I think the point rtf was making had to do more with the similarities with discrimination against gays and discrimination against smokers. The increased taxes on TOBACCO (not just cigs) is a sign of discrimination against smokers when I take into account the only group of Americans that are helping fund SCHIP are people who choose to smoke.

There are otha forms of discrimination against smokers of course. Like refusing to hire someone (or fire someone) cause the person chooses to smoke. I dunno how someone can't call that discrimination. I can't even see how someone can call it perfectly normal for an employer to fire a worker for smoking OFF of the job and in his/her own home.

Based on the way "a class of citizens that choose to smoke" get treated in modern times, is there a problem with protecting a certain group of Americans?

So that means since smokers don't get protection unlike I do as a Black person, then it should be perfectly legal in CA to harass someone for their choice to smoke, it should be legal to deny someone a job simply because that person smokes (and especially if the employer doesn't say "Nonsmokers preferred"), and it should even be legal to give someone a dirty hotel room only cause the person happens to be a smoker?

I may have been born as a Black person, but I'm still an American. And all Americans supposedly have rights. The same thang applies to the context of smoking. Just cause I smoke doesn't mean a hotel has the right to give me the most awful room they have available condition-wise.

It also doesn't mean an employer has the right to fire me for smoking in my own home. I recall hearing about a fireman or a cop in NYC getting fired for smoking off of his job a few years ago.

Smokers DO have different backgrounds. That doesn't mean it's still right to keep targeting them when it comes to funding SCHIP and funding the politicians/antismoking orgs' pockets via tobacco taxes.

Funding SCHIP would make betta sense if smokers weren't the only ones funding the program. And I know if antis got their wish of a smoke-free USA where NO SMOKERS existed in this nation, that money for SCHIP is gonna have to come from somewhere else. Like by raising fast food taxes.

Of course, neva mind the fact a smoke-free USA would make a lot of convience stores go out of business (since most of their sales are tobacco sales), and no smokers in the nation would make a lot of tobacco companies go out of business. Both of those would hurt the nation's economy even more.

For most smokers, smoking is not just an interest. A smoker's body and brain are physiologically and neurologically different than a non-smoker's. And all minority groups consist of diverse individuals from various backgrounds.

If smokers want legal protection from unjust taxation and other forms of discrimination, the only way to get that protection is to gain official status as a minority group like women, blacks, gays and disabled people. Some states already have laws protecting smokers from employment discrimination, so there is some legal precedent already for protecting smokers as a group.

The difficulty in establishing smokers as a valid legal minority group lies in the fact that they do not share an obvious physical trait, such as skin color. However, there is one other minority group, namely gay people, who are legally protected but whose minority group status is based on behavior. So there is some legal precedent for recognizing a group based on a common behavior, rather than a common physical trait.

Researchers are already identifying genes linked to smoking. Google "smoking genes nicotine addiction" or check out the following link for further information.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/T290315.htm

I guess this depends on your definition of "fundamental right". Our founders drafted our Constitution not to give us certain rights but to guarantee that our God-given right to exercise our God-given free will and make our own choices was respected. It is the driving force behind the founding of this country, the acceptance that everyone is created equal, born free and deserves equal protection and rights in life. The Constitution was designed to protect everyone's right to live their own life according to their own beliefs.....as long as they harmed none.

Liberty is not something you can buy or own. It is not a product or law. It IS an unalienable (God-given/inborn) right.

Therefore, smoking IS a fundamental right, as people CHOOSE of their own free will to smoke or not smoke.

These bans and taxes are being forced on us by those who hate the idea that we smoke, can't stand the smell, and want to blame the world's problems on something that won't affect their way of life.

There is a difference between passing laws that keep chaos down and allow all to live peacefully and in an orderly fashion; and passing laws that actually prohibit people from exercising their unalienable rights, while encouraging the denormalization and outright discrimination of the target group.

I understand smokers are discriminated against with bans and increased taxes, nobody is arguing that at all. The problem is you cannot compare it to discrimination against gays or other groups because those are protected classes and smoking or using tobacco is not. It is perfectly legal to discriminate against other people, such as the examples I listed in previous posts.

A person can separate tobacco from their bodies and eliminate the discrimination. It is not something permanently fixed to them. I think this is the point where a tobacco user can see the difference between them and someone of a different color skin or religion.

No, you can't harass them, that may be violating the law. You can deny someone a job because employers can decide who they want to work for them.

You have the right be upset and disagree with the law. However, smoking is not a right and that's where the law ceases to protect you as an american citizen.

Again, you can disagree with what the government uses the tobacco tax for, but it won't change the legality of its enforcement. There are many many different taxes and fees in America that are unfair but still legal. This isn't the first and it certainly won't be the last.

Well, how do we go about doing that? What's the first step?

No, not kidding. Liberty is a fundamental right and that's why it would be considered protected under the 9th amendment. Smoking is not a fundamental right, but a right to privacy is.

I have personally never known anyone who suffered from a smoking-related disease during the time I worked with them, so I'm starting to feel pretty skeptical about the "health costs" claims.

Of course, neva mind the fact a smoke-free USA would make a lot of convience stores go out of business (since most of their sales are tobacco sales), and no smokers in the nation would make a lot of tobacco companies go out of business. Both of those would hurt the nation's economy even more.

The difficulty in establishing smokers as a valid legal minority group lies in the fact that they do not share an obvious physical trait, such as skin color. However, there is one other minority group, namely gay people, who are legally protected but whose minority group status is based on behavior. So there is some legal precedent for recognizing a group based on a common behavior, rather than a common physical trait.

We smokers are being ostracized because we are such a peaceable group (or at least were in the past). I truly do believe that we should organize and file a discriminatory class action suit.

However, smoking is not a right and that's where the law ceases to protect you as an american citizen.

It should also be noted, smoking is still legal for someone in their private home and space.

That's what we're discussing here, the need to get legal status as a minority group so that we can't be bludgeoned mercilessly by the majority.

What are you doing in our forum? Since you don't seem to have any comprehension of what it's like to be a smoker in this society, I can only assume you are a non-smoker or even an anti. If you do want to express your opinion, then at least read the replies to your posts so you can better understand what we're talking about.