🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <3tpl30$566@netsrv2.spss.com>, Edward Janik <janik@spss.com> wrote:

> I don't think ANY restaurant should refuse to serve someone
> because they are a smoker...but a restaurant should have the
> right to ban smoking within its premises...

Well, of course.

What I object to is Big Brother -- in the person of local or state
governments -- deciding that a one-size-fits-all rule is appropriate
as re smoking in eating and drinking establishments.

>  it's not the person
> I find objectionable...it's the smoke which I do not want to
> inhale.  I want a smoke free environment.  And if you think I
> shouldn't be able to demand it...

I don't think you should be able to demand it for each and every
restaurant/bar you care to choose -- rather, you should choose to
patronize those that meet your needs.

I don't smoke in restaurants, actually, at least not in the eating
area.  IMO smoking at table is somewhat rude.  On the other hand, I
do not patronize drinking establishments that forbid me my cigar.  I
don't make a fuss, I just go elsewhere.  No big deal.

>  then how can you expect the
> government to enact and enforce regulations to provide 
> porno-free TV in your home to protect your children?  I don't 

Er.  Huh?

(Mr. Janik, you're generalizing again....  :)

> have children.  But I have lungs.  I want to protect my lungs.  
> It's that simple.



--
Mark Shaw <mshaw@netcom.com>                email for PGP public key 
GE/CS     d H- s:++ g- p7 au a w+ v- C++$ S++$ P++>+++$ L+>++ 
v2.1      !3 E--- N+++ K W--- M-- V po+++(--) Y+ t+@ 5-- jx R 
          G? tv b++@ D++ B- e->-- u** h-- f+ r++ n--- y++<**