Post Reply

Forum Index   >   Smoking Bans   >   Banning SMOKERS, not smoking!   >   Post a New Reply

Share/Bookmark this Topic: Digg it Stumble it Submit to Del.icio.us Reddit it Facebook it Blink it Slashdot it Linkagogo it 
Message Author
by smallbird on Thu Jul 30, 2009 9:57 pm
Smoker Sympathizer wrote:
Just when I thought I couldn't get more disgusted with the anti's I find this thread. I swear I must be a masochist because this is just painful. 3rd hand smoke, really? How are these nuts able to get away with this crap? It's because no one calls them on it. Wonder how they would react if every smoker who lived in these crazy states filed a multimillion dollar lawsuit against the state for libel, slander, pain and suffering and every business owner whose business went bad because of these idiotic bans did the same. I'm not even a smoker and I am sick to death of smokers being pushed around. I don't know what a smoke free state is, but if I had to guess I'd say it's something ridiculous like no indoor or outdoor smoking in public. Where the hell do these people get off? I'm a non-smoker and they sure don't speak in my name. I wouldn't let them near me.

Smokers should start forming their own versions of speakeasies, private homes or clubs where fellow smokers can enjoy a meal and a cigarette in a dignified setting. If these sprung up all over the country, it would be a kind of subcultural support network for smokers. Is there anything out there like that now?


There probably are Ms. Sympathizer, but they aren't advertised because they don't want to get arrested Cool
smallbird Enthusiastic Smoker
Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: Jan 03, 2007 Posts: 362
Back to top
 
by garhkal on Fri Jul 31, 2009 5:15 pm
LOL. I can see it though, someone opens one up and advertizes it. Within 2 - 3 weeks is sued.
garhkal Enthusiastic Smoker
Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: Apr 24, 2009 Posts: 278
Back to top
 
by Smoker Sympathizer on Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:58 pm
garhkal wrote:
LOL. I can see it though, someone opens one up and advertizes it. Within 2 - 3 weeks is sued.


For what? If I had serious money, I'd consider something like this. I'm so sick of people trying to take away our liberty and pursuit of happiness. And when I advertised it, it would have a very freedom based slant. Without liberty and pursuit of happiness, life itself is devalued. I would however have a very stringent ban on whiners and hypochondriacs.
Smoker Sympathizer Toker
Toker Joined: Jul 19, 2009 Posts: 86
Back to top
 
by Smoker Sympathizer on Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:30 pm
Crap like this makes me even more determined to show extra respect to smokers. How can people take it seriously when all the evidence points the other way? If smoke was that dangerous, no one would flipping be alive. What aren't they getting? This is what happens when people let "the experts" do their thinking for them.
Smoker Sympathizer Toker
Toker Joined: Jul 19, 2009 Posts: 86
Back to top
 
by libertarian99 on Fri Aug 07, 2009 8:52 am
Smoker Sympathizer wrote:
Crap like this makes me even more determined to show extra respect to smokers. How can people take it seriously when all the evidence points the other way? If smoke was that dangerous, no one would flipping be alive. What aren't they getting? This is what happens when people let "the experts" do their thinking for them.
You have to realize that non-smokers reap a lot of psychological benefits from pinning every known form of cancer on smoking or passive smoking. There is a big psychological pay-off, if you believe that you can avoid all forms of cancer just by not smoking. It is much more anxiety-provoking to think that you will get cancer due to your own genes, which you can do nothing about, or due to pervasive industrial pollutants, which you can also do nothing about.

Even more anxiety-provoking is the thought that cancer might happen to a person by chance, due to random cellular mutations that occur over time no matter how a person behaves or what kind of environment they live in.

There is a huge amount of fear involved in living a mortal human life, and people are always looking for ways to deny or minimize that fear. We can't change the fact that we are mortal, and the certain knowledge that our life will one day end is completely unacceptable. So we grasp at ways to deny the truth. Continued sanity depends on that denial.

Everything becomes more tolerable if you embrace religious beliefs that promise an afterlife. Another good psychological relief mechanism is to blame the existence of death on individual behavior rather than admitting it is built into the human body and ultimately can't be avoided.

That's one good reason why it's almost impossible to get someone to voluntarily give up their beliefs about smoking and illness. Why would anyone want to give up a belief system that tells them they can avoid getting sick and even avoid dying altogether if they avoid one behavior, which they never enjoyed doing anway?
libertarian99 Enthusiastic Smoker
Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: May 01, 2009 Posts: 453
Back to top
 
by garhkal on Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:24 pm
TO me then that should be a misomnier then, if they still get cancers without smoking. It should show smokng is not the only cause and therefore should not be scap goated as much.
garhkal Enthusiastic Smoker
Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: Apr 24, 2009 Posts: 278
Back to top
 
by runamok on Fri Aug 07, 2009 7:25 pm
libertarian99 wrote:
You have to realize that non-smokers reap a lot of psychological benefits from pinning every known form of cancer on smoking or passive smoking. There is a big psychological pay-off, if you believe that you can avoid all forms of cancer just by not smoking. It is much more anxiety-provoking to think that you will get cancer due to your own genes, which you can do nothing about, or due to pervasive industrial pollutants, which you can also do nothing about.

Even more anxiety-provoking is the thought that cancer might happen to a person by chance, due to random cellular mutations that occur over time no matter how a person behaves or what kind of environment they live in.

There is a huge amount of fear involved in living a mortal human life, and people are always looking for ways to deny or minimize that fear. We can't change the fact that we are mortal, and the certain knowledge that our life will one day end is completely unacceptable. So we grasp at ways to deny the truth. Continued sanity depends on that denial.

Everything becomes more tolerable if you embrace religious beliefs that promise an afterlife. Another good psychological relief mechanism is to blame the existence of death on individual behavior rather than admitting it is built into the human body and ultimately can't be avoided.

That's one good reason why it's almost impossible to get someone to voluntarily give up their beliefs about smoking and illness. Why would anyone want to give up a belief system that tells them they can avoid getting sick and even avoid dying altogether if they avoid one behavior, which they never enjoyed doing anway?

You hit the nail on the head and stated it very eloquently.

Anti-smoking, extreme environmentalism, temperance, and a host of other movements all have religious undercurrents which make them extremely difficult, if not impossible, to root out and destroy. They are all based on faith and beliefs.

"The debate is over" is their leaders' way of covering the congregations ears so they will hear no evil.
runamok Smoking Lobby Sponsor
Smoking Lobby Sponsor Joined: Dec 20, 2004 Posts: 1288
Back to top
 
by Khas on Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:47 pm
It's all just a recipe for frog soup, you know put a frog into boiling water and he jumps out, but if you slowly bring it to a boil he'll boil to death. We let them whittle away at our rights a little at a time until we stand there with an overpriced pack of smokes and no where to smoke it.
Khas Newbie
Newbie Joined: Oct 29, 2009 Posts: 7
Back to top
 
by Fight4Freedom on Fri Jan 08, 2010 5:11 pm
I'm new to these forums, and it amazes me how many posts I have already read that take the words right out of my mouth. We just lost our right to assemble in smoker-friendly establishments in NC. I am all for respecting and protecting the rights of the non-smoking community, but I believe it should be up to the owner to make these decisions. I'm trying to put together a petition to fight discrimination of this nature. Please take a look at the petition. If you agree, please sign it and help me share the link.

http://www.petitionspot.com/petitions/ownerschoice

Thank you!
Fight4Freedom Newbie
Newbie Joined: Jan 08, 2010 Posts: 10 Location: Mooresville, NC
Back to top
 
by garhkal on Fri Jan 08, 2010 6:20 pm
Khas wrote:
It's all just a recipe for frog soup, you know put a frog into boiling water and he jumps out, but if you slowly bring it to a boil he'll boil to death. We let them whittle away at our rights a little at a time until we stand there with an overpriced pack of smokes and no where to smoke it.


I am just waiting to see which state will TRY to do that ,by making it still legal to purchase smokes in their state, but no where is it legal to smoke them...
garhkal Enthusiastic Smoker
Enthusiastic Smoker Joined: Apr 24, 2009 Posts: 278
Back to top
 


All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 5 of 6
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next