Monday, January 01, 2007

A KrazyKat editorial - Issue 5

I quote from B.C. Forbes in 1953:
'What have Americans to be thankful for? More than any other people on the earth, we enjoy complete religious freedom, political freedom, social freedom. Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States, 'the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.' Yes, we Americans of today have been bequeathed a noble heritage. Let us pray that we may hand it down unsullied to our children and theirs.''

"Our liberties are sacredly safeguarded by the Constitution of the United States"...but are slowly being eroded away by the likes of the new anti-smoking law in Ohio. Don’t get me wrong, I believe second-hand smoke to be as dangerous as we are being preached to about it. But this new law(who the anti-smokers will say was a product of the democratic process) imposes a socialistic value to our democracy. How hypocritical of them. What really is democracy in action is allowing a self proprietor to run his businsness as he sees fit. As long as he does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, gender or other civil rights as protected under the law he should be able to run his establishment any way he see it.The rights of the majority do not supersede the rights of the minority.

Issue 5 in Ohio was about much more than smoking. It was about eroding the values of democracy and civil liberties this country has come to depend on to make it the great country it is. If we allow these unconstitutional laws to run our lives and take away our rights to personal choice, let the majority run the lives of the minority, let the holier than thou think they know what is best for everyone an impose their way of thinking upon all, then we might as well live in a Social state such as Russia and China. If a smoker does not like the fact that a bar allow smoking... simply do not patronize it. If the bar owner discovers that his business is suffering because he alienating the anti-smokers, he will change his business practice. But it is his choice...not the decision of a majority who feel that their rights are more civil than that of the minority.

An Ohioan does not have the "Right" to visit a bar that allows smoking. They have the "Privilege" of visiting it based on the rules that the proprietor sets forth. If it is ok for a business owner to place a sign in his window that reads "No shirt...No shoes...No Service" he should also be able to determine who he wants his clients to be by placing a "Smoking Allowed/Not Allowed" sign in his window.

Those who voted on the unconstitutional Issue 5 were naive at the least and mislead by the political banter and demogogary

(It’s akin to always saying that “they” are responsible for condition “Y”. There’s this thing called “lies of omission”, lieing by telling the truth but not ALL the truth. Depending on what you tell and what you don’t tell, you can give your audience quite the opposite idea of what’s going on than what really is.)

of the ballot language. Only when the law is expanded to include the elimination of act which they posses will they realize that they made a grave mistake in giving the government the power to dictate our lives and personal choice.


Maggie Thurber said...

Ah - but you see...somewhere along the line, it appears that the majority has forgotten that, in a Republic like the USA, the majority don't get to vote to take away the rights of the matter how much the majority despises the minority's exercise of such rights.

Hooda Thunkit said...

"Those who voted on the unconstitutional Issue 5 were naive at the least and mislead by the political banter and demogogary"

You're right of course. However, consider that those who for whatever reason can't tolerate smoke have been made to tolerate the smoke of the minority for so darn long.

On behalf of myself and the others who voted for the ban, can you see our side of the coin, just a little?

You're also right that this law takes the right of private business holders out of their hands, which is just plain wrong, IMO.

Now, on a more reasonable law, depending on the details, I could/might vote to undo this travesty, as I certainly understand what's at stake.

Let's also hope that the rabid smokers have learned something from this law's enactment too.

As for me, I will return to my usual practice of choosing the places that I patronize by how scrupulously adhere to the restrictions on allowing smoke to penetrate so-called non-smoking areas.

If adhered to, I can live with that.

Harmodius and Aristogeiton said...

Next, strip club regulations: Touching/No toouching sections.

Anonymous said...

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.


Anonymous said...