| Author | Message | ||
     Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 457 Registered: 2-2003 |
Libertarian, Here's a question I posed this afternoon that I don't think you've answered, that I think goes to the heart of the issue:
| ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1128 Registered: 3-2004  |
When carcinogens are involved - there shouldn't be a choice. now you arent even debating or discussing. you are just spouting rhetoric. This is a favorite tactic of GW and his cabal. | ||
| SO Ref Citizen Username: So_refugee Post Number: 1388 Registered: 2-2005  |
I liken the debate surrounding a potential ban on smoking in areas accessible to the public to the debate that occurred over seat belt regulations. Many felt it was a personal choice; however, the overriding consensus was that wearing a belt saved lives and helped lower insurance rates/medical costs. Buckling up became the norm. A total ban on smoking may be the final destination, but, that cannot be the first solution or we'll simply get stuck in debate without any progress. Of course, you can only change where you have influence and, in this case, our immediate areas are Maplewood/South Orange and, then, NJ. Sort of "think global, act local." Also, most private businesses have to provide public access that meets ADA guidelines, as well as, those of the health department; therefore, they do not have complete sole discretion in how they run their business. | ||
| Joan Supporter Username: Joancrystal Post Number: 6872 Registered: 5-2001 |
Libertarian: In banning tobacco products, would you also ban the use of nicotine patches even if they were classified as perscription medication? I would love to see the sale of tobacco products banned and I would love to see the use of tobacco products banned, even in the privacy of one's own home but I don't see that happening any time soon and I suspect you don't see that happening either. A ban on tobacco products would be about as easy to administer as the ban on alcoholic beverages during prohibition or the present day war on controlled substances (narcotics and related drugs). Banning tobacco products won't work for several reasons, the most improtant of which is that many smokers (if not all) quickly form a physical as well as an emotional dependency on the tobbacco products they use. Another reason is that tobacco use is still too socially acceptable in too many subcultures in this country for it to be legislated out of existence. In the absence of being able to legislate against the sale and use of tobacco products, I would gladly press for laws which make it as difficult as possible for persons who choose to smoke to do so and I would strongly support legislation which severely limits their ability to smoke in the presence of others. I think you and I have a different definition of "public spaces". I am using the term to refer to places (either publically or privately owned) in which the general public may congregate while you seem to be referring to publically owned spaces only. Interestingly, all of the anti-smoking legislation with which I am familiar uses the broader of our two definitions. I hope this helps to clarify my position on this subject. | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 3457 Registered: 1-2004  |
Lib- Those who can't stop smoking are addicts. Nicotine is a drug. Period. I'll be very happy when this passes. I know of several bar owners who can't wait for the smoking ban to go into effect. 'Why don't they just ban it in their bar you ask?' Because they don't want to look like the bad guy. | ||
| TomR Citizen Username: Tomr Post Number: 894 Registered: 6-2001 |
jaime, Is this the argument you were seeking? TomR | ||
| Fabulouswalls Citizen Username: Fabulouswalls Post Number: 3 Registered: 10-2005 |
JTA has a good point. The bowling alley has the same problem. They don't want to look bad either. | ||
| jamie Citizen Username: Jamie Post Number: 351 Registered: 6-2001  |
TomR - I wasn't seeking any specific argument - I'm open to hear all sides. Nicotine addiction is the main problem here, and most of the current bar regulars fit this category. Thus no bar is going to cut them off. They on the other hand prefer a statewide ban to even the playing field. It all comes down to money or health. Bottomline. The Assembly Health and Human Services session starts at 10am - you can view the proceedings online here: http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/media/live_audio.asp | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 3462 Registered: 1-2004 |
Tom R- I looked through the thread to see if you mentioned being a smoker. You said you were. A few questions to ask your self. Actually just one really. Could you tell yourself, right now this minute, "No more smoking?" I'm willing to be you can. Can you stick to it though? Or will you find yourself smoking again? I know a number of people who have tried on more then one occasion to quit. Unfortunately, they find it very difficult because they are addicted to the nicotine. Smokers don't like to hear they have an addiction. This doesn't mean that every smoker is addicted; Just as not everyone who drinks alcohol becomes an alcoholic. Many smokers though do have some type of dependence on the nicotine; just as some people have one on caffeine. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1156 Registered: 3-2004 |
I would love to see the use of tobacco products banned, even in the privacy of one's own home wow! you would allow this but i bet you screamed about GW's illegal phone taps. how can you ever condone the restriction of perssonal freedom? ponderous! | ||
| jamie Citizen Username: Jamie Post Number: 352 Registered: 6-2001 |
Bill just passed the Assembly Health Committee: 9-1 Off to the main assembly on Monday! | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4641 Registered: 9-2001  |
WOW, how about that? Who was the one vote against it from "The Libertarian"?  Congratulations are in order, and let’s see what happens next... | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1158 Registered: 3-2004 |
yay! more suppresion of personal freedom! anyone who supports this should never complain about NSA wire tapping. | ||
| jamie Citizen Username: Jamie Post Number: 353 Registered: 6-2001 |
This was the fellow opposed:  Samuel D. Thompson (R) The only debate the other 9 had about the bill was that fact that casino floors were exempt, but they agreed that it was a good first step and accepted the bill as is with the hopes of extending to casinos later. | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4643 Registered: 9-2001 |
...what does that (R) at the end of his name mean, Roser? ;-) He sure looks like one... | ||
| Just The Aunt Supporter Username: Auntof13 Post Number: 3465 Registered: 1-2004 |
Lib- You don't get it, do you? There are MANY business owners who WELCOME the ban. I know of several business owners who would love to forbid smoking in their establishment BUT out of fear of looking like 'the bad guy' and loosing business from smokers who will just go elsewhere, they don't ban it. By having it be something across the state, everyone is on a level playing field. I disagree with the ban on one point, the casinos; it should be banned there as well. I actually feel bad for those smokers who want to quit, try to quit, but find it very difficult. I'm old enough to remove when it was okay to smoke in the classroom of colleges, while class was in session. It use to be OK to smoke on airplanes and movie theaters. For those who use the argument 'if you don't like smoke, don't go places smoking's allowed,' should I have not signed up for classes I needed? Not flown places I had to go? Why should a smoker have more rights then a non smoker? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1159 Registered: 3-2004 |
You don't get it, do you? i do get it. it is suppression of personal freedom. | ||
| Fabulouswalls Citizen Username: Fabulouswalls Post Number: 5 Registered: 10-2005 |
Smoking impinges on my rights to breathe cleaner air. I think that given the health issues involved with smoking and second hand smoke something should be done. You can't make everybody happy but there has to be a give and take. My parents both smoked when I was a kid and my father died at 46 from cancer. The house and the car always smelled like cigarettes and everything (including my father's teeth) was tinged yellow from the nicotine. It is pretty disgusting to think that people would want to ingest that stuff. Sure, you can make that argument about some foods too. And obesity is a huge problem in this country. But someone eating crap 7 days a week right in front of me won't get me sick. Well, maybe a little bit. | ||
| Tom Reingold Supporter Username: Noglider Post Number: 11775 Registered: 1-2003  |
What you don't get is that most of us are willing to sacrifice a certain measure of personal liberty in order to secure a collective benefit. "Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose." | ||
| jamie Citizen Username: Jamie Post Number: 354 Registered: 6-2001 |
Lib, what other personal freedom allows someone to bring a Group A carcinogen into a public place? | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1160 Registered: 3-2004 |
What you don't get is that most of us are willing to sacrifice a certain measure of personal liberty in order to secure a collective benefit. exactly what GW said about his illegal wiretaps. i am glad you are willing to give a portion of your personal freedom, but you are forcing me give up a portion of my freedom unwillingly. you are frog marching my personal freedom out the door. start with this one and the next one will be even easier. Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities (and the smallest minority on earth is the individual Ayn Rand Tyranny and despotism can be exercised by many, more rigourously, more vigourously, and more severely, than by one. Andrew Johnson They that can give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty or safety. Benjamin Franklin The more developed a nation is, the more complete is the independence of the individual, and the safer the individual from encroachments by another. Dmitry Pisarev The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. Edmund Burke Fifty-one percent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic. Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn When great changes occur in history, when great principles are involved, as a rule the majority are wrong. Eugene V. Debs It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people. Giordano Bruno Democracy means having the choice. Dictatorship means being given the choice. Jeannine Luczak Any doctrine that weakens personal responsibility for judgment and for action helps create the attitudes that welcome and support the totalitarian state. John Dewey i could post a hundred more quotes from founding fathers, constitution writers, and political philosophers who agree with me about the erosion of personal freedom. but i guess they are all wrong. what do they know about freedom anyway? | ||
| Stevef Citizen Username: Stevef Post Number: 152 Registered: 5-2005  |
Libertarian: Can you smoke in your workplace? | ||
| ajc Citizen Username: Ajc Post Number: 4649 Registered: 9-2001 |
...after all this information from Jamie, I think the better question is does he still smoke?  | ||
| bottomline Citizen Username: Bottomline Post Number: 361 Registered: 8-2003 |
Libertarian, I'm surprised someone of your sophistication would try to slide by with such a lame argument. This is nothing like Bush's wiretaps. The smoking ban is being promulgated in the light of day with full due process. The public knows the issue is on the table. Legislators -- our elected representatives -- will vote on it in public. Bush’s wiretaps, on the other hand, flaunt the democratic process. Their existence and implementation involved deliberate efforts by our government to conceal and obfuscate. Many laws and constitutional provisions entail the public conceding some liberty in exchange for some other benefit. But the key here is the involvement of the public, either directly or through their legislative representatives. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1162 Registered: 3-2004 |
This is nothing like Bush's wiretaps. The smoking ban is being promulgated in the light of day with full due process. The public knows the issue is on the table. Legislators -- our elected representatives -- will vote on it in public. my point was not that they were done in secrecy. my point is that both are an infringment on personal freedom. conceding liberty is never, NEVER, the correct thing to do. it goes against everything the writers of the constitution were striving for. read their words, you will see that i am correct. this is a forced restriction of my freedom by the tyranny of the majority. you are suppressing my freedom. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1936 Registered: 5-2001 |
You all have to check out Lib's response to the crying kid in the restaurant thread. I believe the contrast in opinion by this one poster should serve as the poster child to define illogical, irrational and/or hypocrtical. Wendy Lauter | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1166 Registered: 3-2004 |
how is it hypocritical? it is all about personal responsibility. completely in line with my political and personal philosophy. you just want to pick a fight cause i dont like to see animals abused. | ||
| SO Ref Citizen Username: So_refugee Post Number: 1396 Registered: 2-2005 |
First, they came for the smokers but I did not speak out because I am not a smoker...
To some, liberty is clothing optional; to others, it's not having to wear shackles. To some, freedom is having the choice between political parties; to others, it's simply being able to vote in an open election. To some, liberty is hosting a Ku Klux Klan website; to others, it's simply posting on an open message board. To some, freedom is filling their lungs with carcinogens and making their immediate environment smoke-filled and stinky; to others, it's being able to dine/drink/work in an environment not smoke-filled where they breathe in pollutants and where they don't leave smelling like an ashtray. Your lungs can thank us later. But, hey, I could be wrong. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1937 Registered: 5-2001 |
And that was the height of a wonderful personal choice to be irrational.  | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1170 Registered: 3-2004 |
i will now make another choice to ignore you in the future as i find that you dont make much sense when addressing me. | ||
| bottomline Citizen Username: Bottomline Post Number: 363 Registered: 8-2003 |
He's not libertarian, he's anarchist. Let's don't feed the troll any longer. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1939 Registered: 5-2001 |
Good - please remember that choice when and if I look for dedicated volunteers next July to help with our annual July 4th activities, which never ABUSES animals but may have animals perform in a wonderful family circus. Hey Looney (a term which is less insulting than calling parents breeders, imo) Big Apple is going on right now. Maybe you should go protest them and take some action instead of complaining. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1173 Registered: 3-2004 |
why is it that some people start name calling when someone disagrees with thier opinion. i didnt name call. i was having an honest debate. plus, i believe in government. i am far from an anarchist. we need government to protect our freedoms and uphold the law. | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1940 Registered: 5-2001 |
You were not having an honest debate. I believe that is what most of the posters on this particular thread have been trying to tell you. | ||
| TomR Citizen Username: Tomr Post Number: 897 Registered: 6-2001 |
n/m | ||
| jamie Citizen Username: Jamie Post Number: 355 Registered: 6-2001 |
TomR - I have no idea. Lib - please answer this: Name a Group A carcinogen that is currently allowed in enclosed public place? | ||
| TomR Citizen Username: Tomr Post Number: 898 Registered: 6-2001 |
jaime, Please ignore my last post as well as the earlier one asking if this was the argument you sought. I had been under the mistaken impression that you were the author of this thread. Thanks again for providing us with this board. TomR | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1942 Registered: 5-2001 |
Jamie you have the patience of a saint when it comes to "debating" with Lib. This is what he said in part in another thread and my response: It was Lib who said this: "dont impose on me with your reproductive choice. its a restaurant where people go to eat and relax, not listen to your offspring cry." [emphasis added] The owner at Trattoria would have every right to ask that family to leave actually because of that imposition on other diners. What the smoking thread is talking about is giving those same rights against imposition of second-hand smoke to diners. And since no restaurant/bar owner wants to be the only one to lose the business of these big imposers it is up to the government to even out the playing field for the public and the business owner. | ||
| The Libertarian Citizen Username: Local_1_crew Post Number: 1175 Registered: 3-2004 |
restaurants already have those rights! they can go no smoking any time they want to!! that is the whole point!! they choose not to! sheesh! | ||
| wendy Supporter Username: Wendy Post Number: 1944 Registered: 5-2001 |
Jamie have you noticed he/she still doesn't answer your question but in fact CHOOSES to respond to me, a poster he/she wants to ignore. |
