Michigan Votes Forum

gypsy:

Quite simple. Smoking can be done in places that don't expose the public to second hand smoke, and places that are truly private.

So, let me get this right.  You don't care that smoking pollutes the public air and you don't care that it burdens society with additional health care and social welfare costs.  Your concern is that you can go into your favorite watering hole and not be bothered by someone smoking.  I get it.  The only "rights" you care about are your own.

To help you "get it right".

I do care that smoking pollutes the lungs of those not smoking when done in a confined area, such as a restaurant or workplace. I care about the burden smokers put on the health system, like I care about the burden obese people do. But I don't want laws to forbid someone from making a bad life style decision, as long as their decision doesn't harm others. That's just the price we'll have to pay for being human and having weaknesses. I'm not concerned about being "bothered" by someone else smoking. I am concerned about my health being damaged, and other people's health being damaged, by someone else's bad choice.

I care about my rights, and your rights. I want you to be able to enjoy your rights as I enjoy mine. You apparently assume I drink, so I"ll assume you smoke. I won't pour my drink on you, and you don't blow your smoke on me.

This bill should pass to allow us both to enjoy our rights and our weaknesses, just not impose them on each other.

 Well, thier decision does harm others because society eventually pays for it, especially in todays era of lack of personal responsibility.  Insurance companies are restricted from charging smokers more in the name of "fairness", same with obese people. 

If you are concerned about your health, don't go into places that allow smoking.  And if you really want to help society don't purchase food products from companies that sell unhealthy food items. 

I don't smoke, I only respect the rights of those who do. But more importantly I respect the rights of property owners, including business owners to make decisions on how their property is used without you, or anyone else unduly restricting those rights.  You have choice to enter an establishment that allows smoking or to stay out.  Vote with your dollars.  Stay out.  Better yet, open your own non-smoking establishment and provide a non smoking atomosphere for you and freespeaker and maybe me and maybe even people who smoke but respect your rights to ban smoking in your establishment.

You have your facts wrong. Please permit me to correct them.

Smokers do pay more for insurance. Insurance companies are not restricted in the name of fairness to not charging smokers more than people who do not smoke.

Why should a non-smoker be limited in his or her choice of restaurants or place of employment because of smokers? And how am I going to know which foods are unhealthy if the seller doesn't have to devulge the true ingredients through government oversight?

I also don't smoke, and I also respect the rights of those who do, as long as they respect my right to not breath their second hand smoke.

This is not, as has been previously established, a property rights issue. A business does not have the "right" to endanger it's customers and employees. This is a public health issue, and as such, this bill is an amendment to the Public Health Code. I favor it's passage.