State intervention in the UK

Where I live, we have a public smoking ban, and I don't personally feel that it is ridiculous, as it does endanger the lives of others... as many of the deaths are still due to smoking. I do, however, believe that people should be able to smoke in their own homes, and that removing that right is violating one's body. And once you have violated one's body, what other barriers are there left to cross? None, absolutely none.

I also think that (illegial) drugs should be legalized. It is again, the government forcing people to put things, or not to put things into their bodies.

Thirdly, abortion. While one may not believe in baby killing, it is merely a violation of one's privacy by dicatating what she should or should not do with her body.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frasbee [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

And I was saying "Yes" to their lives only.

Anybody who chooses to drink in a bar that clearlyng allows smoking is forfeiting their lung health. The owner should have the say as to whether they want to allow smokers or not.

---

Then again, I do agree with this as well. But I do believe that smoking ought to be banned in public, government-owned places.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DarkDwarf [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Where I live, we have a public smoking ban, and I don't personally feel that it is ridiculous, as it does endanger the lives of others... as many of the deaths are still due to smoking. I do, however, believe that people should be able to smoke in their own homes, and that removing that right is violating one's body. And once you have violated one's body, what other barriers are there left to cross? None, absolutely none.

I also think that (illegial) drugs should be legalized. It is again, the government forcing people to put things, or not to put things into their bodies.

Thirdly, abortion. While one may not believe in baby killing, it is merely a violation of one's privacy by dicatating what she should or should not do with her body.

---

I couldn't agree with you more.
However, I think abortion should be allowed if the couple were using protection and sort of.. accidently the woman became pregnant. I don't think abortion is right for those who are having completely unprotected sex and know of the consequences.
I agree with the legalisation of drugs. There would be far less crime, and people could be made aware of the results of using drugs, just like they are with smoking, and make a concious decision whether they do drugs or not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babydoll [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Did I mention the lives of others? If you had read it properly.. you will see that I think it is a good thing they have stopped smoking in public places. Therefore it is not damaging anyone else, except those who choose to do it.
STIs? Again it would be damaging someone ELSES health. If however, for sake of argument, everyone knew who had and who did not have an STI someone decided they wanted to get one.. let them do it. Why not eh?

---

I understand where you are coming from. I just see that smoking always does affect the lives of others (Even if they are no longer smoking in public places). They are smoking in their homes infecting their families, their partners and children they are smoking with other close people near by, friends, family ones who love them enough to accept them for it and not fuss up to them, getting slowly killed by that disgusting stench in the process.

I understand that the Government should not interfere in our pirvate lives and there are limits to what they should be able to do. I don't think this should extend to smoking (and anything else that damages other people - see speeding). As far as public safety goes I would rather see them regulate at will.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

I understand that the Government should not interfere in our pirvate lives and there are limits to what they should be able to do. I don't think this should extend to smoking (and anything else that damages other people - see speeding). As far as public safety goes I would rather see them regulate at will.

---

See prohibition.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Frasbee [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

See prohibition.

---

I never said they should prohibit

Meh, my parents aren't killing me. My dad isn't allowed to smoke in the house, and my mum doesn't think I know she smokes :D twat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babydoll [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Seeing as you're not allowed to smoke in public places.. that is only endangering smoker's lives.

---

How is not smoking in public places endangering smoker's lives? Smokers will not die if they don't smoke in public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Babydoll [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Oh my ****ing god. This government does my bloody head in (UK). On the news they have now taken the banning of advertising tobacco and cigarettes to another level by removing them from view in shops. It is unbelievable how much this government is interferring in our lives.

---

And how exactly does this change anything? Those who already intend to smoke know perfectly well that they can still purchase them at their everyday shop, right? And those who try to quit smoking, do it on rare occassions or have never done it wont feel any urge to try it out by seeing the package.

State control? I'd like to see a better example of that. This is hardly worth mentioning.

Quote:

---

For a start smoking is not a direct cause of death. It is correlational.. but not a direct cause. My great grandfather lived until he was 88, having smoked all his life and did not die of smoking related illnesses.

---

I believe a previous poster already clarified about this and cancer. And I'd far sooner believe the correlation between cancer statistics and habitual smoking over your one-person example.

Quote:

---

Also, as cynical as it may sound, this world is over populated as it is. Realistically, if people are indirectly willing to damage their health then let them do it! It's banned in public places in the UK as it is, so passive smoking is not really an issue any more.

---

Population distribution. I do hope you know where most of the people in the world live at before you use it as an example for first world country peeps to go wacko and kill themselves.

-----------


One thing I'm curious about though. Just randomly, since christian beliefs are against masturbation since it kills seeds (aka potential life), doesn't it essentially mean that sex also should be against that belief since only one of the sperm make it to the egg while the others die?