Cosmos I know you are not thick
Why aren't you getting I was talking to MG when he said he understood about the fictional 'live and let live world' and I said "no perhaps not' cause he didn't understand and I went on to describe that fictional world. I was talkng about a perfect world that does not exist not what is our current reality.
I went on to describe how lovely it would be if everyone thought about each other and was courteous
and got along.
Hope you got that now
I would never use a blanket statement and say everyone is one way or the other as you are trying to claim to make my point invalid. As we have said there are jerks and there are courteous smokers same with non smokers.
RADIO EDIT -
Here's a question to help us get to the bottom of this: Are people saying that allowing smokers to smoke in the currently designated areas doesn't bother others? Or are they saying that others should put up with a certain amount of being bothered? I think I've heard both arguments.
Finally: I don't have a problem with smokers. I have a problem with smoke. That's not discriminatory, mean, self-centered, closed-minded, or judgmental.
ETA: Whoa - that's longer than I thought it was. :oops:
...
I have no problem with smokers... partially because I am a smoker, I guess. I hang out with the smokers in our designated areas and avoid lighting up where I am not allowed to... I have no problem with that.
I don't think my bad habit should be inflicted on others... I don't care who they are. This includes, using my street as an ashtray.
I understand the health risks and do not want to be the cause of anyone else's discomfort.
I guess it all comes from being a closed minded person.
...
Let me add this... I am old... I graduated high school in 1973. Just because I'm old, does not mean I am wise. This applies to everyone. I understand this.
ha ha maybe not but you are well worded and sharp,can't take that away from you.
you'll need to show a specific quote cause I'm old and don't remember when I treated an entire group badly.
That doesn't really sound like me cause I don't care if someone agrees with me or not..
and I am usually pretty good to others.
Yeah, I know. That's why I've been surprised throughout this thread.
I was going to show you specific quotes about how you have repeatedly, since page 1, misrepresented and insulted the entire group of people who don't feel that anyone should be subjected against his/her will to secondhand smoke, but they are too numerous. Here's a summary:
Instead of acknowledging our concerns and then explaining why you disagree, you have said we only feel the way we do because we are:
lacking compassion
discriminatory
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
hateful
uncaring
selfish
refusing to be understanding
unwilling to listen to another viewpoint
believe the rest of the world revolves around us
discriminatory
prejudiced
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
unwilling to accept anyone who is not like us
unwilling to accept people who aren't perfect
hateful
closed-hearted
paranoid
hysterical
obsessed
judgmental
demanding
controlling
on a power trip
lacking common sense
just looking for stuff to dislike in people
just trying to be politically correct
just trying to jump on the bandwagon
are trying to take away people's right to smoke entirely
I will say the pretend 12 hour thing didn't bring the best out in people here... not very compassionate to the pain of the smokers, even when the smokers were following the banning rules
so if you are talking about a statement directed to the group that they were being less than understanding I stand by it, cause they were.
Hey I stand by the last thing I said too.
Sorry but that there is the truth. Being open minded is being reasonable and compromising and accepting others imperfections even when those faults tread on us.
Is that a universal maxim or does it only apply to the things you agree with?
Imperfect world full of imperfect people.
The really funny thing here is I agree there should be bans. You'd think with all this excitement I was against banning entirely!!
I feel that what's in place now if enforced properly should satisfy everyone.
This statement is kind of meaningless since: A) they aren't enforced properly, and every city has different restrictions.
Is it your position that the current bans prevent innocent bystanders from being subjected to other people's smoke? Or just that we should be willing to accept the smoke?
It is you scb that is unhappy with the current smoking bans and feel harsher restrictions should be placed on others.Restrictions that not just myself would find unreasonable.
And it was you that was harsh and yes a bit out of control because I did not agree with your opinion.
As I have said twice already (and yet you persist in misrepresenting me), I was not upset because you disagree with my opinion. I was upset because:
1. You were being condescending to me and judgmental about my relationship with my sister.
2. You were (and still are) choosing to completely twist around our reasons for supporting the right of all people to not breathe cigarette smoke and insist that any opinion other than yours is based in hatred and selfishness and not reason.
I even chose to overlook the fact that you have ignored so many of the valid points people have made.
lacking compassion
discriminatory
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
hateful
uncaring
selfish
refusing to be understanding
unwilling to listen to another viewpoint
believe the rest of the world revolves around us
discriminatory
prejudiced
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
unwilling to accept anyone who is not like us
unwilling to accept people who aren't perfect
hateful
closed-hearted
paranoid
hysterical
obsessed
judgmental
demanding
controlling
on a power trip
lacking common sense
just looking for stuff to dislike in people
just trying to be politically correct
just trying to jump on the bandwagon
are trying to take away people's right to smoke entirely
...
Yup... that's me in a nutshell.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Jesus, so this is where it's all happening is it? This is why I stay away from this part of the forum!!
Not sure I can bear to read all of what's been going on in this thread, but me and a close family friend almost came to blows over this very issue a few summers ago (when I was a non-smoker but defending smokers and telling her that the British National Health Service had developed an almost pathological intolerance of smokers and needed to gain a sense of perspective)
I'm back smoking again - but at my work (Government related stuff) a while back a new edict was issued which banned any smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion'.... ie any time of the day other than the 30 minute statutory lunch break most people had, not smoking in your own car if you were alone and driving to a meeting, and standing even further away from the back entrance to the building before lighting up than previously. Again, a complete lack of perspective, and one with an almost fundamentalist 'zeal' to it which is a bit concerning to me.
My response at the time was to write a satirical email (which I never sent since I didn't want to get singled out) saying how grateful I was that my employer was concerned about my own health (because obviously the majority of these measures were to 'promote' my personal health, since there were already many measures for ensuring nobody else got a whiff of my tobacco smoke) - that I was grateful for their contribution to improving the health of the whole country, and that I hoped they would go further, in helping us to tackle the growing problems of 'obesity' which is costing the health service a lot of money, and making many people unwell and unfit. To 'help' our employees with their obesity issues I proposed - no cakes, chocolate or muffins on work time, no junk food 'comfort breaks', no gathering round or encouraging others to eat cakes, no eating of junk food in the car, etc etc etc.
Anyway - hope you guys here don't kill me - feel like I'm walking into the Lion's Den!! I would read the rest of the thread, but the reason for not doing is I think I would actually find it distressing, given the highlights I've read on the last couple of pages.
Cancel my subscription to the Ressurection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
Jesus, so this is where it's all happening is it? This is why I stay away from this part of the forum!!
Not sure I can bear to read all of what's been going on in this thread, but me and a close family friend almost came to blows over this very issue a few summers ago (when I was a non-smoker but defending smokers and telling her that the British National Health Service had developed an almost pathological intolerance of smokers and needed to gain a sense of perspective)
I'm back smoking again - but at my work (Government related stuff) a while back a new edict was issued which banned any smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion'.... ie any time of the day other than the 30 minute statutory lunch break most people had, not smoking in your own car if you were alone and driving to a meeting, and standing even further away from the back entrance to the building before lighting up than previously. Again, a complete lack of perspective, and one with an almost fundamentalist 'zeal' to it which is a bit concerning to me.
My response at the time was to write a satirical email (which I never sent since I didn't want to get singled out) saying how grateful I was that my employer was concerned about my own health (because obviously the majority of these measures were to 'promote' my personal health, since there were already many measures for ensuring nobody else got a whiff of my tobacco smoke) - that I was grateful for their contribution to improving the health of the whole country, and that I hoped they would go further, in helping us to tackle the growing problems of 'obesity' which is costing the health service a lot of money, and making many people unwell and unfit. To 'help' our employees with their obesity issues I proposed - no cakes, chocolate or muffins on work time, no junk food 'comfort breaks', no gathering round or encouraging others to eat cakes, no eating of junk food in the car, etc etc etc.
Anyway - hope you guys here don't kill me - feel like I'm walking into the Lion's Den!! I would read the rest of the thread, but the reason for not doing is I think I would actually find it distressing, given the highlights I've read on the last couple of pages.
...
We should have a smoke and a drink of the Ale... it's not as bad as it seems, you know.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Jesus, so this is where it's all happening is it? This is why I stay away from this part of the forum!!
Not sure I can bear to read all of what's been going on in this thread, but me and a close family friend almost came to blows over this very issue a few summers ago (when I was a non-smoker but defending smokers and telling her that the British National Health Service had developed an almost pathological intolerance of smokers and needed to gain a sense of perspective)
I'm back smoking again - but at my work (Government related stuff) a while back a new edict was issued which banned any smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion'.... ie any time of the day other than the 30 minute statutory lunch break most people had, not smoking in your own car if you were alone and driving to a meeting, and standing even further away from the back entrance to the building before lighting up than previously. Again, a complete lack of perspective, and one with an almost fundamentalist 'zeal' to it which is a bit concerning to me.
My response at the time was to write a satirical email (which I never sent since I didn't want to get singled out) saying how grateful I was that my employer was concerned about my own health (because obviously the majority of these measures were to 'promote' my personal health, since there were already many measures for ensuring nobody else got a whiff of my tobacco smoke) - that I was grateful for their contribution to improving the health of the whole country, and that I hoped they would go further, in helping us to tackle the growing problems of 'obesity' which is costing the health service a lot of money, and making many people unwell and unfit. To 'help' our employees with their obesity issues I proposed - no cakes, chocolate or muffins on work time, no junk food 'comfort breaks', no gathering round or encouraging others to eat cakes, no eating of junk food in the car, etc etc etc.
Anyway - hope you guys here don't kill me - feel like I'm walking into the Lion's Den!! I would read the rest of the thread, but the reason for not doing is I think I would actually find it distressing, given the highlights I've read on the last couple of pages.
I think the not smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion' is key here. Part of the rationale for banning smoking outside at the health sciences center / medical school / public health school where I work is that we are supposed to the leader in promoting health in the state. Our entire mission is to promote health. Having a policy that allows smoking is counter to that mission & image. It makes sense to me that the time an organization is paying someone to promote their mission should not be used to undermine said mission.
There are many other things we're not allowed to do while on paid time because we're considered to be representing the health sciences center, like lobbying. I wasn't allowed to wear my Obama earrings and my badge at the same time.
With regard to obesity, there is already a big push for health promotion facilities to practice what they preach in that area as well and provide healthy food, gyms, etc. My institution does quite a bit of this already. Also, eating junk food in moderation is not really bad for you, especially when balanced with exercise. There's not really such an antidote for smoking.
oh and while were at it.. please dont spit your gum on the ground you pigs that do.
and please don't spit period! gross habit
gross as that is it doesnt really inconvenience anyone does it?
You know, I once heard that they started making people wear shoes in public places in part because people were picking up illnesses from dirty floors that people spit on. I don't know if that's true. Maybe this is something that Pandora and her extra years of wisdom can shed some light on.
gross as that is it doesnt really inconvenience anyone does it?
You know, I once heard that they started making people wear shoes in public places in part because people were picking up illnesses from dirty floors that people spit on. I don't know if that's true. Maybe this is something that Pandora and her extra years of wisdom can shed some light on.
really? wow. its not unusual for me to walk down to the shops barefoot. i dont see why i should be made to wear shoes. in fact if it werent for OHS bullshit id go barefoot everywhere... except perhaps the annandale hotel.. their band room floor is the most disgusting thing in existence.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Jesus, so this is where it's all happening is it? This is why I stay away from this part of the forum!!
Not sure I can bear to read all of what's been going on in this thread, but me and a close family friend almost came to blows over this very issue a few summers ago (when I was a non-smoker but defending smokers and telling her that the British National Health Service had developed an almost pathological intolerance of smokers and needed to gain a sense of perspective)
I'm back smoking again - but at my work (Government related stuff) a while back a new edict was issued which banned any smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion'.... ie any time of the day other than the 30 minute statutory lunch break most people had, not smoking in your own car if you were alone and driving to a meeting, and standing even further away from the back entrance to the building before lighting up than previously. Again, a complete lack of perspective, and one with an almost fundamentalist 'zeal' to it which is a bit concerning to me.
My response at the time was to write a satirical email (which I never sent since I didn't want to get singled out) saying how grateful I was that my employer was concerned about my own health (because obviously the majority of these measures were to 'promote' my personal health, since there were already many measures for ensuring nobody else got a whiff of my tobacco smoke) - that I was grateful for their contribution to improving the health of the whole country, and that I hoped they would go further, in helping us to tackle the growing problems of 'obesity' which is costing the health service a lot of money, and making many people unwell and unfit. To 'help' our employees with their obesity issues I proposed - no cakes, chocolate or muffins on work time, no junk food 'comfort breaks', no gathering round or encouraging others to eat cakes, no eating of junk food in the car, etc etc etc.
Anyway - hope you guys here don't kill me - feel like I'm walking into the Lion's Den!! I would read the rest of the thread, but the reason for not doing is I think I would actually find it distressing, given the highlights I've read on the last couple of pages.
I think the not smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion' is key here. Part of the rationale for banning smoking outside at the health sciences center / medical school / public health school where I work is that we are supposed to the leader in promoting health in the state. Our entire mission is to promote health. Having a policy that allows smoking is counter to that mission & image. It makes sense to me that the time an organization is paying someone to promote their mission should not be used to undermine said mission.
There are many other things we're not allowed to do while on paid time because we're considered to be representing the health sciences center, like lobbying. I wasn't allowed to wear my Obama earrings and my badge at the same time.
With regard to obesity, there is already a big push for health promotion facilities to practice what they preach in that area as well and provide healthy food, gyms, etc. My institution does quite a bit of this already. Also, eating junk food in moderation is not really bad for you, especially when balanced with exercise. There's not really such an antidote for smoking.
Yes I have encountered these arguments a lot..... the basic point about the cakes is that all reasonable people would hit the roof if any public organisation started to legislate against people being seen eating cakes or eating cakes on work time and quite rightly! Comparing smoking to supporting Obama is interesting - because smoking has become a 'political' issue, which is what is concerning me - there is a partisanship at work here which is disproportionate to the crime I believe - being driven exclusively by non smokers. So I see it akin to Republicans going out of their way to ban Obama badges.... there is a point about 'parity' here. 'Smoking is evil' - this may as well be our starting point.
There are two sets of facts I think need to be borne in mind if we want to understand this agenda properly - and this involves understanding how we have got to this point, and seeing where it is going by considering two groups of people: - Smokers and anti-smoking health promotion specialists.
In my work I do a lot of evaluation of different public services, roles and 'jobs'; and it is clear to me that some of this smoking agenda is the inevitable culmination of creating specific full time health promotion jobs for people to attack the issue with a 'purpose'.... which is why I think it is time to look at where this is going and re-evaluate the 'perspective' issue. What I mean by this is that if you give someone a full time job solely to look at promoting non-smoking, then inevitably they will find and generate all sorts of compelling arguments, positions, policies, opinions, and marketing strategies, since this is their raison d'etre - they as an individual want to look busy, meet their targets, impress people and do the job well. However, multiply this by thousands upon thousands of anti-smoking health promotion specialists the world over, and you can easily start to lose balance, since the arguments feed off each other, become taken for granted, multiply, get more and more creative, and then risk becoming a frenzy of the slightly quirky world of the anti-smoking health promotion specialist - rather than what was originally envisaged.... trying to help people to stop smoking, and to improve their health. It is the 'frenzied' element to the proceedings which I am most concerned about.
The second point relates to 'smokers' as a group - and I think we'll find there is a massive difference between the demographics of the groups of anti-smoking health promotion specialists, and the groups of smokers. As a general rule (in the UK at least) large numbers of smokers tend to be from more disadvantaged backgrounds, more working class economic groups, have objective stresses and difficulties to deal with, and turn to smoking as a form of stress relief because life is hard, and it's hard to get by. Look at these Chilean miners and their request for cigarettes. Smoking has always been a part of dealing with very very hard circumstances (look at the importance of tobacco in 'One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich', a novel set in the Stalinist Gulags as another example). These smokers pay a large amount of tax on their habit, which they can't afford very easily anyway. The point I think is relevant here though is the 'mismatch' between the world of the working class smoker in Britain, and the world and life experience of the middle class non smoking health promotion specialist..... intentions may have started out well - but personally I'm not sure the 'zeal' of this current agenda is in practice helping anybody much at all. It is making the lives of smokers even more difficult..... I don't believe the policies of anti obesity health promotion involve a core drive to make the buying and consuming of chocolate as difficult and as despised as possible. This would be seen as misplaced, invasive, and overly paternalistic......
Cancel my subscription to the Ressurection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
It wasn't my intention to compare smoking to Obama or suggest that it's a political issue. And no Republicans went out of their way to ban Obama badges. McCain paraphernalia is equally unacceptable. The purpose of this - and my point/analogy - is that we are considered to be representing our employer & its mission when we are on company time. (I believe this is a state law.) So this concept is not new, nor is smoking singled out.
In our case, our policy did not come about as a result of public health professionals trying to look busy, nor did it create more jobs. Our institution is under-staffed & has a hiring freeze.
I also don't think it was about trying to help people stop smoking, or at least that would be a secondary purpose. We already had all the tools & programs available to help people stop smoking.
(Sorry for the multiple posts; I have trouble responding to long posts from my iPod.)
Regarding the impact of smoking regulations on people of lower socioeconomic status, I think you're talking about a couple of different things. There is certainly an argument to be made that raising taxes on cigarettes places a disproportionately high burden on individuals in this population. Studies have been done around here that have shown mixed results for this burden though. While some people said they spend their food money on cigarettes when taxes are raised, others said it was just the incentive they needed to stop smoking, thereby increasing the money they have to spend on necessities. And of course national studies have demonstrated that there is a threshold at which sin taxes become an effective deterrent, indicating that perhaps taxes just need to be raised higher to be beneficial to these individuals.
But I didn't think we were talking about taxes; I thought we were talking about banning smoking in the workplace or on company time. Since this isn't a finacial disincentive, I don't see how it would place a disproportionate hardship on individuals of lower socioeconomic status. Of course, if a higher proportion of lower income people smoke than higher income, smoking disincentives in general will affect a higher proportion of lower income people. But this isn't the same as unfairly targeting low income smokers.
Regarding obesity, similar taxes are sometimes placed on junk food as well. This is not only to create a financial incentive to avoid junk food, but also to kind of even out the playing field particularly for people with lower income to not feel like they have to purchase crap food just because it's cheaper. There are also laws eliminating taxes on healthy foods. (There's kind of a varied mix of these types of laws and proposed laws here.)
I think these types of increased taxes do make sense from a state or federal budget perspective though, which in turn benefits poor people. It's the poor people who rely on Medicaid for their healthcare, yet we are constantly having to cut the Medicaid budget for lack of funds. The billions of extra dollars spent on providing the extra care required for smokers & obese people, along with the revenue raised from increased taxes, could be used to provide healthcare to more people with low incomes or provide more care to the people already covered. So again we see a benefit to people with lower socioeconomic status - as individuals & on a population level. Do these multiple benefits to poor people outweigh the finacial burden placed on the individuals who would rather spend their money on cigarettes than food? Maybe so.
gross as that is it doesnt really inconvenience anyone does it?
You know, I once heard that they started making people wear shoes in public places in part because people were picking up illnesses from dirty floors that people spit on. I don't know if that's true. Maybe this is something that Pandora and her extra years of wisdom can shed some light on.
My mother was a fanatic about floors and the filth and staph that is on them. I went barefoot a lot as a teen just to piss her off! Sorry Mom :(
Anywho what was the question? Oh maybe no question..spitting is gross cause it looks awful, its bodily fluids left for others and it creeps me out.
Went to my favorite mexican restaurant sitting at the bar enjoying
and a fella across from me had an empty plastic coke bottle.
He had chew in and kept spitting the brown fluid into the bottle. Nasty, it got filled up with brown gob.
Needless to say I lost my appetite but hit the drinks hard. Oh and you couldn't smoke in this bar of course but you could do that. Yuk. Such is life. Just got to deal I guess.
My mother was a fanatic about floors and the filth and staph that is on them. I went barefoot a lot as a teen just to piss her off! Sorry Mom :(
Anywho what was the question? Oh maybe no question..spitting is gross cause it looks awful, its bodily fluids left for others and it creeps me out.
Went to my favorite mexican restaurant sitting at the bar enjoying
and a fella across from me had an empty plastic coke bottle.
He had chew in and kept spitting the brown fluid into the bottle. Nasty, it got filled up with brown gob.
Needless to say I lost my appetite but hit the drinks hard. Oh and you couldn't smoke in this bar of course but you could do that. Yuk. Such is life. Just got to deal I guess.
My mother was a fanatic about floors and the filth and staph that is on them. I went barefoot a lot as a teen just to piss her off! Sorry Mom :(
Anywho what was the question? Oh maybe no question..spitting is gross cause it looks awful, its bodily fluids left for others and it creeps me out.
Went to my favorite mexican restaurant sitting at the bar enjoying
and a fella across from me had an empty plastic coke bottle.
He had chew in and kept spitting the brown fluid into the bottle. Nasty, it got filled up with brown gob.
Needless to say I lost my appetite but hit the drinks hard. Oh and you couldn't smoke in this bar of course but you could do that. Yuk. Such is life. Just got to deal I guess.
THAT is fucking gross.
ha ha ha we used milk cartons in high school, I don't chew anymore but it never bothered me,out in lakeside a lot of people chewed.....does seem kinda gross now though that I think about it.
ha ha ha we used milk cartons in high school, I don't chew anymore but it never bothered me,out in lakeside a lot of people chewed.....does seem kinda gross now though that I think about it.
Godfather.
I knew someone whos baseball coach MADE them chew just because it made them look "more tough" and was the thing to do for baseball players I guess. So stupid...
At least smoke dissipates somewhat and clears... spitting has all those gross germs that just festerrr...ewww...
you'll need to show a specific quote cause I'm old and don't remember when I treated an entire group badly.
That doesn't really sound like me cause I don't care if someone agrees with me or not..
and I am usually pretty good to others.
Yeah, I know. That's why I've been surprised throughout this thread.
I was going to show you specific quotes about how you have repeatedly, since page 1, misrepresented and insulted the entire group of people who don't feel that anyone should be subjected against his/her will to secondhand smoke, but they are too numerous. Here's a summary:
Instead of acknowledging our concerns and then explaining why you disagree, you have said we only feel the way we do because we are:
lacking compassion
discriminatory
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
hateful
uncaring
selfish
refusing to be understanding
unwilling to listen to another viewpoint
believe the rest of the world revolves around us
discriminatory
prejudiced
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
unwilling to accept anyone who is not like us
unwilling to accept people who aren't perfect
hateful
closed-hearted
paranoid
hysterical
obsessed
judgmental
demanding
controlling
on a power trip
lacking common sense
just looking for stuff to dislike in people
just trying to be politically correct
just trying to jump on the bandwagon
are trying to take away people's right to smoke entirely
I will say the pretend 12 hour thing didn't bring the best out in people here... not very compassionate to the pain of the smokers, even when the smokers were following the banning rules
so if you are talking about a statement directed to the group that they were being less than understanding I stand by it, cause they were.
Hey I stand by the last thing I said too.
Sorry but that there is the truth. Being open minded is being reasonable and compromising and accepting others imperfections even when those faults tread on us.
Is that a universal maxim or does it only apply to the things you agree with?
Imperfect world full of imperfect people.
The really funny thing here is I agree there should be bans. You'd think with all this excitement I was against banning entirely!!
I feel that what's in place now if enforced properly should satisfy everyone.
This statement is kind of meaningless since: A) they aren't enforced properly, and every city has different restrictions.
Is it your position that the current bans prevent innocent bystanders from being subjected to other people's smoke? Or just that we should be willing to accept the smoke?
It is you scb that is unhappy with the current smoking bans and feel harsher restrictions should be placed on others.Restrictions that not just myself would find unreasonable.
And it was you that was harsh and yes a bit out of control because I did not agree with your opinion.
As I have said twice already (and yet you persist in misrepresenting me), I was not upset because you disagree with my opinion. I was upset because:
1. You were being condescending to me and judgmental about my relationship with my sister.
2. You were (and still are) choosing to completely twist around our reasons for supporting the right of all people to not breathe cigarette smoke and insist that any opinion other than yours is based in hatred and selfishness and not reason.
I even chose to overlook the fact that you have ignored so many of the valid points people have made.
actually those quotes do fit in my opinion, if you choose to be offended ok. And thanks for going easy on me scb and overlooking my shortcomings
Man you got time for all that I'm honored. You must type with all fingers huh?
I thought you were speaking of your mother scb..I told you this before .The fact that you would not want to help her through leaving this world, you made it sound like a chore, I found that appalling, but I tried to hold my tongue and have you see the value of being helpful. But then I was condescending as was Jeanne.Treating you like a child and all. Somewhat defensive you are. I'm not the only one witnessing that.
And you choose to overlook the fact that smokers should have a right to smoke and not only in the privacy of their home. This is what I believe. You are just angry I don't agree with you, I'd say.
Meaningless I am now?...maybe I should take the time and go through all the stuff you've said about me. I won't bother. Better stuff to do I'm actually getting out today
I think the laws we have should be enforced before we make more don't you? Thats how meaningless I am.
And please don't forget to lighten up, its not that serious really. uh oh was that condescending ? If you choose to take it like that ok you don't need to respond with a lengthy post and point it out again.
ha ha ha we used milk cartons in high school, I don't chew anymore but it never bothered me,out in lakeside a lot of people chewed.....does seem kinda gross now though that I think about it.
Godfather.
I knew someone whos baseball coach MADE them chew just because it made them look "more tough" and was the thing to do for baseball players I guess. So stupid...
At least smoke dissipates somewhat and clears... spitting has all those gross germs that just festerrr...ewww...
There is NOTHING worse than picking up your beer bottle at a party and taking a drink only to realize you grabbed someone's spit bottle instead. :shock: Talk about instant gag reflex and running to the bathroom! I'd rather deal with cigarette smoke any day, after that happened.
But I didn't think we were talking about taxes; I thought we were talking about banning smoking in the workplace or on company time. Since this isn't a finacial disincentive, I don't see how it would place a disproportionate hardship on individuals of lower socioeconomic status. Of course, if a higher proportion of lower income people smoke than higher income, smoking disincentives in general will affect a higher proportion of lower income people. But this isn't the same as unfairly targeting low income smokers.
.
No doubt you are right on a lot of the detail. My general point was that there is a certain aggressiveness to this agenda which doesn't have much sympathy for how some of us actually have to live. Smoking is a 'crutch', but we all have them. The reason I was bringing in 'comfort eating' is that it serves a similar purpose for people who are stressed, or indeed anyone - a cup of tea, a cake, a bit of light relief. I could go around trying to get you off your various crutches but you probably wouldn't like it too much. It's interesting to me how a lot of the people in my line of work working with heroin users are ex-heroin users themselves, and so bring a lot of empathy and a certain sympathy to the role; but in my experience most smoking cessation workers and the various strategists have never been smokers themselves.
On the point about breaks, we are talking about an environment where people largely manage their own time, and take plenty of coffee breaks. The 'parity' I am talking about is about my right to go for a cigarette when a colleague is stuffing their face full of cake between meetings!
Cancel my subscription to the Ressurection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
Lol - just thought I'd share this - not everyone will find it as funny as I do.
I visited a hospital for work not too long ago, and went to the smokers' exclusion zone about 500 metres from the building, in the car park, alongside the people in their wheel chairs and wheeling their drip feeds outside. The way you knew you had crossed out of the exclusion zone was, and this is no word of a lie - there was a loud tannoy strategically placed within earshot which has a woman's voice saying this on repeat:
"This is a non smoking hospital, you are now smoking away from the designated area.... YOU ARE KILLING YOURSELVES!!! ... this is a non smoking hosptial, you are now smoking....."
This I find funny.
Cancel my subscription to the Ressurection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
Lol - just thought I'd share this - not everyone will find it as funny as I do.
I visited a hospital for work not too long ago, and went to the smokers' exclusion zone about 500 metres from the building, in the car park, alongside the people in their wheel chairs and wheeling their drip feeds outside. The way you knew you had crossed out of the exclusion zone was, and this is no word of a lie - there was a loud tannoy strategically placed within earshot which has a woman's voice saying this on repeat:
"This is a non smoking hospital, you are now smoking away from the designated area.... YOU ARE KILLING YOURSELVES!!! ... this is a non smoking hosptial, you are now smoking....."
This I find funny.
OMG, can you imagine?!! I kinda think it's funny sad, though... That's an example of blatant attempt to manipulate people. I agree it's a crutch many need to fall back on in times of distress, much like any other vice. Yes, smokers may know it's bad for them but they help in the short term, and we all need our own "drug" of choice to help us get by sometimes.
When we moved here to Georgia, just about 20 years ago, there were many people, whole families that would go to the store in their bare feet and sometimes shirtless too.
Back home in WI we had the signs 'no shoes...no shirt... no service' by that time.
Soon they appeared here in Georgia too, now it would be rare to see someone barefoot in the store
but I still do.
The signs were limited to restaurants and food stores, anyplace with food, so it was a health issue.
Lol - just thought I'd share this - not everyone will find it as funny as I do.
I visited a hospital for work not too long ago, and went to the smokers' exclusion zone about 500 metres from the building, in the car park, alongside the people in their wheel chairs and wheeling their drip feeds outside. The way you knew you had crossed out of the exclusion zone was, and this is no word of a lie - there was a loud tannoy strategically placed within earshot which has a woman's voice saying this on repeat:
"This is a non smoking hospital, you are now smoking away from the designated area.... YOU ARE KILLING YOURSELVES!!! ... this is a non smoking hosptial, you are now smoking....."
This I find funny.
OMG, can you imagine?!! I kinda think it's funny sad, though... That's an example of blatant attempt to manipulate people. I agree it's a crutch many need to fall back on in times of distress, much like any other vice. Yes, smokers may know it's bad for them but they help in the short term, and we all need our own "drug" of choice to help us get by sometimes.
Red wine works fine I hope that doesn't get banned! I'll be moonshining for sure. I'm all for crutches to get you through, less stress makes for more peace.
actually those quotes do fit in my opinion, if you choose to be offended ok. And thanks for going easy on me scb and overlooking my shortcomings
Man you got time for all that I'm honored. You must type with all fingers huh?
I thought you were speaking of your mother scb..I told you this before .The fact that you would not want to help her through leaving this world, you made it sound like a chore, I found that appalling, but I tried to hold my tongue and have you see the value of being helpful. But then I was condescending as was Jeanne.Treating you like a child and all. Somewhat defensive you are. I'm not the only one witnessing that.
And you choose to overlook the fact that smokers should have a right to smoke and not only in the privacy of their home. This is what I believe. You are just angry I don't agree with you, I'd say.
Meaningless I am now?...maybe I should take the time and go through all the stuff you've said about me. I won't bother. Better stuff to do I'm actually getting out today
I think the laws we have should be enforced before we make more don't you? Thats how meaningless I am.
And please don't forget to lighten up, its not that serious really. uh oh was that condescending ? If you choose to take it like that ok you don't need to respond with a lengthy post and point it out again.
Sigh... :( :roll:
Look, I've explained over and over and over again that I got upset because I felt like you were/are treating me and others badly. If it makes you feel better about yourself to choose to believe that the only reason anyone would be frustrated with you is because you disagree with their position on social issues and the only reason anyone would disagree with you is because they are small-minded and hateful, then far be it from me to interfere with such a steadfast world view.
Lol - just thought I'd share this - not everyone will find it as funny as I do.
I visited a hospital for work not too long ago, and went to the smokers' exclusion zone about 500 metres from the building, in the car park, alongside the people in their wheel chairs and wheeling their drip feeds outside. The way you knew you had crossed out of the exclusion zone was, and this is no word of a lie - there was a loud tannoy strategically placed within earshot which has a woman's voice saying this on repeat:
"This is a non smoking hospital, you are now smoking away from the designated area.... YOU ARE KILLING YOURSELVES!!! ... this is a non smoking hosptial, you are now smoking....."
This I find funny.
OMG, can you imagine?!! I kinda think it's funny sad, though... That's an example of blatant attempt to manipulate people. I agree it's a crutch many need to fall back on in times of distress, much like any other vice. Yes, smokers may know it's bad for them but they help in the short term, and we all need our own "drug" of choice to help us get by sometimes.
Red wine works fine I hope that doesn't get banned! I'll be moonshining for sure. I'm all for crutches to get you through, less stress makes for more peace.
One of my favourite song-lines which I have lost count of the number of times I have quoted to myself or others is Lennon:
Whatever gets you through the night. It's alright, it's alright.....
Cancel my subscription to the Ressurection
Send my credentials to the house of detention
actually those quotes do fit in my opinion, if you choose to be offended ok. And thanks for going easy on me scb and overlooking my shortcomings
Man you got time for all that I'm honored. You must type with all fingers huh?
I thought you were speaking of your mother scb..I told you this before .The fact that you would not want to help her through leaving this world, you made it sound like a chore, I found that appalling, but I tried to hold my tongue and have you see the value of being helpful. But then I was condescending as was Jeanne.Treating you like a child and all. Somewhat defensive you are. I'm not the only one witnessing that.
And you choose to overlook the fact that smokers should have a right to smoke and not only in the privacy of their home. This is what I believe. You are just angry I don't agree with you, I'd say.
Meaningless I am now?...maybe I should take the time and go through all the stuff you've said about me. I won't bother. Better stuff to do I'm actually getting out today
I think the laws we have should be enforced before we make more don't you? Thats how meaningless I am.
And please don't forget to lighten up, its not that serious really. uh oh was that condescending ? If you choose to take it like that ok you don't need to respond with a lengthy post and point it out again.
Sigh... :( :roll:
Look, I've explained over and over and over again that I got upset because I felt like you were/are treating me and others badly. If it makes you feel better about yourself to choose to believe that the only reason anyone would be frustrated with you is because you disagree with their position on social issues and the only reason anyone would disagree with you is because they are small-minded and hateful, then far be it from me to interfere with such a steadfast world view.
Why would I care if you or anyone disagreed with me?
I am not the big debated like you and it's clearly not an issue for me as it is for you.
Wow excuse me for frustrating you....
I guess you strike out cause you get frustrated with others. Impatience is a problem for many.
I'm gonna say something when I think people are being unreasonable
and unwilling to compromise, that seems very childish to me.
I don't like taking away the right to smoke in public on public streets, that is over the top as was the smokers smell thing. And I am going to say so.
I think it is self centered and small minded to not compromise.
I am fine with the bans we have, they seem fair to all which is important. The smokers are compromising.
But you want to put unreasonable restraints on them scb. One reason was because you are inconvenienced with hair washing and laundry. Sorry that seems a little self centered.
And it being ok for someone to be fired cause they smell like smoke is ridiculous and I was gonna say so. If you take that as treating others badly how about the person that would be fired? But you can't see that cause you don't want to think of his feelings. He should just quit smoking then is your answer to that. Thats is small minded. Your way or no way.
So we can agree to disagree on smoking and we can leave it at that
unless you want to point out more personality faults of mine, which is boring and belittling to both of us.
I wonder if you are the type of person who must have the last word too.
And I hope you are the type of person who can say they are sorry..I have said I was sorry to you!
Comments
Why aren't you getting I was talking to MG when he said he understood about the fictional 'live and let live world' and I said "no perhaps not' cause he didn't understand and I went on to describe that fictional world.
I was talkng about a perfect world that does not exist not what is our current reality.
I went on to describe how lovely it would be if everyone thought about each other and was courteous
and got along.
Hope you got that now
I would never use a blanket statement and say everyone is one way or the other as you are trying to claim to make my point invalid. As we have said there are jerks and there are courteous smokers same with non smokers.
This shouldn't be this difficult.
ha ha maybe not but you are well worded and sharp,can't take that away from you.
Godfather.
Thanks.
Yeah, I know. That's why I've been surprised throughout this thread.
I was going to show you specific quotes about how you have repeatedly, since page 1, misrepresented and insulted the entire group of people who don't feel that anyone should be subjected against his/her will to secondhand smoke, but they are too numerous. Here's a summary:
Instead of acknowledging our concerns and then explaining why you disagree, you have said we only feel the way we do because we are:
lacking compassion
discriminatory
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
hateful
uncaring
selfish
refusing to be understanding
unwilling to listen to another viewpoint
believe the rest of the world revolves around us
discriminatory
prejudiced
small-minded
unwilling to compromise
unwilling to accept anyone who is not like us
unwilling to accept people who aren't perfect
hateful
closed-hearted
paranoid
hysterical
obsessed
judgmental
demanding
controlling
on a power trip
lacking common sense
just looking for stuff to dislike in people
just trying to be politically correct
just trying to jump on the bandwagon
are trying to take away people's right to smoke entirely
Is that a universal maxim or does it only apply to the things you agree with?
This statement is kind of meaningless since: A) they aren't enforced properly, and
Is it your position that the current bans prevent innocent bystanders from being subjected to other people's smoke? Or just that we should be willing to accept the smoke?
As I have said twice already (and yet you persist in misrepresenting me), I was not upset because you disagree with my opinion. I was upset because:
1. You were being condescending to me and judgmental about my relationship with my sister.
2. You were (and still are) choosing to completely twist around our reasons for supporting the right of all people to not breathe cigarette smoke and insist that any opinion other than yours is based in hatred and selfishness and not reason.
I even chose to overlook the fact that you have ignored so many of the valid points people have made.
Yup... that's me in a nutshell.
Hail, Hail!!!
Not sure I can bear to read all of what's been going on in this thread, but me and a close family friend almost came to blows over this very issue a few summers ago (when I was a non-smoker but defending smokers and telling her that the British National Health Service had developed an almost pathological intolerance of smokers and needed to gain a sense of perspective)
I'm back smoking again - but at my work (Government related stuff) a while back a new edict was issued which banned any smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion'.... ie any time of the day other than the 30 minute statutory lunch break most people had, not smoking in your own car if you were alone and driving to a meeting, and standing even further away from the back entrance to the building before lighting up than previously. Again, a complete lack of perspective, and one with an almost fundamentalist 'zeal' to it which is a bit concerning to me.
My response at the time was to write a satirical email (which I never sent since I didn't want to get singled out) saying how grateful I was that my employer was concerned about my own health (because obviously the majority of these measures were to 'promote' my personal health, since there were already many measures for ensuring nobody else got a whiff of my tobacco smoke) - that I was grateful for their contribution to improving the health of the whole country, and that I hoped they would go further, in helping us to tackle the growing problems of 'obesity' which is costing the health service a lot of money, and making many people unwell and unfit. To 'help' our employees with their obesity issues I proposed - no cakes, chocolate or muffins on work time, no junk food 'comfort breaks', no gathering round or encouraging others to eat cakes, no eating of junk food in the car, etc etc etc.
Anyway - hope you guys here don't kill me - feel like I'm walking into the Lion's Den!! I would read the rest of the thread, but the reason for not doing is I think I would actually find it distressing, given the highlights I've read on the last couple of pages.
Send my credentials to the house of detention
We should have a smoke and a drink of the Ale... it's not as bad as it seems, you know.
Hail, Hail!!!
I think the not smoking at any time you were 'being paid to work' on grounds of 'public health promotion' is key here. Part of the rationale for banning smoking outside at the health sciences center / medical school / public health school where I work is that we are supposed to the leader in promoting health in the state. Our entire mission is to promote health. Having a policy that allows smoking is counter to that mission & image. It makes sense to me that the time an organization is paying someone to promote their mission should not be used to undermine said mission.
There are many other things we're not allowed to do while on paid time because we're considered to be representing the health sciences center, like lobbying. I wasn't allowed to wear my Obama earrings and my badge at the same time.
With regard to obesity, there is already a big push for health promotion facilities to practice what they preach in that area as well and provide healthy food, gyms, etc. My institution does quite a bit of this already. Also, eating junk food in moderation is not really bad for you, especially when balanced with exercise. There's not really such an antidote for smoking.
gross as that is it doesnt really inconvenience anyone does it?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
You know, I once heard that they started making people wear shoes in public places in part because people were picking up illnesses from dirty floors that people spit on. I don't know if that's true. Maybe this is something that Pandora and her extra years of wisdom can shed some light on.
really? wow. its not unusual for me to walk down to the shops barefoot. i dont see why i should be made to wear shoes. in fact if it werent for OHS bullshit id go barefoot everywhere... except perhaps the annandale hotel.. their band room floor is the most disgusting thing in existence.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Yes I have encountered these arguments a lot..... the basic point about the cakes is that all reasonable people would hit the roof if any public organisation started to legislate against people being seen eating cakes or eating cakes on work time and quite rightly! Comparing smoking to supporting Obama is interesting - because smoking has become a 'political' issue, which is what is concerning me - there is a partisanship at work here which is disproportionate to the crime I believe - being driven exclusively by non smokers. So I see it akin to Republicans going out of their way to ban Obama badges.... there is a point about 'parity' here. 'Smoking is evil' - this may as well be our starting point.
There are two sets of facts I think need to be borne in mind if we want to understand this agenda properly - and this involves understanding how we have got to this point, and seeing where it is going by considering two groups of people: - Smokers and anti-smoking health promotion specialists.
In my work I do a lot of evaluation of different public services, roles and 'jobs'; and it is clear to me that some of this smoking agenda is the inevitable culmination of creating specific full time health promotion jobs for people to attack the issue with a 'purpose'.... which is why I think it is time to look at where this is going and re-evaluate the 'perspective' issue. What I mean by this is that if you give someone a full time job solely to look at promoting non-smoking, then inevitably they will find and generate all sorts of compelling arguments, positions, policies, opinions, and marketing strategies, since this is their raison d'etre - they as an individual want to look busy, meet their targets, impress people and do the job well. However, multiply this by thousands upon thousands of anti-smoking health promotion specialists the world over, and you can easily start to lose balance, since the arguments feed off each other, become taken for granted, multiply, get more and more creative, and then risk becoming a frenzy of the slightly quirky world of the anti-smoking health promotion specialist - rather than what was originally envisaged.... trying to help people to stop smoking, and to improve their health. It is the 'frenzied' element to the proceedings which I am most concerned about.
The second point relates to 'smokers' as a group - and I think we'll find there is a massive difference between the demographics of the groups of anti-smoking health promotion specialists, and the groups of smokers. As a general rule (in the UK at least) large numbers of smokers tend to be from more disadvantaged backgrounds, more working class economic groups, have objective stresses and difficulties to deal with, and turn to smoking as a form of stress relief because life is hard, and it's hard to get by. Look at these Chilean miners and their request for cigarettes. Smoking has always been a part of dealing with very very hard circumstances (look at the importance of tobacco in 'One day in the life of Ivan Denisovich', a novel set in the Stalinist Gulags as another example). These smokers pay a large amount of tax on their habit, which they can't afford very easily anyway. The point I think is relevant here though is the 'mismatch' between the world of the working class smoker in Britain, and the world and life experience of the middle class non smoking health promotion specialist..... intentions may have started out well - but personally I'm not sure the 'zeal' of this current agenda is in practice helping anybody much at all. It is making the lives of smokers even more difficult..... I don't believe the policies of anti obesity health promotion involve a core drive to make the buying and consuming of chocolate as difficult and as despised as possible. This would be seen as misplaced, invasive, and overly paternalistic......
Send my credentials to the house of detention
In our case, our policy did not come about as a result of public health professionals trying to look busy, nor did it create more jobs. Our institution is under-staffed & has a hiring freeze.
(Sorry for the multiple posts; I have trouble responding to long posts from my iPod.)
But I didn't think we were talking about taxes; I thought we were talking about banning smoking in the workplace or on company time. Since this isn't a finacial disincentive, I don't see how it would place a disproportionate hardship on individuals of lower socioeconomic status. Of course, if a higher proportion of lower income people smoke than higher income, smoking disincentives in general will affect a higher proportion of lower income people. But this isn't the same as unfairly targeting low income smokers.
Regarding obesity, similar taxes are sometimes placed on junk food as well. This is not only to create a financial incentive to avoid junk food, but also to kind of even out the playing field particularly for people with lower income to not feel like they have to purchase crap food just because it's cheaper. There are also laws eliminating taxes on healthy foods. (There's kind of a varied mix of these types of laws and proposed laws here.)
I think these types of increased taxes do make sense from a state or federal budget perspective though, which in turn benefits poor people. It's the poor people who rely on Medicaid for their healthcare, yet we are constantly having to cut the Medicaid budget for lack of funds. The billions of extra dollars spent on providing the extra care required for smokers & obese people, along with the revenue raised from increased taxes, could be used to provide healthcare to more people with low incomes or provide more care to the people already covered. So again we see a benefit to people with lower socioeconomic status - as individuals & on a population level. Do these multiple benefits to poor people outweigh the finacial burden placed on the individuals who would rather spend their money on cigarettes than food? Maybe so.
Anywho what was the question? Oh maybe no question..spitting is gross cause it looks awful, its bodily fluids left for others and it creeps me out.
Went to my favorite mexican restaurant sitting at the bar enjoying
and a fella across from me had an empty plastic coke bottle.
He had chew in and kept spitting the brown fluid into the bottle. Nasty, it got filled up with brown gob.
Needless to say I lost my appetite but hit the drinks hard. Oh and you couldn't smoke in this bar of course but you could do that. Yuk. Such is life. Just got to deal I guess.
Godfather.
At least smoke dissipates somewhat and clears... spitting has all those gross germs that just festerrr...ewww...
Man you got time for all that I'm honored. You must type with all fingers huh?
I thought you were speaking of your mother scb..I told you this before .The fact that you would not want to help her through leaving this world, you made it sound like a chore, I found that appalling, but I tried to hold my tongue and have you see the value of being helpful. But then I was condescending as was Jeanne.Treating you like a child and all. Somewhat defensive you are. I'm not the only one witnessing that.
And you choose to overlook the fact that smokers should have a right to smoke and not only in the privacy of their home. This is what I believe. You are just angry I don't agree with you, I'd say.
Meaningless I am now?...maybe I should take the time and go through all the stuff you've said about me. I won't bother. Better stuff to do I'm actually getting out today
I think the laws we have should be enforced before we make more don't you? Thats how meaningless I am.
And please don't forget to lighten up, its not that serious really. uh oh was that condescending ? If you choose to take it like that ok you don't need to respond with a lengthy post and point it out again.
There is NOTHING worse than picking up your beer bottle at a party and taking a drink only to realize you grabbed someone's spit bottle instead. :shock: Talk about instant gag reflex and running to the bathroom! I'd rather deal with cigarette smoke any day, after that happened.
No doubt you are right on a lot of the detail. My general point was that there is a certain aggressiveness to this agenda which doesn't have much sympathy for how some of us actually have to live. Smoking is a 'crutch', but we all have them. The reason I was bringing in 'comfort eating' is that it serves a similar purpose for people who are stressed, or indeed anyone - a cup of tea, a cake, a bit of light relief. I could go around trying to get you off your various crutches but you probably wouldn't like it too much. It's interesting to me how a lot of the people in my line of work working with heroin users are ex-heroin users themselves, and so bring a lot of empathy and a certain sympathy to the role; but in my experience most smoking cessation workers and the various strategists have never been smokers themselves.
On the point about breaks, we are talking about an environment where people largely manage their own time, and take plenty of coffee breaks. The 'parity' I am talking about is about my right to go for a cigarette when a colleague is stuffing their face full of cake between meetings!
Send my credentials to the house of detention
I visited a hospital for work not too long ago, and went to the smokers' exclusion zone about 500 metres from the building, in the car park, alongside the people in their wheel chairs and wheeling their drip feeds outside. The way you knew you had crossed out of the exclusion zone was, and this is no word of a lie - there was a loud tannoy strategically placed within earshot which has a woman's voice saying this on repeat:
"This is a non smoking hospital, you are now smoking away from the designated area.... YOU ARE KILLING YOURSELVES!!! ... this is a non smoking hosptial, you are now smoking....."
This I find funny.
Send my credentials to the house of detention
OMG, can you imagine?!!
Back home in WI we had the signs 'no shoes...no shirt... no service' by that time.
Soon they appeared here in Georgia too, now it would be rare to see someone barefoot in the store
but I still do.
The signs were limited to restaurants and food stores, anyplace with food, so it was a health issue.
Sigh... :( :roll:
Look, I've explained over and over and over again that I got upset because I felt like you were/are treating me and others badly. If it makes you feel better about yourself to choose to believe that the only reason anyone would be frustrated with you is because you disagree with their position on social issues and the only reason anyone would disagree with you is because they are small-minded and hateful, then far be it from me to interfere with such a steadfast world view.
One of my favourite song-lines which I have lost count of the number of times I have quoted to myself or others is Lennon:
Whatever gets you through the night. It's alright, it's alright.....
Send my credentials to the house of detention
I am not the big debated like you and it's clearly not an issue for me as it is for you.
Wow excuse me for frustrating you....
I guess you strike out cause you get frustrated with others. Impatience is a problem for many.
I'm gonna say something when I think people are being unreasonable
and unwilling to compromise, that seems very childish to me.
I don't like taking away the right to smoke in public on public streets, that is over the top as was the smokers smell thing. And I am going to say so.
I think it is self centered and small minded to not compromise.
I am fine with the bans we have, they seem fair to all which is important. The smokers are compromising.
But you want to put unreasonable restraints on them scb. One reason was because you are inconvenienced with hair washing and laundry. Sorry that seems a little self centered.
And it being ok for someone to be fired cause they smell like smoke is ridiculous and I was gonna say so. If you take that as treating others badly how about the person that would be fired? But you can't see that cause you don't want to think of his feelings. He should just quit smoking then is your answer to that. Thats is small minded. Your way or no way.
So we can agree to disagree on smoking and we can leave it at that
unless you want to point out more personality faults of mine, which is boring and belittling to both of us.
I wonder if you are the type of person who must have the last word too.
And I hope you are the type of person who can say they are sorry..I have said I was sorry to you!