[FoRK] Smoking, etc.

Stephen D. Williams sdw at lig.net
Wed Apr 13 06:33:16 PDT 2005

Of course.  I wasn't clear that I was agreeing with you and answering 
other messages.  I just chose to make the statement at your message.


Joe Barrera wrote:

> I do hope you notice my use of the word "toxic".
> Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>> The point here is physical harm offensiveness vs. offensiveness.  
>> Back in the 50s it was merely offensive for someone to smoke in the 
>> office.  Then, very slowly, we realized why everyone was dropping 
>> dead at 50 and it was recognized as actual physical injury.
>> The US, and many societies, have drawn a strong distinction between 
>> physical and non-physical annoyance.  Unless you can argue 
>> convincingly that second hand smoke has no physical consequences at 
>> all, it's an intrusion that is really out of bounds.  A similar but 
>> more gray area concerns the hypersensitive and perfumes.  A much less 
>> gray area, nonetheless raised in debate, is psychosomatic physical 
>> consequences.  At that level, people have an internal issue much more 
>> than an external one and you can't really fault the stimulus in most 
>> cases.
>> sdw
>> Joe Barrera wrote:
>>> Cigarettes smell like ass but are more toxic.
>>> If the majority doesn't want to smell toxic ass,
>>> why shouldn't it have its say?
>>> I don't see what that has to do with any "nanny state".
>>> - Joe
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FoRK mailing list
>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

swilliams at hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw at lig.net http://sdw.st
Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw

More information about the FoRK mailing list