mistoferin
Posts: 8284
Joined: 10/27/2004 Status: offline
|
You can call straw man all you like Chaingang. You chose to take one paragraph out of the context of an entire conversation and you're wondering why it seems absurd to you? The "conversation" between MistressLorelei and myself went like this....and I think that she understood where I was coming from just fine. Also, just for the record here...I have not once voiced an opinion on second hand smoke in this thread....nor have I even mentioned if I am a smoker or not...I was simply pointing out a possible repercussion that I see as a result of the direction the anti-smoking movement is going. You can certainly disagree with me if you like, it's not going to change my mind. Howard Weyers of Weyco Insurance is a man that has been a business associate of mine. His first target was smoking...and he has been successful in his campaign against it in the workplace. So now you may be fully qualified for a postion with all the proper degrees and experience but turned away based simply on the fact that you are a smoker. You may be a faithful, long term employee who has devoted many years to your employer...and now your job is at jeopardy based on your smoking status. As I said, I know the man personally and I can tell you that his real pet peeve is obesity. He challenged smoking first because he felt it would get more support. He fully intends on tackling weight next. So the examples I used aren't so far fetched. quote:
There seem to be smokers, non smokers....and then there are anti smoking fanatics. The whole issue is getting ridiculous. Companies can now fire you for smoking...or refuse to hire you in the first place based upon your smoking status. People are losing custody of their children because they are smokers. There are towns that are trying to become smoke free...so it won't even be legal to smoke inside your own home. To the fanatics that are behind and pushing these movements....I would suggest you use caution. Right now it's smoking. The next item on the agenda is obesity. (Gosh I sure hope none of you anti smoking fanatics are carrying a few extra pounds) Soon there could come a day when you could walk back into your job after lunch and be fired because you were seen eating at Burger King. Not given a position because you didn't match the numbers on the height/weight ratio scale. If we keep allowing our rights to be stripped from us...it won't be long before we don't have any left to fight for. Mistress Lorelei: So don't strip away the right of smokers' to smoke indoors.... Instead, strip away the non-smokers' rights to breathe safe indoor air? That's the right you want? You smoke, I choke... and all is right in the world. I don't want rights to be stripped away. I often speak about rights for minorities, abortion rights, etc. I, however, don't think it's fanatical to place more importance in the right to breathe clean air, than the right to take clean air away from others. When eating Burger King for lunch is proven to infringe on the rights of non-Burger King eating co-workers, as the greasy fat grams are filtered into the air and adding pounds and high cholesterol to others who didn't want to share the poor eating habits of another... you bet people would be complaining! But it has already been proven. A diet high in fat causes major health problems in the long term. Heart disease and colon cancer leading the way. These diseases lead to higher health insurance premiums. Those costs are passed on to everyone, your co-workers, your neighbors and strangers who you've never even met....including me. Mistress Lorelei: I agree.... But then... smoking should be banned, right? We know about the detrimental effects smoking has on those who do it... and our, as you said 'higher health insurance premiums' because of it. And seat belts should be mandatory, because fatal accidents from non-seat belt wearers hikes up our auto insurance premiums as well, etc. Which rights are we wanting to protect again? Based on your comment about heart disease and cancer causing you higher health premiums, I'd think smoking would be on the top of your ban list. No actually none of them are on my ban list...you missed my point. I am not into banning things...or losing rights. I would prefer the government stay the hell out of my life. I stand on the side of adults being able to make their own choices. If I want to smoke a cigarette, I don't want there to be a law against it. If I want to eat a bloody red steak...I don't want there to be a law against it. If I want to eat my eggs sunny side up...I don't want there to be a law against it. Mistress Lorelei: I agree with you to a point, and agree to disagree about the rest. I want rights and choices for all too. I don't want to smoke, but if others want to, they should be able to anywhere, except in public places where others are harmed directly and physically as smokers enjoy their right to smoke... and their "right" to harm others simultaneously.
< Message edited by mistoferin -- 8/5/2006 6:49:43 AM >
_____________________________
Peace and light, ~erin~ There are no victims here...only volunteers. When you make a habit of playing on the tracks, you thereby forfeit the right to bitch when you get hit by a train. "I did it! I admit it and I'm gonna do it again!"
|