As a young lady, fitting in with my group was important.
We followed the styles of dress and listened to the same music. We even learned to spit. I didn’t like doing it at first, but getting along with my peers was a powerful pressure and soon I could spit with the best of them.
It was a habit at first, but soon it became an addiction. I got to the point, as did my friends, that I could not stand the thought of swallowing my own saliva.
At restaurants we would spit over our shoulders, up into the air, wherever we wanted to. Fortunately, many of our peers were also addicted to spitting, so the laws allowed us to spit wherever and whenever we wanted to.
It is amazing, as I think on it, that non-spitters tolerated our spitting into their faces, onto their clothes, and even into their plates at restaurants. But still, the laws allowed it.
Now I am sure that you have figured out the comparison here. Anyone with a sense of logic can see that my right to spit is not one iota different than another person’s addiction to smoking and their right to put that smoke into my lungs, onto my hair and clothes and into my unborn child’s bloodstream.
What is really funny about this analogy is that spit is, on average, a lot less dangerous than smoke. No one would get sick from my spit right now, as I am presently quite healthy and carry no diseases that can be transmitted by saliva.
In fact, except for the non-fatal common cold, most of us are not carrying a saliva born disease today. If we did, no one would greet anyone with a kiss, as we frequently do, or even shake hands.
Smoke on the other hand is always harmful and statistically fatal. Each inhalation of someone else’s smoke adds to my risk of a deadly cancer, deadly heart disease and on and on. Any pinhead can see that it should be obvious to ban smoking in confined areas where there are other people who need to breathe.
Why does any owner of a restaurant, office or building wait for a shortsighted government to get around to doing the right thing? Why does any government not ban it outright and immediately?
This ban would not stop people’s right to smoke. They can smoke at home, outdoors, in their cars, any place where they cannot contaminate and directly poison other people. This ban would not hurt business as people will not stop eating out just because they have to go outside to smoke. People eat out because they like the food and don’t want to cook at home.
This ban would not hurt the tobacco industry, as it unfortunately would not stop people from smoking. It would only stop them from forcing everyone else to inhale their poisonous fumes. Where is the difficulty of this decision? If you oppose the ban, can I spit on your food next time you eat out?
Cathy Church
Related Videos
