are years
>later and now its the smoking people that are not
>allowed in certain places.
>I have always done my best in trying not to offend
>people with my smoke but it always seems that my best
>is not good enough.
>So what, I smoke - Get over it, there are so many
>other things that I could be doing that are much less
>tolerable.
>Just my thoughts on the whole thing, and sure maybe I
>went a little overboard here and there, but I never
>feel like anyone understands exactly what I am trying
>to say.
>:o) "
>
>"I worked for RJ Reynolds (Camel for those of you with
>no clue) and went through all the brainwashing about
>smoking being a choice. This which was not told in
>these sessions is non-smoking is a choice as well. I
>do not like the people with nicotine stinking clothes
>pass me by from their smoking retreat in the
>restaurant on their way out too. If smoking is their
>choice, not wanting them is my choice and if they get
>offended by being discriminated against, can't I ?"
>
>"I used to smoke, but quit awhile back. I do think
>smokers are discriminated against. So much energy and
>money has been spent in the crusade against smoking it
>makes me wonder how well we would have done in the
>crusade against hunger just in the United States(if
>there really was a crusade) if that money was spent on
>that worthy cause.
>Interesting, how we can garner support against
>tobacco, but can't stamp out hunger first in this
>great nation. Anti-smokers should search their
>conscience first because if I was judging I would
>condemn them straight off compared to someone who
>smoked, but made a difference to others."
>
>"No, not at all. Smokers can go anywhere they want
>anytime. They just can't smoke. I have a bowel
>movement once or twice a day. Am I being discriminated
>against because I can't do it in a pot in the middle
>of a restaurant. And that's just offensive, not
>hurtful."
>
>"Yes, they are. And considering how much taxes they
>pay on the cigarettes they buy,they really should be
>given more consideration. "
>
>""So why would you want to add to the pollution by
>smoking?"
>For one, did you ask if I was even considerated of
>people who do not smoke? I would have non-smokers in
>my home and I would step outside if I wanted a smoke.
>Why should I have to do that to make others happy in
>MY HOME? Because I try to be considerate of their
>feelings. Plus if I knew someone was on their way over
>that did not smoke, I would not smoke in my home up
>until the time they left. If that is not being
>considerate I don't know what is.
>Second of all, if we are not allowed to smoke in
>buildings (in being considerate of non-smokers), where
>do you think we should go? Go home for 10 minutes?
>What do you suggest?
>Third, why not go after these BIG companies that
>pollute the air much more then we smokers do?
>Last but not least, I thought I had freedom in this
>land. I know non-smokers have rights. Why do you think
>in most buildings now, there is no smoking. Fine by
>me. No problem. But to tell me that I can not walk out
>onto the sidewalk and have a smoke is beyond me. That
>is my right!
>We all have rights to do what we want (well to a
>certain extent).
>What are your thoughts on drinking and driving? Now
>there is something to think about. When I get behind
>the wheel and light up, I still have control of my
>actions and do not have the intent to do someone else
>harm. Now on the other hand, someone what is drunk and
>gets behind the wheel, Well there is something to
>think about!
>(off the soapbox now. Go ahead and flame away) "
>
>"I will have you know my father had cancer. They claim
>it was from smoking, BUT my dad was gathering proof
>that he had gotten somewhere else. He could pinpoint
>the exact date that something happened to him and his
>partner. Both him and his partner went through the
>same exact things and got the same exact treatments
>and such. his partner did not smoke! My father was a
>policeman and because of one call, just one, and the
>place was TOXIC! (which they were not told)It took his
>life. Yes smoking may not have helped but let me just
>say..you don't have to smoke to get cancer. Everyone
>has the cancer cell and just one thing could trigger
>it. Just one!
>If you have ever smoked then YOU WOULD KNOW how hard
>it is to quit.
>Some people can't just say one day "I quit" and then
>never pick up another.
>I do have kids and try very hard not to smoke around
>them. I go outside when needing a smoke. If I can't
>quit now at least I am trying to be considerate of my
>kids.
>What about drugs, drinking and guns that kills kids? "
>
>"The logic here is fascinating. Don't working about
>smoking related cancer because other things cause
>cancer. Don't worry about smoking because drinking and
>driving is worse. But rape is worse than drinking and
>driving so I suppose we shouldn't worry about that.
>Now, murder is worse than rape so we shouldn't worry
>about rape. Serial murder is worse then a single
>murder so I guess every murderer should be given a
>pass. Genocide is worse than serial murder, so don't
>bother with the serial murderers."
>
>"Tobacco should be banned and made illegal!!!"
>
>"no, I like to sue all smokers for making me sick."
>
>"I THINK IT WORKS BOTH WAYS, I SEE SMOKERS NOT CARING
>ABOUT
>OTHER PEOPLE, AND VICE VERSA. I WAS IN A.C. ONE DAY
>AND IN THE SMOKING SECTION, NO ONE WAS SMOKING AT THE
>TIME, AND PERSON NEXT TO ME ASKED IF IT WOULD BE ALL
>RIGHT FOR HER TO SMOKE, I SAID FINE. I WAS IN THAT
>SECTION BECAUSE OF A PARTICULAR SLOT MACHINE THAT I
>LIKE. I WOULD NOT TELL HER SHE COULDN'T, AFTER ALL,
>SHE HAD THE RIGHT TO, BUT THOUGHT IT WAS NICE THAT SHE
>CONSIDRED OTHER PEOPLE. SO THERE'S GOOD IN SOME, BAD
>IN OTHERS."
>
>"Of course they are. The definition of discrimination
>is to make a difference in treatment on a basis other
>than individual merit. Well we have laws that are
>imposed on smokers as a group - not based on
>"individual merit".
>So I guess the question is really whether that is fair
>on unfair. I say fair. I'm an ex-smoker and all the
>places I couldn't smoke was part of my reason for
>quitting. It was just too big a pain in the ass to
>smoke! (And yes, I quit for health reasons too, of
>course.)
>So, to all the people who discriminated against me
>when I smoked, thank you. You helped me to quit. In
>addition, it is easier to keep away from smokers now,
>thus easier not to restart."
>
>"Now that it has been established that smokers (which
>I am)contaminate the air..how can we get rid of the
>factories that pollute everyones' airspace. Do we draw
>a line around ourselves to let people know where each
>persons air space is? The government has done a great
>job in convincing
>people it is all the smoking peoples' fault for deaths
>by cancer. this diverts everyones' attention from a
>far greater pollutant. I try my best to be careful
>around none smokers but if they but up a stink and I
>am in a designated smoking area..OH WELL"
>
>"actually, i think non smokers are discriminated
>aginst by smokers. i'm a former smoker who can
>truthfully say that smokers are very selfish people
>who only care about their own desires. if thet truly
>cared about themselves even, they would stop smoking."
>
>"smokers going outside isn't even good enough for some
>non-smokers.They whine that they have to walk by
>smokers!
>Saw a post on another board where a non-smoker was
>whining about smelling the smoke from a smoker in the
>car in FRONT OF THEM. Sitting in traffic, with all
>those exhaust fumes (which OF COURSE didn't bother the
>nonsmoker...uh huh), this person claimed they could
>smell cigarette smoke and thinks smoking should be
>banned in cars! Oh please...get a grip! "
>
>"They shouldn't be discriminated against. But every
>smoker deserves to have the crap knocked out of them
>every time they light up. It shouldn't be a crime to
>beat up a smoker"
>
>"I think smokers get more breaks at work in any
>profession. I don't smoke and if I walked outside
>every hour or 2 for 10 min or more I bet people would
>discriminate against me."
>
>"Alright, you don't want me to smoke in a grocery
>store? Fine. Not at work? Alright. Not in a public
>building? Sure. But please, don't sit your butt in the
>Smoking section at Denny's, order a GrandSlam with the
>hashbrowns covered and smothered (cheese and gravy put
>over them) and wash it down with a huge milkshake and
>then get mad at me for lighting up because the second
>hand smoke is "bad for you"."
>
>"It twists my tail that it is fine to have a
>nonsmoking resturant but when the establishment allows
>smoking you have the complainers that want to be free
>to go in all private businesses.
>If you don't like the smoke, go to the non-smoking
>establishments. Geez,it isn't that difficult. Any
>business should be able to make the desision, for
>themselves, if they want to market to smokers or
>non-smokers."
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 