Liberals versus Capitalism

[Cricket]

I came in here to make sure m42 was doing okay, and that all ya'all were not eating her alive. It turns she can hold her own just fine. I am impressed.

[Atom]

Originally Posted by thegamerslink

Might I ask why you feel yourself so incapable?

Yes, brain damage.

[Atom]

All them drugs ya know.. I think they caused a rift in my sanity. lol

[Atom]

Originally Posted by Cricket

I came in here to make sure m42 was doing okay, and that all ya'all were not eating here alive. It turns she can hold her own just fine. I am impressed.

Oh hell she could probably rip me a new one on this subject, she seems to have a good handle on it.

[thegamerslink]

Originally Posted by Cricket

I came in here to make sure m42 was doing okay, and that all ya'all were not eating here alive. It turns she can hold her own just fine. I am impressed.

She definitely can hold her own. I think on this topic and many many others

[thegamerslink]

Originally Posted by Atom

All them drugs ya know.. I think they caused a rift in my sanity. lol

LoL I think you sell yourself short Just look at all those that are out there like mindless zombies only doing what they are told and never asking what or why. So simply you asking why you should vote has put you a plateau above an alarmingly large number of the people in this country that vote.

I'll never forget on Fox and Friends a few years ago there were multiple protests going on around the station and they were outside interviewing some of the participants. One of the questions was "what are you here to protest today?" and without missing a breath the person responded "I don't know they haven't told me yet"

[jdspc]

There are 5 choices a human can salivate upon, I, for one, choose cut-off pants and long hair...
etc...

[Zap]

Originally Posted by m42

These are the rights people elected to abandon. Your “accept it or move” philosophy is flawed to say the least. I thought it was idiotic the first time you said it. It would be like accepting you have a curable form of cancer and choosing not to fight it.

I wrote "change it or move" and you read "accept it or move"?
Big difference between the two.
Before you go into how idiotic something printed is, you might want to double check what's printed next time.

Originally Posted by m42

And telling people they can’t allow smokers on their private property isn’t equally absurd? If you have people over to dinner, it’s your private property; you can be as controlling as you wish. If they don’t like it, they can always leave. They will honour your wishes and leave because they respect your right to run your property in a manner of your choosing.

Again, I see a difference between my own home, which is not a business and a restaurant. The government does as well. I can't remember the last time a government inspector came to my kitchen.
In my home, there is an expectation of privacy. In a business, where the general public is permitted without prior invitation, there is no expectation of privacy. That would be absurd.
I know of no other way to try to demonstrate the difference to you, but if you truly don't see a difference, then perhaps I'll drop by your place for dinner the next time I'm in the area. Don't worry. I'll bring my cigarettes.

Originally Posted by m42

No. I don’t agree that you have the right to control anyone else. Are you so controlling that every place erected must cater to your restrictive lifestyle or it cannot exist?

You want to make this personal for some reason. This is not an issue of control for me personally. I just feel that majority should rule in a case like this.

Originally Posted by m42

I think John summed it up pretty well.

Kind of scary to me that you both support drunk driving in some form, but each to his/her own I guess.

Originally Posted by m42

I don’t pretend. I don’t force people to adhere to my beliefs. Nor do I even remotely attempt to control anyone. I will be content as long as people don’t force me to adhere to their beliefs --or force me to pay for them.

So you would disagree with John's idea to bail out the restaurants that go under because of smoking laws?

Originally Posted by m42

I think I’m a tad more tolerant than you, mon ami.

To be honest, I don't think you know me well enough to judge me like that.
Tolerance and judgement don't play well together.

[thegamerslink]

Zap...Zap....Zap......regardless of what anyone says it's clear you are going to hold on to the opposite side of this subject till the end. But a business is a persons private property, they decide to open it to the public, and the public decides whether it wants to enter or not, doesn't get much more simple than that. In most states it is legal for a business owner to have a gun under his counter or in his office under the same law that makes it legal for that person to have the same gun in their home....why is this? Because it is their private property to protect to constitutionally be allowed to protect. And let your house become trash and filth ridden over ran with cockroaches, rats or other rodents and let the foundation become unsteady with walls and ceilings beginning to become unstable and the health inspector and the county building inspector will remove you from your house no ifs ands or buts about it...right or wrong....An immediate threat of safety overrides it's what is referred to as sensible law....the law of common sense....common sense tells you if you are eating rancid meat you will become ill and a lot of cases die....just as common sense tells you that if you run into a burning building you will get burned.....common sense also tells you that if you have asthma or a health condition, or you simply don't like to be around smoke you don't frequent business that have chosen to cater to smokers pretty simple.....

Just because the saying is that my rights end where yours begin doesn't give you the right to take mine away because they may inconvenience you in some way at a later day. Or in other words your rights are no more important than mine majority or other wise. This is the ideology that this country was founded on.

[thegamerslink]

Just to make a quick addition here.......I live in Georgia at the moment....south south Georgia...very small town....and you will most likely never in your lifetime come here. You have though taken away my right to go into a pool hall, or a bar, or a cigar shop or any other type of business because you wanted to go to Taco Bell downtown New York(Just an Example) on occassion and not have anyone there smoking.....where is the common sense here?

[Zap]

Originally Posted by thegamerslink

Just to make a quick addition here.......I live in Georgia at the moment....south south Georgia...very small town....and you will most likely never in your lifetime come here. You have though taken away my right to go into a pool hall, or a bar, or a cigar shop or any other type of business because you wanted to go to Taco Bell downtown New York(Just an Example) on occassion and not have anyone there smoking.....where is the common sense here?

Actually, I've been through Georgia a couple of times.
Don't know if I've been through your town, though.

I understand what you are saying, but your position is in conflict with the principle that all people are treated equally. Like the black person on the bus example I gave. You are telling me that I am allowed into the restaurant if I want to go but I have to put up with the smoke, so you're free and clear. But, it's a lot like telling the black man that he is allowed onto the bus, but he has to put up with sitting at the back.
You can argue semantics all you want. Public building vs. private building.
If you want to go the extra mile and argue that buses are public vehicles, then we'll use a taxi instead. It's a private vehicle. Would you support a taxi driver's right to deny blacks a ride? Nevermind. I have a feeling that you'll dig your heels in on that one too, just as I have.
I think we'll just have to agree to disagree. I don't say that the situation is easy or clear, but I think majority rule should be the case here because rights are being denied, one way or another. You may not think so because it's no skin off your back to simply allow smoking and say that people can go in or not. They are free to make the choice, but for people who care about their health or the health of their children, you've taken that choice away. You will probably never see that, just as you will probably never see that the black man that can't get a cab has had a choice taken away from him too.

[thegamerslink]

I don't understand you analogy of the black man and the back of the bus in comparison to this, sorry.....it's not even in the same ball park...and if you will remember up towards the beginning of the topic I did propose a compromise that you completely dismissed.
I made the statement early on that the law was at fault for the most part because it was to broad and had no checks or balances. You don't want to be subjected to smoke when you eat or children eat, I can understand that, I don't smoke while I eat, actually until recently I had quit for over 2 years all together but still held the same views on this matter even when I didn't smoke.....If a restaurant has a small square footage and it's sole purpose is food then don't allow smoking.....If the building has a large enough square footage that with extra costs and precautions you can keep a substantial amount of the air quality clean then allow smoking, in most of these cases you could have 15 people all smoking at the same time in a room off to the side with adequate ventilation or enclosure and never know they were smoking unless you just knew it and psyched yourself out....In bars and cigar stores night clubs, things that aren't frequented by children or families it's the business owners choice how they provide for their customers.....this is called compromise....you get your way because the family can go have a meal either completely without smoke or in an area that is probably cleaner air quality wise than any other that doesn't allow smoking....and if you decide to leave the kids at home you can either go to a place that allows smoking or find one that doesn't.........seems like both sides could win in that type of situation without rights being completely taken away just structured to apply workability

[Zap]

I actually like the idea of a separate ventilated space for smokers and think it would solve a lot of problems.
But it seems to be not so popular with both sides of this issue for some reason.
Some of those in favour of a complete ban fear leakage and also think it doesn't go far enough because it doesn't protect non-smoking employees.
Some of those against a complete ban don't want to smokers in a separate enclosed room like some kind of zoo exhibit.

While I understand the fears on both sides, I don't subscribe to them completely.
In general, I think compromise would be the best solution, but there isn't an awful lot of support for it from what I've seen and can't really understand why.

[Sean@WMS]

Cautiously wading into a political thread here . . . but one thing I see here having skimmed through a lot of it is a complete misunderstanding of why these bans get legislated. It's not, like Zap's analogy, related to the health of patrons. It's always a work place safety/health issue. Smoking is banned to protect the health of the employees of the establishment -- from banning it in planes to bars.

And frankly, you really just have to admit that the "handwriting is on the wall" when smoking got banned in pubs in Ireland.

Personally, I think smoking in restaurants is just gross ( and I enjoy my tobacco ); maybe ok in an outdoor seating ( which is generally allowed under most smoking ban laws ) . . . . but, yeah, when you're at a pub having pints and tossing darts with your amigos, I miss being able to roll one up. . . . but then I think: "Well, the folks that have to work here for 6-8 hrs a day probably don't need that second hand smoke . . . . even if they are themselves smokers."

[John Scott]

Originally Posted by Zap

I understand what you are saying, but your position is in conflict with the principle that all people are treated equally. Like the black person on the bus example I gave.

Buses are public transportation. Restaurants for the most part reserve the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason. They can do so because they are privately owned.

Your socialist mind cannot wrap itself around the idea of private ownership. I know. It's tough. You want to believe we're a communist utopia.