Smoking: Bad Habit or Lifestyle?

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Fri Jan 19, 2007 8:49 pm

vrikasatma wrote:Fact: There is formaldehyde, cyanide (Google on "Jonestown mass suicide," take a good, long look at <i>THE PICTURE</i>), mercury, arsenic, lead, propylene glycol (anti-freeze; not just toxic, it's straight-up and very nasty poison), cadmium (yes, cigarettes are radioactive), ammonia and benzene in cigarette smoke.

Random note: Cadmium is a heavy metal that is used in nuclear reactors because it absorbs neutrons. The problem is it's carcinogenic. (Most elements have radioactive isotopes, I currently have ~1.315mg of cabon-14 running around in my body.)

Ink · Post by **Ink** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:03 am

Vuldari - I have a lot I'd like to say to your last post. However, I'll graciously step down as this has so revealed itself to not be the medium in which either of us will award each other with sincerity anymore.

I'm tired of being called stupid as if it's a rational argument. I won't continue under those pretenses. This will save us both time and any further frustration.

Have a good day.

--------------------------

Now - as far as MattSullivan's commentary, which pretty much sums up my position too, I want to add some stuff:

It's evil only in the eyes of people who shun it. But it's not something any of us force on another person (minors are the exceptions - but that's a parenting issue). Unlike capital crimes or most criminal activity it's not FORCED on someone or involve minors beyond parents that smoke. Even if you walk into a bar where it's still acceptable - that's your choice to walk in there. You can leave at any time.

If you smoke in the privacy of your own home, your car, outside where everybody can (currently) freely breathe air: anybody else has the right to walk away and not be bothered. Nobody is holding you there against your will and smoking in your face. And about smoking outside: If I can legally drive my car outside so I'll smoke a cigarette outside. If you don't understand why - well, I'm not explaining it.

vrikasatma · Post by **vrikasatma** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:37 am

What about the people who have to take the s*** jobs in a bar, or a nightclub that allows smoking? Given the atmospheric conditions in those places, they should be paid a wage scale on a par with nuclear power plant workers, or at least have gold-plated health coverage that won't stiff 'em when they have to get treated for cancer and emphysema. Nobody forced them to work in a toxic environment either.

What about touring musicians that have to breathe that every night for 3, 4, 5 months at a time?

Go ahead, say "That's life."

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:39 am

So what you are saying is...if smokers choose to smoke EVERYWHERE...they basically own the world.

No one can ever tell them to leave, or stop...but if the non-smokers don't want to accept the smokers atmosphere, they have to leave themselves to get away from them. If smokers choose to camp out at every restaurant, every bus stop, every park, and every public establishment in an entire city, then anyone who dislikes what they are doing has to surrender to the smokers and accept and/or join their culture or move out of the city.

You just get to push around anyone you want, merely by being unpleasant. ...but no one else is allowed to push back.

That's just not right.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Its not Wrong if it's not FORCED"

...so let me get this straight.

If someone sets up a stand on the street that sells, not only lemonade, but also a cocktail of household chemicals known to create a "HIGH" when you snort the fumes, and later that day three neighbor kids die from overdose on the cocktail...

The stand owner is guilty of no crimes since he did not FORCE those children to buy or use his stuff? ...No One has the right to make him take down his stand, or even just remove the cocktail and sell normal lemonade? The neighbors have to just let him keep it there and do as he wishes because his stand is on his own property and he is not Forcing anyone to step onto it?...

Just what kind of world are you trying to create here?

If someone is CLEARLY partaking in destructive behavior which is having a destructive effect on the lives of those around them ... simply by fault of being there, doing it ...

... does it really not make sense to you to do something about it? Do you disagree that it would be in the publics best interest to remove such a person, or to restrain his destructive activities?

Do you really believe is is More "JUST" to defend the Rights of the Lethal Cocktail Salesman over the Lives of the children and their mourning parents?

Lupin · Post by **Lupin** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:51 am

Ink wrote:It's evil only in the eyes of people who shun it. But it's not something any of us force on another person (minors are the exceptions - but that's a parenting issue). Unlike capital crimes or most criminal activity it's not FORCED on someone or involve minors beyond parents that smoke. Even if you walk into a bar where it's still acceptable - that's your choice to walk in there. You can leave at any time.

Both parties have the right to be there. What neither has is the right to do is infinge on rights of the other party.

If you smoke in the privacy of your own home, your car, outside where everybody can (currently) freely breathe air: anybody else has the right to walk away and not be bothered. Nobody is holding you there against your will and smoking in your face. And about smoking outside: If I can legally drive my car outside so I'll smoke a cigarette outside. If you don't understand why - well, I'm not explaining it.

Yeah, but you also have the responsibility not to cause undue duress in a public area. I can't drive my car over lawns and sidewalks even though people are free to get out of my way when I'm doing this.

(As for driving over someone's lawn damaging property, while smoking outside does not: Even smoking outside, tar collects on everything around the smoker. I used to have no end of fun spraying Windex on the picture window of my old house, making a brown stream trickle down the window, as a layer of tar would collect on the glass when my stepfather went out for a smoke (I am very easily amused.))

Ink · Post by **Ink** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:26 am

Lupin wrote: Yeah, but you also have the responsibility not to cause undue duress in a public area. I can't drive my car over lawns and sidewalks even though people are free to get out of my way when I'm doing this.

I was generally talking about car exhaust vs. cigarette smoke but I wasn't about to emulate the correlation - I thought it was withstading. And a lawn is called 'private property' not public (even if it's outside) and that infringes upon the homeowner. So if I want to go smoke outside I can do so - as long as it's at a certain level of public (a sidewalk, a park area, or outside on regulated private property such as a campus). I mean, in areas where it's not currently, legally banned to smoke outside on public areas. Even on sidewalks (unlike cars which are supposed to stay between the lines by law).

Ink · Post by **Ink** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 10:52 am

Vuldari wrote:So what you are saying is...if smokers choose to smoke EVERYWHERE...they basically own the world.

No one can ever tell them to leave, or stop...but if the non-smokers don't want to accept the smokers atmosphere, they have to leave themselves to get away from them. If smokers choose to camp out at every restaurant, every bus stop, every park, and every public establishment in an entire city, then anyone who dislikes what they are doing has to surrender to the smokers and accept and/or join their culture or move out of the city.

You just get to push around anyone you want, merely by being unpleasant. ...but no one else is allowed to push back.

That's just not right.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

"Its not Wrong if it's not FORCED"

...so let me get this straight.

If someone sets up a stand on the street that sells, not only lemonade, but also a cocktail of household chemicals known to create a "HIGH" when you snort the fumes, and later that day three neighbor kids die from overdose on the cocktail...

The stand owner is guilty of no crimes since he did not FORCE those children to buy or use his stuff? ...No One has the right to make him take down his stand, or even just remove the cocktail and sell normal lemonade? The neighbors have to just let him keep it there and do as he wishes because his stand is on his own property and he is not Forcing anyone to step onto it?...

Just what kind of world are you trying to create here?

If someone is CLEARLY partaking in destructive behavior which is having a destructive effect on the lives of those around them ... simply by fault of being there, doing it ...

... does it really not make sense to you to do something about it? Do you disagree that it would be in the publics best interest to remove such a person, or to restrain his destructive activities?

Do you really believe is is More "JUST" to defend the Rights of the Lethal Cocktail Salesman over the Lives of the children and their mourning parents?

Vuldari - don't ever put a hypothetical question down like I suggested such an absurd thing. Smoker's don't 'own the world' - You're putting words in my mouth.

The person in your hypothesis administered a controlled substance to a minor. Whether or not that controlled substance is illegal or not - it was administered to a CHILD. That means jail-time and an investigation as to the parents where-abouts (as they are responsible for their offspring).

What is it with this world of hypothetical questions? Not everyone, everywhere is going to do everything.

That's the beauty of being an individual in America (not the late Soviet Union or under the Golden Eagle in Germany). You might like the Marxist social ideals of everyone caring or everyone but I like being responsible for self is the first step for all of us to be able to care for the rest of the world. That, to me, is the liberty of America - the Individual. Be it self defense, financial responsibility, education, and helping those who cannot maintain to help themselves - because if I don't have to worry I have all my bases covered I can throw a life line for somebody else out there. That is half the battle as far as social welfare is concerned - getting the individuals of equal ability and mind to be individuals organized and anchored.

I am not heartless. You know nothing about me - not even my smoking habits to comment on - and you obviously haven't understood what I'm trying to say. Turning it against me doesn't help.

At this point could you at least breathe for an instant and recognize I no longer want to talk to you about this? I'm tired of rationalizing esoteric questions in this medium. And stop instigating hypothetical questions in my direction that question my morality in order to degrade me as if I'm an insensitive b****. I realize you found it an easy kick when I asked for this to be over - don't try to box me in to agreeing with you. I rationalize your tactics - calling me stupid, antagonizing me using your-Utopian-World illustrations. I don't agree with it at this point.

I'd appreciate it if you stopped. The sincerity is gone, Vuldari, it's now some vicious game you're playing to be 'right' and I'm sick of it.

This is how debates go sour.

Teh_DarkJokerWolf · Post by **Teh_DarkJokerWolf** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 12:45 pm

Okies folks I can see this thread heading astray real fast. What you all need to stop an look at is that no one person is right about everything. Vudari..Clearly you are saying things that would upset the somewhat balance that was here. You need to stop an look at this..Closely..You can't be right about every subject, though it seems you try to make it sa that your points are sound an true..They might be to you not everyone else will still have their opinions...

This goes to everyone who like to throughout their opinions. It's just that an opinion..Nuthing more nuthing less..You have to learn to respect that or we will always have such flames starting to spread..We don't need it..If you are going to say something against ones words, please keep it respectful..

EDIT.

On a side note I smoke..Yes I know it's bad..I don't want to kill myself off over it so I plan to quit so I can just focus on dealing with the current focus an not getting Cancer

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 1:57 pm

Ink wrote:Vuldari - don't ever put a hypothetical question down like I suggested such an absurd thing. Smoker's don't 'own the world' - You're putting words in my mouth.

The person in your hypothesis administered a controlled substance to a minor. Whether or not that controlled substance is illegal or not - it was administered to a CHILD. That means jail-time and an investigation as to the parents where-abouts (as they are responsible for their offspring).

What is it with this world of hypothetical questions? Not everyone, everywhere is going to do everything.

That's the beauty of being an individual in America (not the late Soviet Union or under the Golden Eagle in Germany). You might like the Marxist social ideals of everyone caring or everyone but I like being responsible for self is the first step for all of us to be able to care for the rest of the world. That, to me, is the liberty of America - the Individual. Be it self defense, financial responsibility, education, and helping those who cannot maintain to help themselves - because if I don't have to worry I have all my bases covered I can throw a life line for somebody else out there. That is half the battle as far as social welfare is concerned - getting the individuals of equal ability and mind to be individuals organized and anchored.

I am not heartless. You know nothing about me - not even my smoking habits to comment on - and you obviously haven't understood what I'm trying to say. Turning it against me doesn't help.

At this point could you at least breathe for an instant and recognize I no longer want to talk to you about this? I'm tired of rationalizing esoteric questions in this medium. And stop instigating hypothetical questions in my direction that question my morality in order to degrade me as if I'm an insensitive b****. I realize you found it an easy kick when I asked for this to be over - don't try to box me in to agreeing with you. I rationalize your tactics - calling me stupid, antagonizing me using your-Utopian-World illustrations. I don't agree with it at this point.

I'd appreciate it if you stopped. The sincerity is gone, Vuldari, it's now some vicious game you're playing to be 'right' and I'm sick of it.

This is how debates go sour.

Teh_DarkJokerWolf wrote:Okies folks I can see this thread heading astray real fast. What you all need to stop an look at is that no one person is right about everything. Vudari..Clearly you are saying things that would upset the somewhat balance that was here. You need to stop an look at this..Closely..You can't be right about every subject, though it seems you try to make it sa that your points are sound an true..They might be to you not everyone else will still have their opinions...

This goes to everyone who like to throughout their opinions. It's just that an opinion..Nuthing more nuthing less..You have to learn to respect that or we will always have such flames starting to spread..We don't need it..If you are going to say something against ones words, please keep it respectful..

(My apologies Teh_DarkJokerWolf...I admit that my frustration up to this point has encouraged me to be far more rude than may have been fair...and I will keep that in mind for the next debate I take part in here or elsewhere...but my poking and prodding has finally achieved it's goal.

I have lured Inks 'conscience' out from under the rock it has been sleeping under...and now finally our discussion can at long last, have a chance at accomplishing something constructive.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FINALLY we are getting somewhere.

Ink...for the majority of this entire debate I have just been trying to prove that behind that " F*** You " attitude of yours, you know better than you have been behaving, and now you are finally starting to prove it.

You are absolutely right...the scenarios I have been tossing out there are ridiculous. ...They are wrong... ...And I knew that inside that conflicted mind of yours, you know you would never allow such things to happen on purpose, (if you had any heart at all).

I just wanted you to say it yourself, Sincerely.

The thing is...the point I have been trying to make...is that absolute literal, and uncompromising application of strict 'Libertarian' philosophy, (an attitude I sensed in your arguments from the beginning, but did not have a name for until you provided it for me), to all situations and scenarios very often does not end in everyone living peacefully.

Wouldn't it be a breach of the childs right to choose their own actions by stopping them from doing so? Why are the rules different for children than for adults? Why should the Parents be held responsible for the actions of the child? Doesn't Libertarian philosophy excuse one human being for being responsible for the choices and well-being of another human being? What is different about a Parent and Child relationship from a Neighbor to Neighbor relationship? Does the influence, guidance and support of one set of human beings have less significance on the end effect of those peoples consequent actions than another?

Based on your response to my scenarios, may I assume that you also believe, (as I do), that different situations can and do warrant the enforcement of mandatory responsibility on the part of one party for the productive guidance of the actions and well-being of another...such as with a parent and their children?

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:11 pm

My grandfather is older then 90 years old and has been smoking all of his life. So I think everything is a lot overreacted.

Personally, I smoke a cigarette sometimes, but I am not addicted to it.

Morkulv · Post by **Morkulv** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:15 pm

And another thing: can someone do something about that patriotic stench in this topic?

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:22 pm

just wait guys. Wait until someone tries to take away something you love...no matter what it is. then you might be less inclined to b**** about smokers.

Kaebora · Post by **Kaebora** » Sat Jan 20, 2007 2:39 pm

Ink wrote:At this point could you at least breathe for an instant and recognize I no longer want to talk to you about this? I'm tired of rationalizing esoteric questions in this medium. And stop instigating hypothetical questions in my direction that question my morality in order to degrade me as if I'm an insensitive b****. I realize you found it an easy kick when I asked for this to be over - don't try to box me in to agreeing with you. I rationalize your tactics - calling me stupid, antagonizing me using your-Utopian-World illustrations. I don't agree with it at this point.

I'd appreciate it if you stopped. The sincerity is gone, Vuldari, it's now some vicious game you're playing to be 'right' and I'm sick of it.

This is how debates go sour.

Agreed. It is getting far to hostile on both sides of this conversation.

Vuldari wrote:(My apologies Teh_DarkJokerWolf...I admit that my frustration up to this point has encouraged me to be far more rude than may have been fair...and I will keep that in mind for the next debate I take part in here or elsewhere...but my poking and prodding has finally achieved it's goal.

I have lured Inks 'conscience' out from under the rock it has been sleeping under...and now finally our discussion can at long last, have a chance at accomplishing something constructive.)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Ink...for the majority of this entire debate I have just been trying to prove that behind that " F*** You " attitude of yours, you know better than you have been behaving, and now you are finally starting to prove it.

You are STILL using personal attacks on Ink by insulting her attitude. This thread is now locked. This debate went too far. Both sides of the debate are being abusive in nature.

If any moderators disagree with my decision to lock this thread, PM me. As it is I already gave out two warnings. Ink and Vuldari, just know I'm not mad at either of you, and took no "sides" during the decision to end this. I locked this thread so everyone can keep their integrity.