Michael Atherton wrote:

Andy Driscoll wrote:



When they all go nonsmoking, we crusaders will go a-bar-hopping to support our home-grown businesses.



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.


Michael Atherton


It's Mr. Atherton's arguments which have no logical consistency here. Alcohol can be consumed safely and responsibly, and there is a fairly large amount of medical evidence that doing so in certain quantities actually improves one's health. Smoking tobacco can never be done safely. Nor does my having a drink next to you in public ever force you to consume along with me, unlike second-hand smoke.


Further, smoking bans have nothing to do with morals or forcing them onto others. It has to do with public's right and the employees' right to breath clean air. Nobody is stopping you or anyone else from smoking all the tobacco you want inside the confines of your own home.

Establishments which go non-smoking gain the opportunity to receive my discretionary spending, and that of others as well I'm sure. Most of my extended family avoids smoky places.


Chris Johnson, Fulton

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