Cancer Society At It Again
The local nanny- staters at the American Cancer Society are at it again. This time they want to stop a new business from opening in Arcata- that business being a lounge of sorts where people smoke tobacco using hookas (water pipes).
I can't say much about the business idea. I've never been impressed with water pipes. I've never used them for tobacco but did use them a few times for pot back in my younger days. I wasn't impressed. I guess it might have seemed cool, though.
The Cancer Society needs to back off. This isn't even a business involving other things that just allows smoking. It's a business in which the main attraction is smoking. I have no problem with the Cancer Society's spreading the word about the dangers of smoking but, should people choose to smoke anyway, the Cancer Society should leave them alone.
posted by Fred Mangels @ 8:52 AM
14 comments
14 Comments:
agreed
You said it Fred! An anti-smoking advocacy group should shut the hell up when a smoking club wants to open shop.
I read Fred's Humboldt Blog for the daily dose of irony.
I don't remember them complaining when the 2nd, 3rd or 4th pot center opened up.
Why should WE pay for the health care costs related to tobacco? (No connection proven with pot).
My Dad once had a big tobacco pipe collection that included a water pipe. My brother used the water pipe for smoking pot and boy, was my dad surprised!
Smoking's not illegal, and since smoking is now banned almost everywhere, this is a good idea for people who like to smoke. I assume only smokers need apply to work there. And they shouldn't be able to cry foul over unhealthy working conditions.
I won't go there, and people who don't like smoke won't go there. I'm happy to have smoking out of restaurants and public areas. This seems like a fair trade.
2:54 PM: "Why should WE pay for the health care costs related to tobacco?"
You are right. When we get completely socialized medicine, the government can make ALL of your personal choices for you. Think of how "liberated" you will be.
At least you recognize that someone must pay instead of it being "free". There may be hope for you yet.
Nah. On second thought you will still probably be a socialist.
Yeah, Lord knows we don't need EVERYONE getting medical treatment like they do in almost the entire rest of the industrialized world. Goddamn world has gone to the pinko commies.
I'm normally very liberal on social issues, but I agree totally with 2:54. Every tobacco product sold should be subject to a signed waiver by the purchaser that will absolve the public from having to pay for their iron lungs.
But couldn't the same be said for a person that gets in an car accident? They chose to drive a car. And why should we all have to pay to clean up the pollution caused by their burning gas? I guess it's because we're all in this together.
Yeah 9:08 AM, get in line and shut up.
"But couldn't the same be said for a person that gets in an car accident?".
The same could be, and often is, said about just about anything. Usually by authoritarians that want control of more and more aspects of everybody else's life.
Funny thing is, never mind smokers already paying more taxes than most, all we're talking about is someone that wants to start a business that involves letting people smoke on the premises.
Somehow that gets turned into the "why should we pay..." argument.
Nothing strikes me funnier and more ironic as when people want to ban smoking in BARS!
Never mind the carnage wrought by alchohol! Rot your brain and liver- but not your lungs!
Just as long as we dont have to smell that stinky ol' tobbacco!
wow.
Like 'em or not, Libertarians are probably the closest thing to what our forefathers were after when they created 'America'.
If you dont like the idea of a 'Hookah club'...
DONT GO TO ONE!
Smokers actually save the government money on net as they die earlier and therefore claim little in old age programs like Medicare and Social Security. Therefore, the healthcare costs argument is really bogus as government mostly pays for healthcare for old people, and since many smokers don't live long periods of time during Medicare eligibility, the government doesn't spend much on them. But yes, with socialized medicine, you're going to get government running every aspect of your life and they will be using the same argument that anti-tobacco forces use today.
And social liberals better watch out -- homosexual relations is very high risk behavior as it has a very high probability of AIDS. That has significant health costs for a government that runs socialized medicine. Therefore, government may need to restrict homosexual behavior, or any out of wedlock sex, which tends to be riskier than married sex. I can hear the right-wingers loving this
too.
Like it or not, socialized healthcare leads you on the road to totalitarianism -- government controlling all your moves under the guise of protecting other taxpayers from having to pay for the healthcare expenses of your "risky lifestyle choices."
Post a Comment
<< Home