Do you think smoking cigerettes should be illegal ?
- Thread starter Kathleen
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
M
It's more than just a risk, the word risk implies that in the course of an otherwise healthy life there is a chance that smoking will not have any negative affects at all which as far as I know is just not possible, even if it is only minor like slightly diminshing the efficeny of your lungs, smoking will cause damage.
If you can provide some credible evidence to prove that I'd be interested to read it, but even if the health concerns of second hand smoke are exaggerated there are still many other secondary consequences of smoking that cannot be denied.
If you can provide some credible evidence to prove that I'd be interested to read it, but even if the health concerns of second hand smoke are exaggerated there are still many other secondary consequences of smoking that cannot be denied.
N
Yes.
From what i heard & learned weed is less pain than ciggarrates & damages you less....
Or was it the other way around o.o
either way i think smoking ciggarattes should be illegal.
I used to get BAD headaches & sometimes feel dizzy or nautious by just smelling someone smoke now i kind of like it which scares me because i dont want to become a addict to nicatine :O
From what i heard & learned weed is less pain than ciggarrates & damages you less....
Or was it the other way around o.o
either way i think smoking ciggarattes should be illegal.
I used to get BAD headaches & sometimes feel dizzy or nautious by just smelling someone smoke now i kind of like it which scares me because i dont want to become a addict to nicatine :O
M
Well I don't consider that to be damage any more than I consider it damaging to swallow painkilling tablets which can erode the lining of your stomach. For my part I don't think 'causing damage' is the problem. What's important is to show reasonable respect for one's body and health, which I believe can be consistent with smoking in moderation. I also don't believe that the 'healthy lifestyle' as defined by the nanny state is the be all and end all. The Government's extreme concern for the individual's health is quite ironic since we are all living longer, healthier lives than any generation before us.
I can send you all the studies into the effect of ETS with regard to lung cancer and heart disease if you like. They're saved on my computer so I could email them to you. There is also a book which I highly recommend called Velevet glove, Iron Fist by Christopher Snowdon on the history of anti-smoking. It's available on Amazon here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Velvet-Glov...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256690005&sr=8-1
Apart from that, what 'secondary consequences of smoking' are you referring to?
I can send you all the studies into the effect of ETS with regard to lung cancer and heart disease if you like. They're saved on my computer so I could email them to you. There is also a book which I highly recommend called Velevet glove, Iron Fist by Christopher Snowdon on the history of anti-smoking. It's available on Amazon here: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Velvet-Glov...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1256690005&sr=8-1
Apart from that, what 'secondary consequences of smoking' are you referring to?
Last edited by a moderator:
C
Actually an interesting video to watch is called "The Union The Buisness Behind Getting High" it is a documentary on marijuanna. It proves A LOT of myths wrong. I still wont smoke pot simply because I've had enough of it to last me a lifetime. But I would sooner legalize it than keep cigarettes legal.
M
Like I said in my first post, the smell, the staining, the smoke taints food etc..
I'm not saying they are anything major but these things do have an effect on other people, for non-smokers breathing in the smoke makes it hard to breathe.
I often hear the argument that there shouldn't be limits on what people can do in their own homes and in general I completely agree but where children are involved it kind of blurs the lines, raising a child in a smokers home is not a good idea because it can affect them in negative way, my mother was a non-smoker in a house with two smokers and it caused her some problems.
The quit smoking services run by the NHS takes money away from other things, everyone who smokes may pay their taxes but why choose to potentially burden an already struggling health service with more problems when unlike many health concerns those caused or exacerbated by smoking can be avoided or at least diminshed.
In general I think we shouldn't limit peoples freedom of choice, but to whatever level the consequences of smoking aren't just limited to the person doing it and in that circumstance I think it should stop for the beneift of the majority.
But I am aware of the circular argument that gets made, we get rid of cigarettes then we get rid of jobs and then we have less revenue so it actually helps us etc.
I'm not saying they are anything major but these things do have an effect on other people, for non-smokers breathing in the smoke makes it hard to breathe.
I often hear the argument that there shouldn't be limits on what people can do in their own homes and in general I completely agree but where children are involved it kind of blurs the lines, raising a child in a smokers home is not a good idea because it can affect them in negative way, my mother was a non-smoker in a house with two smokers and it caused her some problems.
The quit smoking services run by the NHS takes money away from other things, everyone who smokes may pay their taxes but why choose to potentially burden an already struggling health service with more problems when unlike many health concerns those caused or exacerbated by smoking can be avoided or at least diminshed.
In general I think we shouldn't limit peoples freedom of choice, but to whatever level the consequences of smoking aren't just limited to the person doing it and in that circumstance I think it should stop for the beneift of the majority.
But I am aware of the circular argument that gets made, we get rid of cigarettes then we get rid of jobs and then we have less revenue so it actually helps us etc.
Last edited:
M
To be honest this just sounds as though there are people who just don't like it. That's fine, but there many people who do like it, and many who are just indifferent. Smoking bans such as the ones we have in the UK are a violation of EVERYONE'S freedom of choice. I'm not talking about smokers versus non-smokers freedoms, I'm talking about property rights. Each owner of an establishment should have the right to set his own smoking policy. Then it's up to the customer whether or not they choose to go there.
This is where I believe we should just allow people the freedom to exercise common sense when raising their kids. As far as growing up in a smoking home, I would have to say I'm doubtful of any genuine health risks unless they already have an underlying medical condition such as asthma, but it depends what problems you are talking about (last I read, exposure to tobacco smoke in infancy resulted in a protective effect against devloping lung cancer in later life*).
We could use that argument about any 'self-inflicted' injury (driving accidents, obesity, drink related problems, or even just bad knees from too much hill walking). Life is not all about health, as much as New Labour want us to believe, it's about living and letting people enjoy themselves is a part of that. And you are right to mention taxes since the figure that tobacco brings into the Treasury greatly outweighs the supposed cost of 'smoking related diseases' (they fudge the numbers here because they can basically class anything they want as a 'smoking related disease'; whether or not the person actually died of such a thing is a different kettle of fish). Additionally, the NHS give up smoking campaign is a waste of money. All it does it try to get smokers off tobacco and onto nicotine replacement therapy which is woefully ineffective at about a 2% success rate. You may remember the recent '4 times more likely to quit with NHS' advertising campaign. The pro-choice group Freedom To Choose challanged the claim and they have been forced to withdraw the advert since the figure was, quite literally, just plucked out of the air.
Honestly, I think there's a stronger case for the outlawing of alcohol.
* To clarify, I'm not suggesting that it's good for anyone, just that the Relative Risk figures are so small that they sometimes go the other way; basically that if there is a risk it is negligible and unprovable.
This is where I believe we should just allow people the freedom to exercise common sense when raising their kids. As far as growing up in a smoking home, I would have to say I'm doubtful of any genuine health risks unless they already have an underlying medical condition such as asthma, but it depends what problems you are talking about (last I read, exposure to tobacco smoke in infancy resulted in a protective effect against devloping lung cancer in later life*).
We could use that argument about any 'self-inflicted' injury (driving accidents, obesity, drink related problems, or even just bad knees from too much hill walking). Life is not all about health, as much as New Labour want us to believe, it's about living and letting people enjoy themselves is a part of that. And you are right to mention taxes since the figure that tobacco brings into the Treasury greatly outweighs the supposed cost of 'smoking related diseases' (they fudge the numbers here because they can basically class anything they want as a 'smoking related disease'; whether or not the person actually died of such a thing is a different kettle of fish). Additionally, the NHS give up smoking campaign is a waste of money. All it does it try to get smokers off tobacco and onto nicotine replacement therapy which is woefully ineffective at about a 2% success rate. You may remember the recent '4 times more likely to quit with NHS' advertising campaign. The pro-choice group Freedom To Choose challanged the claim and they have been forced to withdraw the advert since the figure was, quite literally, just plucked out of the air.
Honestly, I think there's a stronger case for the outlawing of alcohol.
* To clarify, I'm not suggesting that it's good for anyone, just that the Relative Risk figures are so small that they sometimes go the other way; basically that if there is a risk it is negligible and unprovable.
Last edited by a moderator:
M
Believe me Maddog I agree with a lot of what you say, I believe there is wisdom on both sides of the argument but in general I'm just not a fan of addictive substances that provide no benefit to the human body, and that's the foundation of my opposition, pleasure isn't a good enough justification for me and I apply that to alcohol as well which I agree is a bigger problem in Great Britain right now.
All things considered our 'unelected' government has made a lot of poor choices in this area, I feel this way even though more of their action seems to be in line with my views, the obsession they have with making us safe is taking all the fun out of life and impinging on individual rights, don't think I agree with Labour for one moment.
All things considered our 'unelected' government has made a lot of poor choices in this area, I feel this way even though more of their action seems to be in line with my views, the obsession they have with making us safe is taking all the fun out of life and impinging on individual rights, don't think I agree with Labour for one moment.
M
Yes i did - name a few of the things u have in mind 
]I shall tell you simply wether i posses/do or have cut them out of my life things
]I shall tell you simply wether i posses/do or have cut them out of my life things
B
I used to smoke, I quit about a year ago. Smoking is very harmful to ones health, and smoking is very addictive. I do not believe smoking should be illegal, I feel everyone should be able to make their own choices. The state I live in is Ohio, and my state has passed laws that prohibit people from smoking in public places. In Ohio smokers have to go outside and smoke 25 feet away from public entrances, and public businesses. My friend works at a college where no one is permitted to smoke in the buildings,or on the outside of the campus. I feel that the smoking ban is fair, because I do not feel that people who do not smoke should be exposed to cigarette smoke. I do not feel that children should have to breath in cigarette smoke just because adults choose to smoke.
L
Mainly politics. There is no legitimate reason for marijuana to be illegal. It is purely political. The public is widely misinformed on the subject.
As to the others, those are harmful to the body, and so the government thinks they have to right to tell us "because it is mind-altering and harmful, you can't do it." They are not beneficial to the body in any way(instead, they are purely harmful), so the only legit argument to get them legalized would be "you're infringing on my rights" but that is a weak argument.
Alcohol was made illegal once before in America. Didn't work, so the government isn't going to try again. Besides which, if alcohol is consumed responsibily it will not harm the body, and in some cases it can be beneficial.
Tobacco isn't illegal because it would be impossible to make it illegal. It would have the same result as alcohol did.
As to the others, those are harmful to the body, and so the government thinks they have to right to tell us "because it is mind-altering and harmful, you can't do it." They are not beneficial to the body in any way(instead, they are purely harmful), so the only legit argument to get them legalized would be "you're infringing on my rights" but that is a weak argument.
Alcohol was made illegal once before in America. Didn't work, so the government isn't going to try again. Besides which, if alcohol is consumed responsibily it will not harm the body, and in some cases it can be beneficial.
Tobacco isn't illegal because it would be impossible to make it illegal. It would have the same result as alcohol did.
C
The thing about these bans, as we have the same kind of ban in Ontario, is that they are almost impossible to inforce. As nice as it would be to have a "smoke free Ontario" (as in public places) It is almost impossible to stop every single person who breaks this law, especialy as the paper work is extensive.