Why do smokers think they have rights?  Where does this come from?  I believe it is the right...?
407716
Smokers' Rights are in the US Constitution!  In the same paragraph as the Right To Privacy.  Look it up!
198404
No, maybe just people don't want to breathe in 2nd hand smoke. Smokers can go harm their own lungs no problem.
299259
Who says that the first is ok? You have to be pretty disconnected these days to NOT already know that smoking is bad for you. Smokers know better than anybody what the disadvantages of smoking are. The preachiness they get handed on a near daily basis seems pretty damn ridiculous to me. \n\nI am not a smoker. I've never smoked a cigarrette and never plan to. Every smoker I know tells me to never pick one up - and you know what? Their arguements against smoking are far more convincing than non-smokers. \n\nFor those people who choose to smoke, as long as they smoke outside to prevent secondhand smoke problems, I've got no problem with their habit. They're adults and they've made an informed choice. It's not the choice many of us (including me) would have made, but they have the right to make it. \n\nSo far, society has not made it acceptable to directly harrass obese people in this way. Overweight and obese people ARE discriminated against and put under considerable emotional strain because of their weight - our society puts too much credence on how people look for it to be otherwise. As the epidemic of obesity continues, it may become more common to verbally harrass people who are overweight and obese.
722069
Drinking in the streets and smoking in bars is what you call freedom?\n\nNo - freedom is knowing that you can express yourself any way you want that does not harm others, can express any idea that you want, can worship in any way that you want, can go anywhere you want without documentation, can be as you want to be without fear of authorities detaining you or seizing your possessions without cause as defined by law.\n\nYes, America is the most free country in the world - but too few Americans use these freedoms, and that is probably what you realized when you were here.  It's this fact that most threatens the freedom we have.\n\nNote to American readers: Freedom does NOT include a right to NOT be offended.\n\n[ADDED] Seeing your details.... Look, if you're saying the US isn't free, I disagree, and my reasons are stated.  But if you're trying to start a pissing contest about who is freer - US or UK - screw the argument; both are free, OK?
357264
YES!  Smokers are discriminated against daily.\n\nBen Franklin once said : "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."\n\nSo, all you people who belive it is right to restrict the rights of others are out in left field.  If you do not like smoke, you should exercise YOUR freedom and choose an establishment that does not allow smoking.....the gov't shouldn't enact laws that make a business owner be non-smoking.  Where is the freedom in that?\n\nIn the words of HL Mencken:\n"I believe that liberty is the only genuinely valuable thing that men have invented, at least in the field of government, in a thousand years. I believe that it is better to be free than to be not free, even when the former is dangerous and the latter safe. I believe that the finest qualities of man can flourish only in free air – that progress made under the shadow of the policeman's club is false progress, and of no permanent value. I believe that any man who takes the liberty of another into his keeping is bound to become a tyrant, and that any man who yields up his liberty, in however slight the measure, is bound to become a slave."\n\nAlso, I am sure that most of you are familiar with the last part of this quote....the front of it is equally important.  Patrick Henry: "Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!"\n\nAnd I think most importantly, Clarence Darrow stated it quite well..."You can only protect your liberties in this world by protecting the other man's freedom. You can only be free if I am free."  In other words....watch out.  If you let the gov't restrict my freedom, it will be knocking on your front door tomorrow - taking away your ability to do something that is dear to you!
79077
Well where I live you can smoke in public, and in some restraunts, but, in other states/cities you can't. We are supposed to have this thing called freedom, and the government is starting to take it away. If people don't like second hand smoke, then ask the person to blow the smoke the other way, or move. Not very hard. I am my own person and just because someone says they don't like it doesn't mean i am going to quit!
976461
I think it was a trick question to older people ...for instant one women voted no to both opinion, thinking that she was voting for people to have the right to smoke in certain areas.The wording in the question throwed them off. So yes , I think if they got a petition people would sign it. And yes some would sign it that don't smoke, 2 people I know told me that they didn't want anymore Rights taken away from them.
501003
WHY? JUST BECAUSE YOU THINK SO, DO OTHER PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS TOO OR JUST YOU? IF PEOPLE SPENT MORE TIME WORRYING ABOUT THEIR SELF'S AND LESS TIME WORRYING ABOUT OTHERS THIS WORD WOULD BE SO MUCH MORE ENJOYABLE.......
770192
First of all I am a smoker....Doing things like that will only make things worse....I think that every privatily owned buisness should have the right to decide wether smoking should be allowed.  Publicly owned places like schools, libraries, and such you could ban smoking, but privately owned bars and resteraunts should be allowed to make that decision for themselves.....would want someone coming into you place and telling you how to run it and make rules for you......I don't think so....then it will be each persons decision to choose wether or not they want to be around smoke....if you are a smoker and a resteraunt does not allow smoking, either don't smoke or go somewhere else....if you don't smoke and the place you want to eat allows smoking either deal with it or go somewhere that does not allow smoking....each group will have to decide that for themselves....I don't feel that a private buisness should be told the can't allow something that is legal like smoking.....
488123
Legalize it.\nTax it.\nDon't demonize it.\nPeople have a fundamental right to do whatever they want to their own bodies as long as they don't hurt other people. The government (of any country, not just the USA) might say differently, but they have an acitve, profitable interest in keeping it illegal.\n\nBTW-No, I don't smoke it. Never have. No plans to. Personal choice. But if I want to smoke it, or shoot smack, or burn some crack, I damn well ought to be able to do that. The consequences are my own. If I lose my job, too bad for me. If my wife leaves me, then that is a poor choice for me to make, but they are MY CHOICES to make.
127193
This is a question I love to answer....\nNo, but I do think they should have thier own area to smoke.\n\nYou have the right to not go into a restraunt that allows smoking too, sooooo.. DON'T...\n\nNow, why I love this question.  Those darn liberal's keep coming back up.  They can not draw a line on what is freedom of a person's body and what is not.\nAbortion to me should be illegal except in extreme cases. (They say that it is a right for a woman to chose what happens to her body)\nSmoking is already legal. (They don't think you should smoke, because it creates cancer and they have to pay for it) (They do not think you should have a choice about smoking)\nThey think that the country is taking away too many of it's freedoms with spying and Patriot act, yet, they do not want you to have the choice to smoke.  ILLOGICAL!\n\nBasically, I think everyone has the right to do what they want and enjoy as long as it does not encrouch the rights of others.  Smokers in a smoking area with a smoke eater system allows just that.\n\nOh, and for the Singapore comment..  If you love it so much, MOVE there!  It is communistic already!
1129519
I completely agree with you, all the way!\n\nIt is the right of anyone living in this country to do whetever ho so chooses, as long as it doesn't harm anyone!\n\nExcellent question... Valid point!
706721
I grew up in the 60s and 70s in a family that smoked and none of us, not even one of us has died or gone to hospital for smoking related illness.  There needs to be a compromise on this issue, but when the people with money and nothing better to do than try to force everyone to be like they are set an agenda, the rest of us pay.  Where I live, a ban on smoking was recently passed (by a 7% margin, by the way, out of only 30% of registered voters weighing in), because these whiny, holier-than-thou control freaks couldn't be happy that we already had an ordinance requiring restaurants to have separate smoking sections with separate ventilation systems.  Now all the restaurants that invested all  that money in those separate rooms and vent systems are going to have to give them up to these jerks.  Recent talk shows have aired the voices of business owners saying that their business has suffered from the bans, while cities around them report increases, as those of us who still appreciate the concept of a free country drive to less fascistic communities to dine out.  Restaurants are private businesses and if someone can't stand the chance of smelling cigarette smoke, they most certainly do not have to go into them.  This no compromise attitude is very un-American, in my opinion.  Sadly, people these days usually just roll over when new laws go through and they'll just say, "OK, you took that right from me, at least I can still smoke in my car and house."  I just wonder how long that will be true. Hail Oceania!
909330
I am not a smoker, but have no problem with people smoking in designated areas in restaurants, or public places like hospitals, malls, etc. I expect people to be smoking in bars, clubs and such. I know there are people that are on oxygen, allergic to smoke, have lung problems and the smoke increases their difficulty to breath. However, everyone has the right to do what they want to as long as it does not hurt someone else. I believe their is a common ground and solution without totally banning smoking and coming down so hard on people who choose to smoke.\n\nAs for taxation, the government has that go in' on....They tax the vices they know people won't quit....gambling, Alcohol,......that's the way it goes.
207139
Yes. Very much so. And I'm a smoker. I do not smoke in public, around children, or around pregnant women. It is MY choice alone to die of cancer. Not theirs. I do not defend smokers in ANY way. Smoking is a dangerous habit that I wish I could control and quit. Unfortunately, I can't seem to stop. I've been a smoker for 18 yrs. and I will NEVER tell another human being to deal with MY habit in public because I have the right to smoke. They have more of a right to breath and to live with out being wrongly affected by me. I smoke in the privacy of my own home. I apologize for those smokers who do not get it, that WE are the offenders. Keep it up guys...maybe smoking will be banned.
239878
A 'right' to live is something granted by society to those choosing to live in that society BY THE RULES OF THAT SOCIETY. If they choose to break those rules, then society should have the right to take away the right to live in that society (basically what prison does). I favor the old British Empire means of 'transportation', except child molesters should be 'transported' to the bottom of the ocean without a submarine.
1061206
.  First of all our "forefathers did not "give us our freedoms"  they fought to ensure that we had that with which  we were rightfully   "endowed by our Creator".   Those freedoms that we commonly speak of like the freedom of the press, the freedom to worship, and the rights: to assemble, to free speech, to trial, etc are all part of that single concept of liberty.  I would not give up one of those individual freedoms or rights because to do so would be to diminish liberty...and liberty is our God given right.  So I agree with several of the other answers in that one respect.  However once again we have our president being accused for eroding our freedoms.  I challenge anyone to offer any evidence that an action on the part of the president has violated the bill of rights.   If you want to talk about an erosion of freedoms lets talkabout some of the liberal legislators in both state and federal  government who have made a habit of imposing arbitrary taxes.  Take for example taxes on tobacco products.  Whether you are a smoker or not, the principle should outrage you.  You have a few politicians who want to raise money who say well...".hey..i don't smoke..how about if we add 50 cents onto the cost of a pack of cigarettes...those smokers are in the minority, we can get away with it".  How fair is that?  Seems to me we fought a revolution in this country over less than this.  How about eminent domain?  You don't think that is an erosion of your freedoms.  A city can just decide they are going to buy your property from you and sell it to a developer because they can make more money in taxes from what will be built there.  What ever happened to private property?  I guess that doesn't mean so much to you liberals.  And why?...Because...private property is the first thing to go under communism and the liberal left mentality in this country today is a direct result of the influence of communist/socialist educators.  Talk about rights.  You are more concerned about a persons right to have unprotected sex without consequences than the right of a living innocent baby to survive.  Of course you are so concerned about crime that you don't want law abiding citizens to own firearms...you'd be just as happy if they banned them all, when statistically these gun owners aren't causing the deaths.  Yet your liberal minded judges continue to give repeat offenders light sentences or grant probation so that young kids can continue to be raped and murdered by these animals.  Yeah, I'd say we have an erosion of our freedoms due to an unresponsive government that does not act in many cases in the best interest of the American people but rather for their own personal agendas.  In my opinion that agenda by and large is the perpetuation of themselves and their positions ala Ted Kennedy.  George Bush was the right man to be in office at this time and he is certainly no enemy of freedom.\n    I guess I kind of got off the topic a bit but the bottom line is I couldn't choose one individual right or freedom over another.  To do so would be like asking me to choose a part of my body to cut off.  They are all important to me.  They are all part of the whole that are liberty and I would give up my life to defend any one or all.