I would hope that we are smarter than that. I gather that the smoke is just as carcinogenic and everything about secondary smoking probably applies. Not only that, but there's the issue of a contact high. So no, I don't think it would be favorably viewed.
On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 12:40 PM, C. Hatton Humphrey <[email protected]> wrote: > >> No one minds people smoking tobacco at home (away from their kids), or >> outside (but not near me). >> >> It isn't any of my business. > > The problem with you response is that it's internalized. I asked how > society would view it. > > Today we have people that want to tell smokers where they can and > can't smoke. We fund anti-smoking campaigns with tax dollars from the > general fund and yet we fund cancer research with cigarette sales tax > money. States have sued tobacco companies and won or settled based on > medical issues that arise from smoking. > > If non-tobacco products were "legalized" in all 50 states would that > not lead to the commercialization of such products? Might it not lead > to the same cycle as the tobacco industry fell into, where over the > course of 50 years smoking went from glamorized to demonized? > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:287271 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
