It is effective to use the "Im so a victim" device these days, angry -white-males have actually turned it into a genre.Fellow victims will always ralley but the more intellectually rigourous approach is a real look at the difference between liberty and freedom.Few modern conservatives will go there but i believe liberty is about rights and responsibilities, the courage to enter into a contract rather than duke it out.Smoking where it affects others is a disregard for that civilizing contract.
Aren't others entering into a contract of sorts by entering the establishment?
There are definitely smokers who are careless and rude about their habit. But where are they supposed to indulge, if not in a bar? It is curious that in an age that has largely spurned temperance, specifically in the sexual realm, that those who engage in something which may only be mildly sinful are ostracized so fiercely.
Last, but surely not least, no one has told me just why those who own these establishments can have THEIR rights revoked. It is one thing to take away a cigarette from a simple civilian when he is in the public realm. It is quite another to take away the livelihood of a restaurant owner merely because he has violated the current damnable sin of the godless world.
2 comments:
It is effective to use the "Im so a victim" device these days, angry -white-males have actually turned it into a genre.Fellow victims will always ralley but the more intellectually rigourous approach is a real look at the difference between liberty and freedom.Few modern conservatives will go there but i believe liberty is about rights and responsibilities, the courage to enter into a contract rather than duke it out.Smoking where it affects others is a disregard for that civilizing contract.
Aren't others entering into a contract of sorts by entering the establishment?
There are definitely smokers who are careless and rude about their habit. But where are they supposed to indulge, if not in a bar? It is curious that in an age that has largely spurned temperance, specifically in the sexual realm, that those who engage in something which may only be mildly sinful are ostracized so fiercely.
Last, but surely not least, no one has told me just why those who own these establishments can have THEIR rights revoked. It is one thing to take away a cigarette from a simple civilian when he is in the public realm. It is quite another to take away the livelihood of a restaurant owner merely because he has violated the current damnable sin of the godless world.
Post a Comment