[FoRK] Smoking, etc.

Jeff Bone jbone at place.org
Tue Apr 12 16:30:43 PDT 2005


On Apr 12, 2005, at 1:38 PM, Ian Andrew Bell (FoRK) wrote:

> The problem is you can't name all of the 100,000 persons or so you 
> might come into contact with during the course of your life each of 
> whom contribute to a debilitating condition, so the liability is too 
> diffuse.  It's not every case where the second-hand smoke emanates 
> from a small group or individuals.

Well, then, that's too bad.  For you.

>> It's also a word used LARGELY by the Reich.  It's difficult to take 
>> seriously.
>
> Did you just invoke Hitler?  Now it's difficult to take /you/ 
> seriously.

That was a reference to the Religious {Right | Reich} --- a euphemistic 
term of some recent popularity around these parts, coined by Turpin 
maybe?  De-Godwin yourself, knee-jerk boy. ;-)

>> In any case, you're far from proving that smoking is deviant behavior 
>> even by your own definition above.  Which society?  What subset of 
>> society?  How do you determine what the "accepted standards" are?  
>> Etc.
>
> I think it's well-established that society is a community.

And do you think that, say, the folks who frequent a particular bar --- 
a majority of whom smoke --- fail to constitute a community for the 
purpose of setting "standards?"

You're building your rhetorical house on sand, here.  "Community."  
"Society."  "Standards."  "Deviants."  Sheesh.

Really, nice go at the Polemics 101 term paper.  Let me know when 
you're ready to register for the second semester. ;-)

> And specifically in this case it's people sharing a physical space 
> within, say, a city.  Which regulates things like public smoking bans. 
>  I'm making a feet-on-the-street argument

One might say "overly-sensitive-nose-in-the-air..."

> here and you just launched yourself into the stratosphere with Richard 
> Branson.

Good company...

>> I --- and many smokers ---
>
> I figured this little factoid became obvious a few messages ago.

You haven't been paying attention.  I've been totally open about this 
for *years.*

> I tend to respect Smokers' "subjective preferences" by not beating the 
> shit out of them every time they despoil the air around me.  You'd be 
> surprise at the lengths I will go to in order to avoid kicking 
> somebody's ass.  The self-righteousness of their sense of entitlement 
> is self-defeating in some sense:  it does sometimes inspire a perverse 
> urge to say "fuck you" to all you militants and forcibly insert the 
> cigarette into your puny mouths.

Mmm hmm.  Thanks for proving my point.  IMHO, it's not really the 
smokers that are the sociopaths.  (And yes, I'm suggesting a slightly 
different definition of "sociopath" here. ;-)

>> Just like all those homophobes who don't want to see guys kissing on 
>> TV, etc. etc. etc.
>
> Funny, watching a couple of queers fondle each other has never made me 
> cough or develop eye irritation.  I seriously doubt it will increase 
> my risk of heart disease.

It might if you were a Reich-winger.

More to the point:  you could make the case that AIDS is a public 
health menace, and that all HIV-infected persons --- and possibly all 
homosexuals, IV drug users, hemophiliacs, Haitians, sex industry 
workers, and so forth should be chemically neutered in order to 
mitigate the risk of their transmitting their infection sexually.  
After all, public health concerns trump individual behavioral freedoms, 
right?  People can't *really* be trusted with their own sexual 
responsibility, can they?  And after all, we're talking about DEVIANTS 
here, right?  CLOSE THE BATH HOUSES!  OPEN THE CONCENTRATION CAMPS!  
ROUND UP THE DEVIANTS, THE PERVERTS, THE DEGENERATES!  REMOVE THOSE 
SICK, TWISTED, DIRTY, FILTHY SOURCES OF DISEASE FROM POLITE SOCIETY!  
THEY ARE RUINING OUR GREAT NATION AND IMPERILING OUR CHILDREN!  
(Sarcasm!  BTW, how do you like my Michael Savage impersonation?)

Look, the bottom line is this:  intolerance is UGLY, no matter what 
flavor.  Ian your position, sadly, is UGLY.  And being intolerant in 
various pet issues while decrying intolerance elsewhere is 
hypocritical.  The left and the right are no different in being 
hypocritical, merely in their choice of hypocrisies.

jb



More information about the FoRK mailing list