Author Topic: Do you smoke? (Read 16266 times)

Rictor · **Reply #120 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:08:30 pm

Well, theres one of you and millions if not billions of smokers. Yes, we could ban smoking or introduce insane measures to protect your precious body from the evil smoke, but a more efficient solution would be to just ignore you.

The extent to which you are taking the issue is not reasonable. Anything above 0% is infirnging upon your rights? Technically yeah, but we don't live in an ideal world.

Deal with it.

aldo_14 · **Reply #121 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:10:33 pm

Oh god, no! You called me an ignorant fool! Sniff... that was really cruel.... you monster of men!

Oh yeah, and if its as poisionous as you say it is - just avoid it or wear a smog mask. Or move to the countryside. Or, build a giant bubble for filtering the air that you breathe

.

SadisticSid · **Reply #122 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:12:29 pm

I despise second hand smoke but I don't blame smokers for it. If it gets too severe I can always go outside or to another establishment where it's either banned or the particulates are less dense.

And I firmly believe the government shouldn't interfere on this. If the owners of public places want to ban smokers then let them; it might be even be good for business. Likewise, if a lot of customers smoke and the owner doesn't mind allowing them to continue, then don't let the health and safety bureaucrats stop them from doing so.

But I'd also demand that smokers who took up the habit after the health risks were uncovered forfeit their rights to free healthcare when developing a smoking-related disease.

JarC · **Reply #123 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:21:14 pm

I smoke...

if someone objects (as long as I'm on their turf) I'll respect that wish...

about SHS...to each his/her own, but do those despising SHS realize that when walking down whatever street, the air isn't suddenly gonna get a whole lot cleaner if folks don't smoke in the streets? for one thing...there's traffic exhaust fumes, tons of dust formed by shedded human skin cells, etc...

Kazan · **Reply #124 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:26:05 pm

rictor: "one of me and million if not billions of smokers" that doesn't change that it's a human rights violation - i'd also direct your opinion to the poll above

You act like I'm the only one with this opinion - i'm very far from it

"We're violating someone's rights, but we don't care! So let's ignore him"

You ciritize the US incessantly, yet you're exactly like GW ****

Kazan · **Reply #125 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:27:35 pm

JarC: that logic fails to be a compelling counterargument - and I am all for getting rid of the internal combustion engine in favor or cleaner things

Zeronet · **Reply #126 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:27:53 pm

Well not really, GW Bu-sh doesn't violate anyone's rights. Nice fellow really.

aldo_14 · **Reply #127 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:28:33 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Kazan
rictor: "one of me and million if not billions of smokers" that doesn't change that it's a human rights violation - i'd also direct your opinion to the poll above

Since when did majority rule determine human rights?

01010 · **Reply #128 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:29:56 pm

Quote

Originally posted by SadisticSid
I despise second hand smoke but I don't blame smokers for it. If it gets too severe I can always go outside or to another establishment where it's either banned or the particulates are less dense.

And I firmly believe the government shouldn't interfere on this. If the owners of public places want to ban smokers then let them; it might be even be good for business. Likewise, if a lot of customers smoke and the owner doesn't mind allowing them to continue, then don't let the health and safety bureaucrats stop them from doing so.

But I'd also demand that smokers who took up the habit after the health risks were uncovered forfeit their rights to free healthcare when developing a smoking-related disease.

Thank you, someone else that can think rationally and realise that these people aren't completely to blame.

I was beginning to think we were a rare breed.

SadisticSid · **Reply #129 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:33:17 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Kazan

"We're violating someone's rights, but we don't care! So let's ignore him"

Tell me, where are you getting these mythical rights from? It's not the first time you've pulled the human rights argument like this out of your ass.

Perhaps by your 'logic' we should also ban the expulsion of CO2 from our bodies because that is also a harmful substance if we inhale enough of it. Somehow I doubt that would be popular though. ^_^

Quote

Originally posted by 01010

Thank you, someone else that can think rationally and realise that these people aren't completely to blame.

I was beginning to think we were a rare breed.

Indeed - it's simply an exercise of free will. If you don't like the atmospheric conditions, you can go somewhere else. Why should it be any more complex than that?

01010 · **Reply #130 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:36:53 pm

"Obnoxious , self-righteous, whining little ****s. My biggest fear is that if I quit smoking, I'll become one of you...Don't take that wrong. I have something to tell you non-smokers that I know for a fact that you don't know, and I feel it's my duty to pass on information at all times. Ready?.......Non-smokers die every day...Enjoy your evening. See, I know that you entertain this eternal life fantasy because you've chosen not to smoke, but let me be the 1st to POP that bubble and bring you hurtling back to reality....You're dead too. "

~Bill Hicks~

Couldn't resist it.

Zeronet · **Reply #131 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:37:02 pm

Quote

Originally posted by SadisticSid

Tell me, where are you getting these mythical rights from? It's not the first time you've pulled the human rights argument like this out of your ass.

Perhaps by your 'logic' we should also ban the expulsion of CO2 from our bodies because that is also a harmful substance if we inhale enough of it. Somehow I doubt that would be popular though.

Strawman argument, CO2 is not comparable to second hand smoke.

JarC · **Reply #132 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:40:22 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Kazan
JarC: that logic fails to be a compelling counterargument - and I am all for getting rid of the internal combustion engine in favor or cleaner things

it's not meant as counter argument, it underlines the onesidedness of the argument if you're not at the same time in the same way strongely opposed to motorized transport, otherwise arguments against SHS could be considered as hypocritical (not that I do not agree that others should not have to be forced to enjoy SHS. but then again, I also don't have a car or use public transport).

Kazan · **Reply #133 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:41:45 pm

thank you Zeronet

CO2 is a "Simple asphixant" (sp?) just like Methane

"Tell me where are you getting these mythical rights from" how about UN and international human rights organizations, oh yeah the US Constitution as well

Circumcision: Right to not be mutilated, right to genital integrity (Follows from the other one)
Smoking: Right to be healthy - ie not poisoned by others

01010: I'd like to die of natural causes, thank you - and while I'm alive I want my lungs to be fully operation, and I don't want to have to put up with cancer

Kazan · **Reply #134 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:42:27 pm

JarC: trying to argue that someone's views are inconsitent is a form of ad hominem anyway - so even if my views were inconsistent you'd be failing to make a compelling argument

SadisticSid · **Reply #135 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:43:54 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Zeronet

Strawman argument, CO2 is not comparable to second hand smoke.

Tell me why, by Kazan's logic. If you breathe enough SHS you can get ill and die. Likewise with concentrated amounts of CO2. Both are poisonous to the human body. And Kaz seems to think it a human right that everyone should not breathe in someone else's poisons.

Kazan · **Reply #136 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:46:08 pm

SadisticSid: I told youi by my own logic you freaking nitwit

the chemicals in cigarette smoke are of themselves poisons - CO2 is only dangerous when there i s enough of it around to cause oxygen concentration to fall below 18% - that is the definition of a "Simple asphixiant gas"

Rictor · **Reply #137 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:48:29 pm

Quote

Originally posted by aldo_14

Since when did majority rule determine human rights?

There are differing degrees of human rights. For example, my right to live in "a positive environment" and not have people swear in my presence is of a lesser priority than say, my right to due process in a court of law.

It would be simple-minded to apply the same standard throughout. If you were to do so, a person who smokes within 100m of Kazan would be the same as lets say, Pol Pot.

If reasonable measures have been taken to respect human rights, and particularly when they are being broken to such a small degree, then it would be alright, by my logic at least, to ignore any such persons who are not satisfied with the current enforcement of said human rights.

JarC · **Reply #138 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:51:48 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Kazan
JarC: trying to argue that someone's views are inconsitent is a form of ad hominem anyway - so even if my views were inconsistent you'd be failing to make a compelling argument

exactly! likewise any agument you put forward is governed by the same ruling, ergo your argument is also not compelling...

SadisticSid · **Reply #139 on:** April 08, 2004, 07:52:37 pm

Quote

Originally posted by Kazan
SadisticSid: I told youi by my own logic you freaking nitwit

the chemicals in cigarette smoke are of themselves poisons - CO2 is only dangerous when there i s enough of it around to cause oxygen concentration to fall below 18% - that is the definition of a "Simple asphixiant gas"

Go argue with the dictionary

Quote

poi·son ( P ) Pronunciation Key (poizn)
n.
A substance that causes injury, illness, or death, especially by chemical means.
Something destructive or fatal.

It fulfills the definition, the mechanics of it are merely different

News:

Poll

Do you smoke

Author Topic: Do you smoke? (Read 16266 times)

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?

Do you smoke?