Quote:
|
Originally Posted by filtherton
Don't be dense, i've repeatedly said that these bans have a large amount of support. This is actually a case of the public deciding what is in it's best interest. It's a shame you find yourself on the losing side of this position, but thems the breaks. Now i guess you know how the public urinators feel.
|
Real mature and showing how flimsy your argument is when you have to use the highlighted portion to attack.
Your refusal to talk to me like a person with respect shows exactly the superior stutus you are taking.
"We must control what others do, because they do not know how to do for themselves."
Quote:
|
Pan, these aren't rights. You should stop calling them rights. Especially since you can't back up your assertion that these are rights. And as far as civility goes, you're the only one in this thread who resorted to the text equivalent of yelling.
|
Excuse me, they are rights. For too long we have mislabelled rights as "priveleges" so that they can be taken away and/or played with.
Quote:
As long as we're talking about made-up rights, let me be the first to claim that every person has the right to spend an evening at a bar without smelling like smoke; smokers want to take away that right; smokers just want to exert power over others; this is the beginning of the end of all freedom everywhere.
See how ridiculous that is?
|
And where exactly did I claim I had the right to smoke anywhere????? No, I stated I am more than happy to smoke in designated areas INSIDE the venue I am in. Those areas around here are already made.... separate rooms, with separate ventilations. I have the right to enjoy my dinner the same as you, I may prefer to smoke while I eat..... that is my right.
Just as it is a business owners right to serve whom he wants how he wants. Of course when I say that your side had to take it to silly juvenile extremes like "masterbating in food..." which again shows your mentality of "we are superior.... we know better so fuckin shut up and conform or we'll keep villifying you and using more juvenile attacks on you."
Quote:
|
Get over yourself. Smoking bans are not the beginning of the descent into totalitarianism. That's ridiculous. You do your position no service when you say things that make you come across as hysterical.
|
I think they are the start. I find most of your side's arguments very immature and as stated above, juvenile.
Quote:
|
I smoke outside all the time. Guess what, i'm fine. I like it, even when it's 25 degrees F. I would suggest that you smoke outside.
|
Lady Sage and I smoke outside of our house because we have a parrot that is very expensive and we don't want to hurt it.
I have no problem smoking outside.... I do it at work and school. I am arguing the fact that restaurant, bars and other places that historically have allowed smoking be allowed to have the owners decide what they want to do.
Quote:
I'm thinking more and more that this debate is about people rationalizing their disgust with inconvenient laws by coming up with really shaky, inconsistent arguments as to why those laws are bad.
For instance you have the "These laws violate my rights" argument, which completely ignores the fact that unless you make up your own definition of the word right you actually have no right to smoke. No, it's not like censorship because the constitution actually mentions something about freedom of speech; it doesn't mention tobacco products.
|
Ah, but then again the Constitution doesn't say anything about universal healthcare (which I have seen you for), minimum wage, guaranteeing education, etc.
As for censorship, nowhere does the Constitution say we have the right to have Tom Sawyer in our library, or Howard Stern on the radio or internet access..... show me in the Constitution where it truly gives us those rights.
Quote:
There's also the "business owners should be able to do whatever they want" argument, which is also ridiculous. Has anyone heard of regulatory agencies? The government? They're the people who tell businesses what they can't do and they've been doing it for a long time. It's nothing new, and to claim that this instance of regulation is somehow more heinous or "wrong" than every other instance smacks of inconsistency.
There's the "if you don't like smoke why don't you go somewhere else" argument to which it is way too easy to respond "if you don't like smoking bans why don't you move to somewhere where they don't have them". Both statements are really nothing more than a fancy way of saying "Fuck you". Really, though, it's not that simple. Like i said above, there weren't any smoke-free bars in my city before the ban, i couldn't simply "go somewhere else" unless that somewhere else was to the liquor store and then home. This never seems to get addressed when i bring it up, though.
|
I'm running late for class (have to grab a cigarette also)..... I'll finish tonight when I get home from work.... around 12:30 EST.
By the way, this is a good debate until you have to use juvenile examples to try to prove your point.... then you lose and show how weak your position is.