Op/Ed to my hometown paper (on smoking laws)

jfarel

New member
I wrote an op/ed to my hometown paper after they published there own op/ed saying that free enterprise should decide whether we are allowed to smoke or not.

If you have anything I should add to it or any other suggestions let me know. I am so tired of hearing the same old smoking crap from "free enterprise fanatics." I am free enterprise too, but not when it endangers the lives of others. Here was my response:



<i>Recently, an op/ed entitled "No Smoking? Let the Free Enterprise System Work," appeared in the " "Star. The article comes after Virginia's House of Delegates voted against a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places.

The point of the article was, as you can probably guess from the title, that ultimately people will choose "with their feet." When it becomes culturally acceptable to do so, they will stop going to smoking establishments such as restaurants.

This is the rationale I always here by those opposed to a ban on smoking in public places. However, sometimes government intervention is warranted. I am all for free enterprise but I would argue a ban on smoking is essential to public health. The government doesn't allow people to drive drunk, nor do they allow builders to use asbestos. At some point the government has to act. Smoking has proven to be harmful both to smokers and to those exposed to second hand smoke. For those with asthma and other lung diseases, exposure can make life even more difficult.

I have lived with a genetic lung disease (cystic fibrosis) for the past 27 years. I'm convinced if the legislators could live one day in my shoes they would ban smoking immediately. The damage caused by second hand smoke is well documented. I am already at the point where I will soon need a lung transplant. I can't continue to be exposed to second hand smoke and risk further damage to my lungs. I'm certainly not the only one in this community who suffers from lung problems. Smoke can be devastating to those with asthma and other lung diseases.

If you live in the " " area you probably know how difficult it is to find a non-smoking restaurant. Your choices are very limited and no one wants to eat at the same place all the time. Non smoking sections in restaurants are laughable. Many times I have been seated side-by-side with a smoker separated by 5 foot divider.

We all know how addictive smoking is. If we are going to wait for free enterprise to bring in more non-smoking restaurants in Virginia, I'm afraid we are going to be waiting a long time. </i>
 

jfarel

New member
I wrote an op/ed to my hometown paper after they published there own op/ed saying that free enterprise should decide whether we are allowed to smoke or not.

If you have anything I should add to it or any other suggestions let me know. I am so tired of hearing the same old smoking crap from "free enterprise fanatics." I am free enterprise too, but not when it endangers the lives of others. Here was my response:



<i>Recently, an op/ed entitled "No Smoking? Let the Free Enterprise System Work," appeared in the " "Star. The article comes after Virginia's House of Delegates voted against a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places.

The point of the article was, as you can probably guess from the title, that ultimately people will choose "with their feet." When it becomes culturally acceptable to do so, they will stop going to smoking establishments such as restaurants.

This is the rationale I always here by those opposed to a ban on smoking in public places. However, sometimes government intervention is warranted. I am all for free enterprise but I would argue a ban on smoking is essential to public health. The government doesn't allow people to drive drunk, nor do they allow builders to use asbestos. At some point the government has to act. Smoking has proven to be harmful both to smokers and to those exposed to second hand smoke. For those with asthma and other lung diseases, exposure can make life even more difficult.

I have lived with a genetic lung disease (cystic fibrosis) for the past 27 years. I'm convinced if the legislators could live one day in my shoes they would ban smoking immediately. The damage caused by second hand smoke is well documented. I am already at the point where I will soon need a lung transplant. I can't continue to be exposed to second hand smoke and risk further damage to my lungs. I'm certainly not the only one in this community who suffers from lung problems. Smoke can be devastating to those with asthma and other lung diseases.

If you live in the " " area you probably know how difficult it is to find a non-smoking restaurant. Your choices are very limited and no one wants to eat at the same place all the time. Non smoking sections in restaurants are laughable. Many times I have been seated side-by-side with a smoker separated by 5 foot divider.

We all know how addictive smoking is. If we are going to wait for free enterprise to bring in more non-smoking restaurants in Virginia, I'm afraid we are going to be waiting a long time. </i>
 

jfarel

New member
I wrote an op/ed to my hometown paper after they published there own op/ed saying that free enterprise should decide whether we are allowed to smoke or not.

If you have anything I should add to it or any other suggestions let me know. I am so tired of hearing the same old smoking crap from "free enterprise fanatics." I am free enterprise too, but not when it endangers the lives of others. Here was my response:



<i>Recently, an op/ed entitled "No Smoking? Let the Free Enterprise System Work," appeared in the " "Star. The article comes after Virginia's House of Delegates voted against a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places.

The point of the article was, as you can probably guess from the title, that ultimately people will choose "with their feet." When it becomes culturally acceptable to do so, they will stop going to smoking establishments such as restaurants.

This is the rationale I always here by those opposed to a ban on smoking in public places. However, sometimes government intervention is warranted. I am all for free enterprise but I would argue a ban on smoking is essential to public health. The government doesn't allow people to drive drunk, nor do they allow builders to use asbestos. At some point the government has to act. Smoking has proven to be harmful both to smokers and to those exposed to second hand smoke. For those with asthma and other lung diseases, exposure can make life even more difficult.

I have lived with a genetic lung disease (cystic fibrosis) for the past 27 years. I'm convinced if the legislators could live one day in my shoes they would ban smoking immediately. The damage caused by second hand smoke is well documented. I am already at the point where I will soon need a lung transplant. I can't continue to be exposed to second hand smoke and risk further damage to my lungs. I'm certainly not the only one in this community who suffers from lung problems. Smoke can be devastating to those with asthma and other lung diseases.

If you live in the " " area you probably know how difficult it is to find a non-smoking restaurant. Your choices are very limited and no one wants to eat at the same place all the time. Non smoking sections in restaurants are laughable. Many times I have been seated side-by-side with a smoker separated by 5 foot divider.

We all know how addictive smoking is. If we are going to wait for free enterprise to bring in more non-smoking restaurants in Virginia, I'm afraid we are going to be waiting a long time. </i>
 

jfarel

New member
I wrote an op/ed to my hometown paper after they published there own op/ed saying that free enterprise should decide whether we are allowed to smoke or not.

If you have anything I should add to it or any other suggestions let me know. I am so tired of hearing the same old smoking crap from "free enterprise fanatics." I am free enterprise too, but not when it endangers the lives of others. Here was my response:



<i>Recently, an op/ed entitled "No Smoking? Let the Free Enterprise System Work," appeared in the " "Star. The article comes after Virginia's House of Delegates voted against a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places.

The point of the article was, as you can probably guess from the title, that ultimately people will choose "with their feet." When it becomes culturally acceptable to do so, they will stop going to smoking establishments such as restaurants.

This is the rationale I always here by those opposed to a ban on smoking in public places. However, sometimes government intervention is warranted. I am all for free enterprise but I would argue a ban on smoking is essential to public health. The government doesn't allow people to drive drunk, nor do they allow builders to use asbestos. At some point the government has to act. Smoking has proven to be harmful both to smokers and to those exposed to second hand smoke. For those with asthma and other lung diseases, exposure can make life even more difficult.

I have lived with a genetic lung disease (cystic fibrosis) for the past 27 years. I'm convinced if the legislators could live one day in my shoes they would ban smoking immediately. The damage caused by second hand smoke is well documented. I am already at the point where I will soon need a lung transplant. I can't continue to be exposed to second hand smoke and risk further damage to my lungs. I'm certainly not the only one in this community who suffers from lung problems. Smoke can be devastating to those with asthma and other lung diseases.

If you live in the " " area you probably know how difficult it is to find a non-smoking restaurant. Your choices are very limited and no one wants to eat at the same place all the time. Non smoking sections in restaurants are laughable. Many times I have been seated side-by-side with a smoker separated by 5 foot divider.

We all know how addictive smoking is. If we are going to wait for free enterprise to bring in more non-smoking restaurants in Virginia, I'm afraid we are going to be waiting a long time. </i>
 

jfarel

New member
I wrote an op/ed to my hometown paper after they published there own op/ed saying that free enterprise should decide whether we are allowed to smoke or not.

If you have anything I should add to it or any other suggestions let me know. I am so tired of hearing the same old smoking crap from "free enterprise fanatics." I am free enterprise too, but not when it endangers the lives of others. Here was my response:



<i>Recently, an op/ed entitled "No Smoking? Let the Free Enterprise System Work," appeared in the " "Star. The article comes after Virginia's House of Delegates voted against a comprehensive ban on smoking in public places.

The point of the article was, as you can probably guess from the title, that ultimately people will choose "with their feet." When it becomes culturally acceptable to do so, they will stop going to smoking establishments such as restaurants.

This is the rationale I always here by those opposed to a ban on smoking in public places. However, sometimes government intervention is warranted. I am all for free enterprise but I would argue a ban on smoking is essential to public health. The government doesn't allow people to drive drunk, nor do they allow builders to use asbestos. At some point the government has to act. Smoking has proven to be harmful both to smokers and to those exposed to second hand smoke. For those with asthma and other lung diseases, exposure can make life even more difficult.

I have lived with a genetic lung disease (cystic fibrosis) for the past 27 years. I'm convinced if the legislators could live one day in my shoes they would ban smoking immediately. The damage caused by second hand smoke is well documented. I am already at the point where I will soon need a lung transplant. I can't continue to be exposed to second hand smoke and risk further damage to my lungs. I'm certainly not the only one in this community who suffers from lung problems. Smoke can be devastating to those with asthma and other lung diseases.

If you live in the " " area you probably know how difficult it is to find a non-smoking restaurant. Your choices are very limited and no one wants to eat at the same place all the time. Non smoking sections in restaurants are laughable. Many times I have been seated side-by-side with a smoker separated by 5 foot divider.

We all know how addictive smoking is. If we are going to wait for free enterprise to bring in more non-smoking restaurants in Virginia, I'm afraid we are going to be waiting a long time. </i>
 

Ratatosk

Administrator
Staff member
You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!

Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.
 

Ratatosk

Administrator
Staff member
You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!

Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.
 

Ratatosk

Administrator
Staff member
You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!

Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.
 

Ratatosk

Administrator
Staff member
You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!

Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.
 

Ratatosk

Administrator
Staff member
You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!

Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.
 

jfarel

New member
Whether I convince anyone, I don't know. I hope the article does some good.

Is there something I should add to make it more effective?

These pictures are pretty funny.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.notobacco.org/photos/">http://www.notobacco.org/photos/</a>
 

jfarel

New member
Whether I convince anyone, I don't know. I hope the article does some good.

Is there something I should add to make it more effective?

These pictures are pretty funny.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.notobacco.org/photos/">http://www.notobacco.org/photos/</a>
 

jfarel

New member
Whether I convince anyone, I don't know. I hope the article does some good.

Is there something I should add to make it more effective?

These pictures are pretty funny.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.notobacco.org/photos/">http://www.notobacco.org/photos/</a>
 

jfarel

New member
Whether I convince anyone, I don't know. I hope the article does some good.

Is there something I should add to make it more effective?

These pictures are pretty funny.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.notobacco.org/photos/">http://www.notobacco.org/photos/</a>
 

jfarel

New member
Whether I convince anyone, I don't know. I hope the article does some good.

Is there something I should add to make it more effective?

These pictures are pretty funny.
<a target=_blank class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.notobacco.org/photos/">http://www.notobacco.org/photos/</a>
 

jfarel

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Ratatosk</b></i>

You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!



Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.</end quote></div>

Veterans can smoke in there homes and places where it wouldn't effect others. Being fat doesn't make other people sick. For smokers rights advocates those arguments are weak, when we have hard science proving otherwise.
 

jfarel

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Ratatosk</b></i>

You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!



Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.</end quote></div>

Veterans can smoke in there homes and places where it wouldn't effect others. Being fat doesn't make other people sick. For smokers rights advocates those arguments are weak, when we have hard science proving otherwise.
 

jfarel

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Ratatosk</b></i>

You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!



Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.</end quote></div>

Veterans can smoke in there homes and places where it wouldn't effect others. Being fat doesn't make other people sick. For smokers rights advocates those arguments are weak, when we have hard science proving otherwise.
 

jfarel

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Ratatosk</b></i>

You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!



Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.</end quote>

Veterans can smoke in there homes and places where it wouldn't effect others. Being fat doesn't make other people sick. For smokers rights advocates those arguments are weak, when we have hard science proving otherwise.
 

jfarel

New member
<div class="FTQUOTE"><begin quote><i>Originally posted by: <b>Ratatosk</b></i>

You're not going to be able to convince the die-hard smokers rights individuals who claim studies on second hand smoke are all fake. Or they'll say smoking is legal, you're infringing on their rights, if they're going to ban smoking then they should ban fat people because that's not healthy either. I've heard all the annoying rhetoric for the past few years. They even get the veteran's involved -- they fought for our country and the right to smoke. Though so did my husband and FIL and they don't smoke or support smoking. Sigh!



Our city recently went thru a change in the smoking regs -- basically, smoking is allowed in enclosed bars where children (21 and under) aren't allowed. Wish they'd have gone further to ban it from park facilities or building entrances. It's so nice to go to a restaurant or bar where there's no smoking allowed. We had to skip a relatives wedding reception a few years ago 'cuz it was held in a smokey bar.</end quote>

Veterans can smoke in there homes and places where it wouldn't effect others. Being fat doesn't make other people sick. For smokers rights advocates those arguments are weak, when we have hard science proving otherwise.
 
Top