> Yea, you can go bar-hopping as long as the anti-alcohol
> crusaders haven't make MN into a dry state by then.  What
> goes around comes around.  The logical inconsistency with
> forcing your morals onto others is that your ability to do
> so lasts only as long as your power; you have no recourse to
> the higher moral ground in your own defense.

The smoking ban has nothing to do with morality, and I find the comparison
between banning smoking in workplaces and prohibition to be weird.  I don't
think smoking is immoral; I just think that sucking on something that's on
fire is stupid.  But that has nothing to do with the point of the smoking
ban, which is protecting workers from harm.  If anything, I think it is
immoral to harm people's health so you can selfishly enjoy something.

I am a strong supporter of a smoking ban.  I am also a strong supporter of
getting rid of bar closing times and the ban on Sunday alcohol sales.  When
you come down to it, it is for the same reason: allow people to act as long
as it doesn't harm others, but don't allow people to be harmed out of
selfishness.  Simple, consistent, and it doesn't have anything to do with
whose morality is better than whose.

===
Nathan Hunstad
CARAG
Minneapolis, MN
PGP DH/DSS public key -- http://www.angelfire.com/mn/freakpower/nhpubkey.txt
________________________________________________
Do you Gonzo?!
http://www.angelfire.com/mn/freakpower
REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to