Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site hp-pcd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!hp-kirk!mark
From: mark@hp-kirk.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: Re: Re: reply to ** FRODO ** from laura - (nf)
Message-ID: <1574@hp-pcd.UUCP>
Date: Sat, 20-Aug-83 03:27:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: hp-pcd.1574
Posted: Sat Aug 20 03:27:31 1983
Date-Received: Sun, 21-Aug-83 05:57:58 EDT
Sender: netnews@hp-pcd.UUCP
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Corvallis OR
Lines: 50

#R:hou5f:-35800:hp-kirk:7100018:000:3043
hp-kirk!mark    Aug 18 08:50:00 1983

        Dry up Laura.  You have a pretty good stand and you are destroying
     it with lousy comparisons.  Nobody is talking about outlawing blacks,
     computers, or any other people or object.  They are not even talking
     about outlawing smokers.  What they are talking about is passing laws
     to prevent smokers from smoking in public.  And contrary to much of
     the opinions expressed in this debate, laws to restrict unpopular
     practices are a very common practice these days.  We have laws
     against prostitution, gambling, fornication, loud stereos, littering,
     nudity, and spitting on the sidewalk.  In short, if a large enough
     segment of society doesn't like something then they will pass a law
     against it.  Your attack on the alleged survey showing a 51% majority
     of non-smokers serves no purpose since you are not contending that
     the issue is one of majority rule.  If what you're supporting is
     individual rights then stop diluting your efforts by attacking
     surveys that have no bearing on the issue.

        Now with regard to the issue, I feel that smoking belongs with the
     above mentioned outlawed practices.  However, I do not feel that all
     of these practices should be outlawed.  Littering should be outlawed.
     Prostitution, gambling, nudity, and loud stereos call for some level
     of regulation but should not be illegal, and the laws have no call
     what-so-ever to regulate fornication.  Smoking falls into the middle
     category where some regulation is called for but not a total ban.  My
     problem here is that all of this paragraph is subjective opinion, and
     though I could probably outline the distinctions between these
     practices that lead to my opinions, I do not have any hard fast rules
     that I can apply to objectively class the practice as legal,
     regulated, or illegal.  How does smoking differ from these practices.
     If you are in favor of not regulating smoking are you also in favor
     of not regulating the above.  If you are in favor of outlawing
     smoking are you in favor of banning the above.

        What is it about smoking that you feel subjects it to or frees it
     from legislative intervention.  I suspect that those who want it
     banned as a health hazard would be no less adamant to have it banned
     if it were proven to be safe.  Those who feel the majority is on
     their side would feel the same if the majority was not.  The best
     argument I have seen seems to be the physical discomfort that smoking
     causes some (many) non-smokers.  Are we willing to treat all of the
     unpopular habits, desires, and practices of our society in the same
     manner.  I would like to say yes, but I don't know what that manner
     is. 
                                        More questions, no answers,
                                        Mark Rowe
                                        hplabs!hp-cvd!hp-kirk!mark
                                        Corvallis, Oregon