Give me liberty, or..COUGH! COUGH! COUGH!
Those of you who follow what's going on in France may be aware that smoking is going to be banned in all public places next year, although restaurants, bars and cafés will have until January 1st 2008 to comply.
There has been a lot of discussion on one of the expat forums about the subject. I started to post something there, and then it occurred to me that this was the perfect place to talk about it.
Several people link banning smoking to the idea of banning drinking. I say they are two separate issues. Yes, drinking can cause lots of problems. People get drunk and become horrible and dangerous. However, if you are drinking in a public place, you can't force ME to become drunk. If you are smoking in a public place, you CAN force me to breathe in your smoke. That is the major difference.
When I was a kid, my sister was asthmatic and we used to keep an oxygen tank in the house because she nearly died several times from attacks. One of the triggers for her asthma was smoking, so from the time I was born I lived in a smoke-free house. Now, this was the 50s, and it seemed like everyone except my parents smoked. No one ever seemed to mind that they couldn't smoke in our house however.
When I grew up, I decided that even though I didn't have asthma, I would keep the no-smoking tradition going. When JM and I got married, he thought it was a great idea and we only had a problem once or twice with visitors. Only one person ever stormed out of our house because he wasn't allowed to smoke, but he was a known jerk anyway.
My in-laws were shocked the first time they came to visit us. My MIL never smoked, but my FIL did. Still, he had no problem sitting on the terrace to smoke. My stepfather also smokes, but he even goes outside to smoke at his own house out of courtesy to my mother who still doesn't smoke.
When we used to come to visit the in-laws in Paris JM and I had to lock ourselves in our bedroom with the door closed just so we could breathe in the house. We would open the window, because the polluted air of Paris still smelled better than the smoke-filled air of that apartment. When we would get back to L.A., we would immediately dump all of our clothes in the laundry room for washing, because they stank so badly of stale tobacco smoke.
My FIL developed bladder cancer several years ago. He had to have his bladder removed and his life will never be the same because of that. The cancer was 100% linked to smoking, as bladder cancer is always linked to either smoking or exposure to certain chemicals. He no longer smokes.
It is everyone's decision as to whether they want to smoke or not. But I wonder why the question of "liberty" is only applied to the smoker's right to puff away and not to the non-smoker's right to breathe un-smoke-filled air? There are more non-smokers than smokers, so why should WE have fewer rights? Does that make any sense at all?
Ciao for now.
Randy
There has been a lot of discussion on one of the expat forums about the subject. I started to post something there, and then it occurred to me that this was the perfect place to talk about it.
Several people link banning smoking to the idea of banning drinking. I say they are two separate issues. Yes, drinking can cause lots of problems. People get drunk and become horrible and dangerous. However, if you are drinking in a public place, you can't force ME to become drunk. If you are smoking in a public place, you CAN force me to breathe in your smoke. That is the major difference.
When I was a kid, my sister was asthmatic and we used to keep an oxygen tank in the house because she nearly died several times from attacks. One of the triggers for her asthma was smoking, so from the time I was born I lived in a smoke-free house. Now, this was the 50s, and it seemed like everyone except my parents smoked. No one ever seemed to mind that they couldn't smoke in our house however.
When I grew up, I decided that even though I didn't have asthma, I would keep the no-smoking tradition going. When JM and I got married, he thought it was a great idea and we only had a problem once or twice with visitors. Only one person ever stormed out of our house because he wasn't allowed to smoke, but he was a known jerk anyway.
My in-laws were shocked the first time they came to visit us. My MIL never smoked, but my FIL did. Still, he had no problem sitting on the terrace to smoke. My stepfather also smokes, but he even goes outside to smoke at his own house out of courtesy to my mother who still doesn't smoke.
When we used to come to visit the in-laws in Paris JM and I had to lock ourselves in our bedroom with the door closed just so we could breathe in the house. We would open the window, because the polluted air of Paris still smelled better than the smoke-filled air of that apartment. When we would get back to L.A., we would immediately dump all of our clothes in the laundry room for washing, because they stank so badly of stale tobacco smoke.
My FIL developed bladder cancer several years ago. He had to have his bladder removed and his life will never be the same because of that. The cancer was 100% linked to smoking, as bladder cancer is always linked to either smoking or exposure to certain chemicals. He no longer smokes.
It is everyone's decision as to whether they want to smoke or not. But I wonder why the question of "liberty" is only applied to the smoker's right to puff away and not to the non-smoker's right to breathe un-smoke-filled air? There are more non-smokers than smokers, so why should WE have fewer rights? Does that make any sense at all?
Ciao for now.
Randy

