Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I dislike people who harangue others about their behavior and adopt a generally judgemental, schoolmarmish attitude toward anyone who doesn't fit their idea of what a person should be doing. If you want to be a vegan, fine. If you want to be a smoker, fine. If you want to be a fitness nut, fine. If you want to be a glutton, fine. It's your choice. Religious zealot? Atheist? Totally ok. Just don't get in my face about it. Respect my right to live differently and I'll do the same.
Now, if a person is a friend, or especially a family member, then I think it's your responsibility to try to stop them from self destructive behavior. If it's a stranger, mind your own business , assuming they aren't perched on the side of a bridge, threatening to jump.
There are many dangerous things we encounter every day, walking past a smoker probably isn't even in the top twenty. If it bothers you so much, hold your breath while walking past them.
Your 'right' to live differently is subject to your actions having no impact on my health or quality of life. Furthermore it is not for you to determine what my degree of tolerance for your cigarette smoke should be. That said, why is it only friends and family deserve to get the benefit of a good hearted persons concern? Why, if your theory is valid, should the stranger with one leg over the guardrail of the Burnside Bridge suddenly be exempt from the mandate to be left alone to practice whatever self-destructive behaviors one wishes? I doubt you even know. There is so much inconsistency in your opinions that I about all I can determine is that you are about par for the course in a typically American fashion as regards behavior. IOW, don't tell you what to do or what not to do but, please, save me from myself if I really muff it and am about to cark it big time.
Did you read this before you clicked ‘Post Reply”?
After reading this completely through, you gave me the creeps ~ and not in a productive way. You are so friggin’ FULL of yourself that your cup runneth over. I don't smoke (anymore) but I'm sure glad that I'm not as "perfect" as you. If anything, in all your “rambling”, you likely gave sayulitaLESS encouragement with your arrogance.
I sense a bullying factor within your “family” that noticeably involves women. You must have some mighty “god”(you)-fearing members among you. There is absolutely no chance of my brothers attempting to make demands on what I can and cannot do with my life and my body, and that goes for my husband as well. If I want to be 20 lbs overweight then THEY would have no say in it, nor would I tolerate condescending or shaming remarks. That’s bull-hit.
These forums are an open enterprise and we all the take risks in offending others with our opinions. And that’s okay ~ I didn’t join City-Data to “make friends”. But you hit rock-bottom with this one.
You have perfectly proven the main point of my post with your overly emotional response. True, I had dinner waiting when I wrote that piece and did not have a chance to edit, but, what I did manage to get onto the wire makes sense to me even after your hatchet job on it. What part of all the women in my family who have ever smoked, even for just a few years, develop terminal lung cancer and die, horribly, within a few months after their diagnosis. What part of this has happened four times makes you think the rest of us are "bullies" for doing what we can to keep our family members safe? For the record, I do not live near any of my family and thus I do not personally participate in the "tough love" that takes place, be it over weight issues or health ones. I know it goes on though and my point was: without it, some family would have had different outcomes to their lives. You might be surprised to learn that none of them resent it as much as you seem to think they should. I haven't done it in years, I haven't had to do it in years but in my youth I have grabbed cigarette packs from 'friends' and stomped them. The cost... what does a pack cost in PDX? ~5 bucks? Do you know what they cost in NYC now? $11/pack. That is why there are so many smokers in PDX relative to other places. Even though you don't think so, compared to many other places, cigarettes are a screaming deal in Stump Town. I didn't crush those cigarette packs because I was worried about some second hand smoke. I did it because I wanted to make a point to the smoker that I strongly disapproved of their habit because I cared for them as a human being. What you call arrogance, I call concern.
I didn't crush those cigarette packs because I was worried about some second hand smoke. I did it because I wanted to make a point to the smoker that I strongly disapproved of their habit because I cared for them as a human being. What you call arrogance, I call concern.
H
YOU grabbed something that wasn't yours and stomped it because YOU didn't like it?!?! You don't think that's way too intrusive and outa' line???
I know you commute via bike. Since few bikers obey their laws completely, how would you like it if a driver pulled over, yanked you off the bike, and attempted to damage it because you cut in front of his car illegally? You'd be in the wrong, yes, but it wouldn't warrant his reaction, despite his right to argue that you endangered his life (and yours). And, somehow, something tells me YOU wouldn't like it one bit.
@lawmomma: no, I actually don't use hairspray, excessive cleaning products, air freshners, spray paint (now why would I use that regularly?) etc. I think the last time I really HAD to use glue was in elementary school, and that was Elmer's glue. Also, the only mower I ever had to use in my life while growing up was a push one with blades. And I use public transportation.
I applaud your post and your efforts; I bet you tried your darndest to offend me.
Uggg [facepalms]- you missed the point entirely, and in fact further proved it. Since when is public transportation not a vehicle? And I didn't say "excessive" cleaning products, or "regular" paint usage. The fact that you have to qualify your usage shows that you still use pollutants yourself albeit occasionally. My point was that if you are so burdened with the occasional whiff of a smokers' fumes that you believe their rights are inferior to your own, then then I am surprised that you are not advocating for the demise of all other sources of pollution as well. But, you can somehow manage to choke down the occasional fumes when they serve a purpose that suits your needs. So, in that case, you believe YOUR right to pollute (when it's an activity YOU value) is superior to others' rights to fresh air, but when you are the burdened breather, YOUR right to fresh air is superior to others' rights to pollute. So basically, you think YOUR rights, in general, are superior to others.
And no, I didn't "try my darnedest" to offend you. It's clear you couldn't care less about how other people feel, and I know enough about your type than to even try to rile your cool, calm, righteous demeanor. In fact, if the stereotype holds true, you're probably quite proud of your lack of empathy. Congrats on that.
Uggg [facepalms]- you missed the point entirely, and in fact further proved it. Since when is public transportation not a vehicle? And I didn't say "excessive" cleaning products, or "regular" paint usage. The fact that you have to qualify your usage shows that you still use pollutants yourself albeit occasionally. My point was that if you are so burdened with the occasional whiff of a smokers' fumes that you believe their rights are inferior to your own, then then I am surprised that you are not advocating for the demise of all other sources of pollution as well. But, you can somehow manage to choke down the occasional fumes when they serve a purpose that suits your needs. So, in that case, you believe YOUR right to pollute (when it's an activity YOU value) is superior to others' rights to fresh air, but when you are the burdened breather, YOUR right to fresh air is superior to others' rights to pollute. So basically, you think YOUR rights, in general, are superior to others.
And no, I didn't "try my darnedest" to offend you. It's clear you couldn't care less about how other people feel, and I know enough about your type than to even try to rile your cool, calm, righteous demeanor. In fact, if the stereotype holds true, you're probably quite proud of your lack of empathy. Congrats on that.
This is such a ridiculous argument.
I repeat - We need to get from one place to another, we need to clean our clothes, etc... NO ONE NEEDS TO SMOKE.
Your 'right' to live differently is subject to your actions having no impact on my health or quality of life. Furthermore it is not for you to determine what my degree of tolerance for your cigarette smoke should be. That said, why is it only friends and family deserve to get the benefit of a good hearted persons concern? Why, if your theory is valid, should the stranger with one leg over the guardrail of the Burnside Bridge suddenly be exempt from the mandate to be left alone to practice whatever self-destructive behaviors one wishes? I doubt you even know. There is so much inconsistency in your opinions that I about all I can determine is that you are about par for the course in a typically American fashion as regards behavior. IOW, don't tell you what to do or what not to do but, please, save me from myself if I really muff it and am about to cark it big time.
H
Because if I smoked and you started bitching me out about it with the same kind of attitude you show in your posts and I didn't know you I'd punch you the **** out. Then, my smoking would really be detrimental to your health. Have a nice day!
This is such a ridiculous argument.
I repeat - We need to get from one place to another, we need to clean our clothes, etc... NO ONE NEEDS TO SMOKE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leisesturm
Your 'right' to live differently is subject to your actions having no impact on my health or quality of life.
Didn't one of you vote for the recent tax increase for the wealthy? The one that didn't affect you but did affect someone elses quality of life? Afterall, quality of life is subjective.
Both of your arguments are so decidedly self-serving and self-righteous it makes me ill.
[Sarcasm] So as a society we've decided that public transportation is better for the environment than everyone driving cars. The key word is "better". Is public transportation actually good for the environment? No. I'm going to start gospel-thumping that we need to actually ban public transportation. And while we're at it, we need to ban bicycles. Because the steel, aluminum, carbon fiber, and rubber (petroleum based by the way) is made in factories that pollute. We need to force people to move within walking distance of their jobs. Not ask, force....its the only way because we need to help those who can't help themselves. But unfortunately we also need to ban certain types of footwear that contain synthetic rubber or other petro-chemicals. We will mandate sustainably grown organic hemp sandals. Its the right thing to do because I'm already wearing them. You must assimilate so we can all live freely.
We need to ban electricity as well. The magnetic fields given off by electricity can give me cancer and how dare you drive by me in your cancer-causing prius or with your battery-powered bike light. [/Sarcasm]
I don't smoke. In fact I hate the smell of cigarette smoke. But as long as you aren't blowing smoke in my face in an enclosed environment or throwing butts out the window, smoke away.
I haven't noticed that there are more smokers here than other places. It seems to be on par with other cities.
Didn't one of you vote for the recent tax increase for the wealthy? The one that didn't affect you but did affect someone elses quality of life? Afterall, quality of life is subjective.
Both of your arguments are so decidedly self-serving and self-righteous it makes me ill.
[Sarcasm] So as a society we've decided that public transportation is better for the environment than everyone driving cars. The key word is "better". Is public transportation actually good for the environment? No. I'm going to start gospel-thumping that we need to actually ban public transportation. And while we're at it, we need to ban bicycles. Because the steel, aluminum, carbon fiber, and rubber (petroleum based by the way) is made in factories that pollute. We need to force people to move within walking distance of their jobs. Not ask, force....its the only way because we need to help those who can't help themselves. But unfortunately we also need to ban certain types of footwear that contain synthetic rubber or other petro-chemicals. We will mandate sustainably grown organic hemp sandals. Its the right thing to do because I'm already wearing them. You must assimilate so we can all live freely.
We need to ban electricity as well. The magnetic fields given off by electricity can give me cancer and how dare you drive by me in your cancer-causing prius or with your battery-powered bike light. [/Sarcasm]
I don't smoke. In fact I hate the smell of cigarette smoke. But as long as you aren't blowing smoke in my face in an enclosed environment or throwing butts out the window, smoke away.
I haven't noticed that there are more smokers here than other places. It seems to be on par with other cities.
I don't get into peoples' faces when I encounter a smoker. I sheild my nose and walk as far from them as I can.
But since you think smokers are on a par with our basic daily needs, I'll be more than happy to have you come & sweep up their cigarette butts & spit from my sidewalks, wash off the stains on the building where they put out their cigarettes, hose down my sidewalks, repaint their smoke-stained apartments when they move out, etc...
Your post is apples & oranges.
But since you think smokers are on a par with our basic daily needs, I'll be more than happy to have you come & sweep up their cigarette butts & spit from my sidewalks, wash off the stains on the building where they put out their cigarettes, hose down my sidewalks, repaint their smoke-stained apartments when they move out, etc...
Your post is apples & oranges.
I'll do that as soon as you remove the unsightly railroad tracks and ugly bike stands from in front of the buildings. Also, can you ensure that the bikes are not chained to trees or lightpoles so that they fall over and obstruct half the sidewalk? I don't want to trip over them and get that petroleum based bike grease all over my pants. Also, why should I be forced to look at a guy in spandex at 7am? Its repulsive.
...I haven't noticed that there are more smokers here than other places. It seems to be on par with other cities.
As an ex-smoker myself (1-2 packs a day for 24 years) second hand smoke doesn’t really bother me, but having moved here relatively recently, I have to generally agree with the OP. I was amazed at the number of smokers here at work and on the street.
And I don’t know why this kept popping into my head as I was reading this thread, but I was also surprised at the large percentage of men who don’t wash their hands after using the restroom…
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
