United Liberty

.

“… smoking bans violate the private property rights of business owners.”

And a civil society establishing laws, rules, and regulation is fascism how?

BTW - Is it also fascism to ban false advertizement or selling tainted foods in eating establishments?

Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.

If you don;t think banning individual choice is fascism I wonder what you are doing on a libertarian site.

What has smoking to do with false advertisement? Unless the vendors are saying the cigarettes dont contain tobacco you are making a spurious argument with absolutely relevance. If the government can ban smoking why cant they ban eating pork? or adding salt to food? or not wearing a veil in public? You see where I’m going with this? Hope so, because thats the direction America is heading in one tiny inocuous slice at a time.

First its drugs because drugs are bad mkay. Then its cigarettes. then its alcohol. Then its your kids NOT taking their ADHD medication. Then its you NOT taking your daily prozac. Then its protesting in public. Then its not carry your identity papers. Then its not working in the job the government has decided is best for you (them).

Either you own your body, or the government does. I find it truly disturbing that you cannot see the difference.

.

“… what you are doing on a libertarian site.”

Trying to learn ya good about speaking good English?

One may find rules, regulations, and laws established by a civil society for the sake of safety for the majority of its people to be meddlesome and irritating. Being callously indifferent to the well-being of others may make one feel superior, but has questionable value. One owns one’s body within a free society in USA.

One can do a ‘chicken little’ over “… direction America is heading in one tiny inocuous slice at a time” all one wants. But “fascism” (a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism.) it is NOT!

Use the word correctly.

Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.

I’m always vexed by the segment of the liberty-minded community that chooses to defend smoking and attack smoking bans. Would these same individuals defend the right of a property owner to dump hazardous, toxic materials on their own property? Smoking is no different. If people are allowed to smoke in establishments catering to the general public, they are causing harm upon all those present who have the intelligence not to participate in that behavior, be they employees or patrons. And I see nothing in the doctrine of liberty that defends harming others in the name of private property rights.