First they came for the smokers, and then it was trans fats eaters. Then they came for my hard liqueur and by then their was no one left to speak up for me.
*Live free or die: Death is not the worst of evils. dj * On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:10 AM, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]>wrote: > Ah Rigs, I love you. > > The SMOKING CAUSES LUNG CANCER OH MY GOD story has been going around so > long that people have really built up the correlation in their head as > truth. Smokers die of heart disease and emphysema (COPD). Lung Cancer is a > distant third for cause of death. Heart disease is also the leading killer > for heavy eaters of fried foods, and sedentary folks. The short and easy > explanation is that an unhealthy life will be a shorter life. That hasn't > stopped the anti-smoking crusades, though. > > > On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 10:17 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Amazing to think how many survived under the care of smokers, >> fireplaces, etc. I have known of lung cancer deaths where smoking was >> not a factor. What about drinkers or those who take drugs or strong >> meds and accidents/fatalities? What about junk food addicts and child >> health? What about all the taxes and court awards paid via tobacco? >> What if California passes legal marijuana? What if cell phones cause >> brain tumors? How long did Churchill live with all his cigars and >> brandy? Good grief! >> >> On Mar 29, 8:19 pm, Ash <[email protected]> wrote: >> > I am a smoker, and extend the moral question further that it has many >> > effects on the health and productivity of the smoker while impacting the >> > longevity of a parent, shortchanging the offspring in many ways less >> > directly than immediate exposure. That said, I feel guilt each time I >> > light up (~25/day) and am irritated at my weakness. Smoking anywhere >> > around children should be done with caution IMO even in open >> environments. >> > >> > On 3/24/2010 2:35 AM, fiddler wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > I saw that article. I believe that if a person wishes to smoke in >> > > their own vehicle, they should be allowed to do so. I support the less >> > > reaching ban, that disallows smoking in vehicles that drive children. >> > > I know plenty of people that smoke and would be quite horrified at >> > > being near children, much less transporting them lol. The strong ban >> > > on ALL vehicles is just silly IMO. Trying to prevent children from >> > > ever seeing a cigarette burning is taking government intrusion back >> > > into the middle ages...or the middle east. >> > >> > > On Mar 23, 11:28 pm, Ian Pollard<[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > >> Fiddler, your post is quite timely as the UK is looking to extend its >> > >> smoking band to cars with child passengers: >> > >> > >>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8583551.stm >> > >> > >> Ian- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > - Show quoted text - >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> ""Minds Eye"" group. >> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> [email protected]<minds-eye%[email protected]> >> . >> For more options, visit this group at >> http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. >> >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]<minds-eye%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
