U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-07-2011, 11:24 AM
 
Location: Chicago
1,257 posts, read 2,301,451 times
Reputation: 1140

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
And not all that long ago the consensus was that smoking was "pretty healthy for you". As I said earlier in this thread, doctors recommended it because scientific evidence showed that it was.

Again, if you think that the scenario I mentioned is all that far-fetched, you're either naive or so self-centered that you think that ONLY those rights that you object to will ever be targeted, and yours would NEVER be.

History shows otherwise.

Really? Tell me, how long ago was smoking deemed healthy for you?
51 years ago when my father started smoking, people knew it wasn't healthy. Sure, they didn't know it was cancerous as they do now, but it wasn't considered good for you. And let's run with your hypothetical that we discover milk is bad for us one day. Let's pretend we find out it's actually deadly and cancerous. Again, how does that affect the person sitting next to you? Drinking cancerous milk will not give the person next to you exposure to the same dangers. That is the fact that you keep ignoring which would make your scenario relevant to this debate.

And saying that people cannot smoke in public is not going to suddenly cross some line of civil or private rights in this country that hasn't already been crossed 100 times before. This is far from unprecedented. For exhibit A, please see the list of every drug in this country that has been made illegal. Please quit hanging on to some libertarian daydream about an America that has never existed. The government has made the general health of this country its business for the better part of its existence. This isn't "1984" coming into fruition.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-07-2011, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,816 posts, read 40,057,471 times
Reputation: 24363
Smoking was promoted by doctors as being healthy during my childhood - which would have been about 50 years ago.


No one is forcing you, by the way, to go into a smoking permitted establishment and be exposed to smoke unless you just want to do so and throw a hissy fit to make a point. As for being exposed to smoke in the outdoors, I take it you do not use a car?

As for milk, I noted that milk AND PRODUCTS CONTAINING MILK would be banned, under that scenario. Because the milk would be hidden and, according to some, causes health problems for humans, and humans would be being exposed to it whether they wanted to be or not.

IHowever, I've just remembered that getting into religious arguments never works, and that smoking is nothing if not a religious argument on the part of the anti-smoking (as distinguished from the nonsmokers, of which I am one - I don't care for smoking, but I care for our rights a heck of a lot more than I don't care for smoking).

If only it didn't have to do with rights and people being so obtuse as to think that they can get rid of the rights of others without getting rid of their own in the process.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 11:38 AM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 29,615,912 times
Reputation: 7667
LOL, I just noticed all the Statewide smoking ban passed threads below.

It will only be time for Texas since Houston, Dallas San Antonio and Austin have already passed bans.

horselady you can choose to not drink milk if you don't want to. Whether you do or not doesn't hurt anyone
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Underneath the Pecan Tree
15,988 posts, read 32,070,688 times
Reputation: 7335
I'm neutral to the issue because I do think people have the right to destroy their own bodies, but it becomes an issue when people can't respect other people's space and feelings. I don't smoke and I'd appreciate if people not smoke around me.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 01:32 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,816 posts, read 40,057,471 times
Reputation: 24363
If not milk, how about salt? NYC is leading the way there for a ban on salt.

Like I said, religion cannot be argued.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 01:59 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 29,615,912 times
Reputation: 7667
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
If not milk, how about salt? NYC is leading the way there for a ban on salt.

Like I said, religion cannot be argued.
I am totally for a ban against people throwing salt in other peoples eyes in places of public accommodation.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 02:18 PM
 
Location: Ohio
15,719 posts, read 14,824,391 times
Reputation: 22000
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClarenceBodiker View Post
So just to be clear, you are 100% in favor of decriminalizing crack, cocaine, heroine, meth, marijuana, hallucinogens, and all other illegal drugs and allowing these drugs to be used in public, right?
Ummmm, tobacco is a LEGAL product.

So, is alcohol, which is known to cause a great deal of social ills. People drive drunk, abuse others, rob, kill, and rape under the influence......yet no one seems to have a problem with it, society wholeheartedly accepts alcohol.

Don't you find that kind of hypocritical?

Don't you think alcohol should be added to your list?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Up on the moon laughing down on you
18,509 posts, read 29,615,912 times
Reputation: 7667
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annie53 View Post
Ummmm, tobacco is a LEGAL product.

So, is alcohol, which is known to cause a great deal of social ills. People drive drunk, abuse others, rob, kill, and rape under the influence......yet no one seems to have a problem with it, society wholeheartedly accepts alcohol.

Don't you find that kind of hypocritical?

Don't you think alcohol should be added to your list?
Alcohol is regulated, just like cigarettes.


Now drinking on its own is not inherently dangerous. It is drinking in combination with something else that is dangerous.

So someone drinking in a bar isn't going to cause you to get run over by a car. It is someone who drinks and then goes off driving that is dangerous. Therefore, drinking and driving is regulated.

smoking on the other hand is dangerous all by itself. just lighting up harms people. So that is what the government is willing to regulate.

and fyi, society doesn't wholeheartedly accept alcohol.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 02:34 PM
 
Location: Central Texas
20,816 posts, read 40,057,471 times
Reputation: 24363
Quote:
Originally Posted by HtownLove View Post
I am totally for a ban against people throwing salt in other peoples eyes in places of public accommodation.
That's not what NYC's proposed ban is aimed at. It's aimed at requiring chefs in restaurants to change their recipes to leave out, or radically reduce, salt in their food so that people won't get to eat it unless they salt it at the table. Now, any cook worth their salt (interesting old phrase, that) knows that WHEN you salt is as important as how much salt is added, and that people are much more inclined to oversalt their food when not enough is added at the right time during cooking - much more than would be added during the cooking, in fact. So the very people who are pushing the salt ban clearly have no idea what they're talking about, they're acting in a kneejerk fashion to a popular idea that's based on very little actual facts.

Even the idea that salt raises blood pressure? Applies to a very small portion of the population that is "reactive" and not the population as a whole. It would be like banning bees because I have to carry an epipen lest I get stung, rather than requiring me to take responsibility for staying away from bees, or banning peanuts because some people have an allergic reaction to them.

This applies to most of the things that people want to trample other people's rights over, while steadfastly thinking that nothing that THEY like or think good would ever have the same done to it.

This has nothing to do with smoking, and everything to do with how deep in the mud you're willing to stomp the Constitution in order to make other people do what you want them to. Pure and simple.

Of course, there's a lot of that going around these days. More's the pity. The human impulse that was responsible for justifying the Inquisition and the Crusades are not a thing of the past, not hardly.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-07-2011, 02:58 PM
 
Location: Purgatory (A.K.A. Dallas, Texas)
5,010 posts, read 13,825,853 times
Reputation: 2450
Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady View Post
This has nothing to do with smoking, and everything to do with how deep in the mud you're willing to stomp the Constitution in order to make other people do what you want them to. Pure and simple.

Uh, what?

Your lack of understanding about what the Constitution is appalling.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top