Subject:
|
Re: Trying to understand
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 16 Mar 2000 21:09:46 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
311 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes: Look at tobacco. It started
> with
> > warning labels, then "no smoking" areas in buildings and planes, then no
> > smoking at all in certain buildings or planes and now lawsuits. It doesn't
> > stop, as long as liberals think they can control your behavior and squeeze a
> > buck out of it. Now they're talking about taxing fatty foods(!) - oh, because
> > they care. Puh-lease, all they care about is manipulation and money.
>
> At the same time, though, the supposition of courtesy is inadequate against
> the average smoker in my experience--sufficiently so that "no smoking" areas
> in restaurants seem to me a good idea. I don't think it's necessary to ban
> smoking at the federal level, but some measure of "enforced politeness," if
> only on the level of individual business, doesn't strike me as inappropriate.
As a non-smoker, I agree. Yet if a private property owner wants to have only
smokers in his establishment, that should be up to him.
> Fatty foods, on the other hand, are another matter!! Who was the chief
> zealot on that crusade? I have the impression that it was primarily one
> individual, but I may be incorrect. Let me know, if you recall.
I think it was from the FDA, not an individual. I hear these things on the
radio news while I'm driving around as part of my job - so I'm half paying
attention.
Bill
>
> > Every penny we give away in taxes is lost freedom.
>
> Mildly-ObRef: Guvvamint do take a bite, don't she?
>
> Dave!
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Due Process
|
| (...) Certainly, as a privately-owned entity it should be allowed to admit or refuse smokers as it sees fit, without being subject to federal heavy- handedness (any more than I as a private citizen should be legally required to lock my guns in my (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Trying to understand
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bill Farkas writes: Look at tobacco. It started with (...) At the same time, though, the supposition of courtesy is inadequate against the average smoker in my experience--sufficiently so that "no smoking" areas in (...) (25 years ago, 16-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
139 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
