Smoking ban passes with exemptions
read more recent story comments Reader comments| nobodyimportant Friday, March 9, 2012: 5:38 pm More from nobodyimportant  | What convuluted thinking. This shows the power that certain lobbyists have in government. Consider this. The sole reason for smoking bans is the health of people exposed to the polluted air. No longer is there any doubt about the fact that this kind of prevention saves and prolongs lives. The exemptions brokered here send a message that the lives of people working in and patronizing certain places of business like bars are less valuable than those working in restaurants and hospitals. The cowardness of our legislators is shameful and the businesses owners who are choosing to place their workers at risk should hand their heads. |
| thumper342 Friday, March 9, 2012: 6:22 pm More from thumper342 | Why not allow each city a certain amount of smoking and smoke-free bars. Then those who choose (for themselves) which to frequent can do so, without persecution or ridicule. This is just another way to make everyone take their eyes of the real issues. Those being, the slow, but steady, abuse and transformation of our rights. Please Sir, may I go here or there? Eat this or that? Feel this way or the other? And so on. We choose to smoke or not. I don't smoke, but, if someone I know chooses to, who am I to say they can or can't. Like I said, their choice. Just like it's my choice not to. I can exit a room full of smoke if I choose. Forcing others to obey our ideals is wrong. Enough being wind-up robots. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!! |
| Danny Stewart Friday, March 9, 2012: 8:13 pm More from Danny Stewart | Alcoholism is preventable too. So does that mean we need to reenacted prohibition too? I have a better idea. How about minding your own business. Besides, I have yet to meet a bartender or waitress that gave a rats butt if the customers smoked or not. Let alone the fact that most of these same people smoke themselves. If you don't like the fact that a place allows smoking, then don't go there. It's that simple. |
| A Hoosier Saturday, March 10, 2012: 1:15 am More from A Hoosier | More oppressive regulation in the name of public safety. Want cleaner air, stop driving. Find me ONE case of second hand smoke disease, I'll show you a doctor getting handouts from the makers of "stop smoking" drugs and products. |
| nobodyimportant Saturday, March 10, 2012: 1:33 am More from nobodyimportant | We live in a country that allows a majority of those representing us to pass laws that restrict individual freedoms for the common good. None of us are free to do as we please, not should we. We live in community and there are limits to personal freedoms so that we may coexist. Decide to drive on the wrong side of the street and you'll find out how much freedom you really have. And the reason we have rules governing behavior...yes, even restricting or restraining behavior is because it isn't just about the person. Don't get me started on prohibition. The popular notion is that it didn't work, but in fact it did work better than anything we have done since to prevent death, disease, and social/familial consequences of alcohol. I know at this point someone will start down the list of things that are unhealthy and whine about what's next. I agree that it is sad that government has to pass measures that at least try to keep people from killing themselves, but it is clear that left to our best thinking, we will choose disease and death over health in order to get what we want when we want it and as often as we want it. We are addicted to instant everything. We have among the highest costs of medical services in the world and are among the unhealthiest to show for it. We refuse to practice self restraint for the sake of others and choose to indulge because we can and it pleases us. Watching both my father and mother lie on their death beds gasping for air and racked with the pain of lung cancer made me acutely aware of what decades of smoking can do. They started smoking in an era where it was the sheek thing to do. Those who started to talk about the dangers of tobacco were treated like today's environmentalists, as wacko crusading alarmists. Smoking was even promoted as healthful. As they approached their end, they cried over and over, "I should have listened. I could have stopped. I'm sorry." And if you really want to spar on this one, consider this. Tobacco use is one of the top reasons why people who are in poverty remain in poverty. The rate of smoking among low income families right here in Morgan County is mind-boggling. I dunno, maybe peple see no hope and just want seek comfort in a cylindrical friend. I'm starting to ramble. It is past my bed time. STOP SMOKING! Start a bank account with your smoke money. Argggghhhhh! |
| A Hoosier Saturday, March 10, 2012: 1:56 am More from A Hoosier | NI, glad to see you up. Little secret, I believe it is a liberty to kill myself anyway I want or to live anyway I want. Because you were unable to control your parents behavior does not entitle you to tell others how to live or die. Tobacco DOES NOT hold those in poverty in poverty. How about we examine education? |
| A Hoosier Saturday, March 10, 2012: 2:35 am More from A Hoosier | NI, after further evaluation, I have determined that it is your opinion that in America we should regulate consumption. Like I said Americans are NOT free. Shall we also regulate moral compass? |
| Danny Stewart Saturday, March 10, 2012: 8:11 am More from Danny Stewart | Nobody, That is the exact same argument that anti-gun activists make. And it is not regulation that keeps this country in line, it is the belief in I'll do my thing, and you do your thing and we'll get along just fine. In other words, self governance. |
| nobodyimportant Saturday, March 10, 2012: 10:23 am More from nobodyimportant | I know that the concept of "regulation" and laws that attempt to alter behavior runs against the grain. We'd all like to believe that to be free means we get to do what we want. But we have a common gene that we inherited from our father and mother, Adam and Eve. (not genetically, but morally). That predisposition is to serve ourselves. When I hear someone say, "I should be completely unrestrained from doing what pleases me" (or something along that line), my first thought is "watch out". Left to do what I want usually gets me in trouble because when I am the focus of my life, others get shortchanged and hurt. My nature is to consider my needs before those of others. In the context of what we are discussing, here is how that plays out. When God asked Cain where his brother Abel was, Cain said, "am I my brother's keeper?" Of course, since omnicient God already knew where he was and what had happened to him, he was posing the question to see if Cain would aknowledge his sin. Cain's response showed none of that. Instead he essentially told God that he had no responsibility for anyone else, even a brother. We say that we live in a country founded on Christian values. Liberty, we say is a Christian principle. Freedom we declare is a right guaranteed in writing. But we sometimes forget the source of that liberty and freedom. God ordained the founding of this country. He would not do that and at the same time tell those who live in it, "now just go do your thing." The lesson from Cain and Abel is that we are responsible (not just take into consideration)...we are responsible for others. Everything we do affects people. We live in community. We choose to live around others and not alone in a cave or on an island. Wouldn't it be great if 100% of us lived our lives where we put the needs of others higher than our own? That's not going to happen. If we could and would do that, there would be no need for laws, jails, rules, regulations..... So, since we are unwilling to do that, God allows us to be governed. Every rule, every law, every executive action restricts the freedom of someone. Most of the time, we just accept it because it addresses someone's tendency to hurt someone by what they are doing. We are ok with laws that govern things like pedophelia, rape, murder, investment fraud. In those cases, we want deterrants and we want the guilty punished. And we are quick to point out what price the victims have paid. But since we don't do any of those things, we are ok with those restrictions on freedom. Hoosier, you stopped short of saying that there is no such thing as disease from second hand smoke. I don't know if you intended it to come out that way, or whether you we just taking a shot at the medical profession by suggesting it is all contrived to profit doctors. If after all that has been done to study this issue, if you say "it just ain't so", I think you are in total denial. God gave us science and right now the science on this issue is no longer debated. The smoker who digs in his heals and says, "I should be free to smoke when and where I want and in the presence of others...those who don't like it can just go elsewhere," is the Cain of today. Am I my brother's keeper? You bet! |
| A Hoosier Saturday, March 10, 2012: 11:22 am More from A Hoosier | Further justification that laws are for the common good. How does my drivers license protect the public? Or my license plate, dogs tag, boat license, gun permit, property taxes, income tax, taxes on everything I buy? How is the extensive wars in other countries where the American military kills everyday, destroys homes, lives, and communities, how are these things being "my brothers keeper". Our regulation, rules, and over reaching government is nothing short of tyrannical. |
| Lassiter Saturday, March 10, 2012: 11:47 am More from Lassiter |
Hoos We may disagree on some things but this one I'm with ya. I wonder if they will regulate production of excess excrement? |
| nobodyimportant Saturday, March 10, 2012: 11:49 pm More from nobodyimportant | Hoosier, I am sympathetic to some of your points. I know you understand that governance is necessary for people to live together. It does come down to the degree of governance and priorities. I cannot argue with you on the issue of our preoccupation with teaching other nations how to live and attacking them if they don't learn. Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan are excellent cases in point. It's not a question of whether or not we will attack Iran, it is a question of when. I think it will come before October this year. President Obama will take the lesson from George Bush that the public is hesitant to switch commanders in chief in times of war. It should come as no surprise at the words of the Israeli Prime Minister following his meeting with our president. I highly suspect that the Israel was assured that if they attack, we will join. But back to the excessive laws, rules, regulations, and executive orders, it does come down to whose ox is being gored. Using just one off your list, can you imagine what it would be like on our roads if there were no laws governing who could drive on them? I remain satisfied that being my brother's keeper is a commandment. But that doesn't extend to being a brother's enabler. Discipline and correction has a place in relationships. Suffering consequences is a way of getting attention so that change can (should) occur. Being a brother's keeper isn't about just being a protector or supporter. Iron sharpens iron. |
| 13 comments found | |
| 1 | 2 | Most Recent | Next |
Add a comment
Posting comments on this web site requires you to be logged in. • Create your account• Log in to your account
» more
TABLE OF CONTENTS »
NEWS
Today
Obituaries
Local
Police
Court news
Weather
Business
Property transfers
Area salaries & stats
Education
State
Nation/World
Photo galleries
Videos
SPORTS
Sports
MD-T sports
IU sports blog
Martinsville
Mooresville
Decatur Central
Eminence
Indian Creek
Monrovia
Tabernacle Christian
Fantasy racing league
BLOGS
All blogs
Quit Smoking...Do It
Sci-Fi Sojourns
The Hoosier Scoop
Hoosier Wine Cellar
Gaming Guru
Mellenblog
