Re: Where there's smoke, there's ire!
Ronald W. Fox (us018956@POP3.INTERRAMP.COM)
Mon, 25 Mar 1996 19:58:58 PST
David Wilson quoth:
>Regarding Jim Moriarty's post...
>> The "big picture" is hundreds of thousands of dead people
>Great. I hope you now intend to launch a crusade against Scouters who own
>cars, eat fatty food, don't take any regular exercise, etc, etc. Not
>forgetting the obvious one of "Scouters who own firearms", of course.
Cars and fatty food have their place. Tobacco remains the only legal substance
sold in the U.S.A. that, when used in a normal fashion, will addict you and then
kill you. Death by lung cancer is NOT pretty. It's a smoker's right, though...
>> manipulation of youth by slick advertising, dumping on new third
>> world markets
>Oh, this is a biggy! I think we can obtain convictions on A LOT of companies
>for this! We'll start with Coca Cola, hit Nestle next week, get to work on
>Pepsi the week after...
I think that the U.S.A., having found tobacco enough of a medical problem to ban
most forms of advertising it in the U.S.A., will one day have to answer for allo
AND subsidizing the expansion of its sale to relatively unsophisticated markets
elsewhere in the world.
>> a gateway to hard drug use
>Anyone who could write such a patently absurd statement and post it to a
>public forum must have passed through this gateway some time ago.
I have my doubts about any one drug being especially a "gateway" drug myself.
If you're prone to become addicted to drugs, I figure that any one drug will
adequately serve as your first.
>> bazillions of dollars of tax revenue supporting
>> otherwise useless tobacco farmers
>Less of a problem over here. However, I think you'll find that smokers pay
>more than enough tax to cover this. Besides, if they didn't grow tobacco,
>you'd have to pay for their unemployment benefit.
It's pretty stupid (here in the U.S.A.) to have one part of the Government conde
tobacco as one of the biggest health problems in our country, and have another p
of it subsidize it. I don't vote for prohibition, but elimination of the subsid
is blocked by callousness, not sense.
>> Big enough for you?
>My world is big enough to accomodate people who choose to behave
>differently from myself. Jim, I have a sneaking suspicion that _your_
>world does not have this air of tolerance.
I vote for tolerance as well!
>Some of the best Scouters I have known have been smokers. Some of the worst
>Scouters I have known have also been smokers. Truth is, I don't really
>care. Wherever thay went, though, there were always people who couldn't
>wait to treat them as second class citizens. For some reason, the sight of
>other people smoking turns some normally reasonable people into ranting
>bigots. And I think that's sad.
If a smoker is gracious enough to either make sure that their smoke doesn't
blow in my face, or ask my leave if it would have to, I don't care if they light
up or not. Anti-anything fanatics raving in public against people I view as
victims are acting like fools, and make me suspicious that their intent is to
remake the world in their image, since they know best, regardless of what the re
of us think. I do think that smoking in front of Scouts on Scout functions is w
>Yours waiting for the anti-smoking Gestapo to prime their flamethrowers,
>David Wilson. <Djh.Wilson@ee.qub.ac.uk>
>(SL, 1st Saintfield Scout Troop, Co. Down, N. Ireland)
>(NON-SMOKER who doesn't particularly care if other people want to)
Cubmaster, Pack 69, Des Plaines Valley Council, Willow Springs, Illinois.
E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org (Ronald W. Fox)
Lips that touch tobacco will never touch mine!
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City