One of my favorite smoking ban memories. We are eating at a On the Borders Mexican place outside on the patio. One of my coworkers lit up a smoke. The waiter came by and insisted he put it out since there was no smoking at the restaurant. At that moment, a semi truck took off from the stop light nearby and unleashed a huge cloud of diesel that drifted over everyone and our food. Nice. I guess legistlators only have the cajones to target and trample on the individuals rights since they don't want to mess with big business.

djenks wrote:

Dmnkly wrote:

gleam wrote:

djenks wrote:the fact of the matter is - all the people that are against the sale of fois gras and are FOR the ban of cigarettes are hypocrites - no two ways about it.

That's absolutely not true. One is an animal welfare issue, the other is a public health issue.

Agreed... that's just false. I'm not in favor of either, but there's absolutely nothing inconsistent about supporting one and opposing the other. Just because they have some elements in common doesn't mean they aren't two very different issues. They're hardly analogous.

Nope. They are the same. They are business owner's rights - and any ban of either is (should be) viewed as an infringement on their rights.

No, they are NOT the same. Because they both affect business owners' rights doesn't mean they're both solely about business owners' rights, and does not by any logical definition make them the same!

By this logic, you should be required to take the same licensing examinations for semi trucks, cars, motorcycles and skateboards because they all have wheels and can be ridden/driven on the street. Yes, they have that in common, but there are other differences between them that make them distinct entities that must be considered on their own merits rather than being treated the same. In end, you may very well decide that they should all have the same licensing requirements, but to do so simply because they all have wheels while completely ignoring the other differences between them doesn't make any damn sense.

I'm not saying there aren't some parellels between foie and smoking in a restaurant context that are worth considering and enter into the debate, but calling them the same and insisting that it's impossible to support one and reject the other without being a hypocrite defies logic and reason and makes it impossible to have an intelligent discussion on the subject. You'd be hypocritical if you stated that what business owners can sell and allow on their property should never be regulated and then support a ban on one of these, but because you have no problems with the (real or perceived) public health issues surrounding restaurant smoking doesn't mean it makes you a hypocrite to then have problems with the (real or perceived) animal rights issues surrounding foie gras service in restaurants. There's nothing inconsistent in believing that it's government's place to regulate business in some arenas but not others. Choosing anything other than "businesses should be able to do anything they want" or "government should be able to regulate businesses in any way they want" doesn't make you a hypocrite. That's just silly.

And I agree with you on both!

Dmnkly wrote:There's nothing inconsistent in believing that it's government's place to regulate business in some arenas but not others. Choosing anything other than "businesses should be able to do anything they want" or "government should be able to regulate businesses in any way they want" doesn't make you a hypocrite. That's just silly.

And I agree with you on both!

I like the fact that there is a civil debate about legislation and politics on this board - most people can't handle themselves with this type of discussion.

Having said that, i disagree with you. My personal opinion is - it's hypocritical to support the ban of smoking but oppose fois gras or trans fats.

I agree that gov't should have a hand in some aspects of business - but they crossed the line with that LONG ago.

I don't think businesses should be able to "do whatever they please" but it is my opinion that the business owner has had rights taken away from them at a steady rate. Business owners:

1. Should never be required by law to provide benefits.
2. Should never be required by law to provide handicap parking on their property
3. Should never be required by law to hire fairly
4. Should bever be required by law to cease the use of fois gras and trans fats
5. Should never be required to cease smoking.

I would never support a business that made it a point to NOT have handicap parking. I would NEVER support a business that only hired a certain race, gender or religion. But these should be their choices. It's their business. they are paying taxes, they made the business plan, went into debt, and work their asses off for it.

Why not make it law to provide warning signs at every entrance if you're going to have smoking in your establishment?

Why not make it a law to provide employees with standard paperwork BEFORE hire that train them on the risks they will endure by accepting a job there? Medics have to do it. We sign on the dotted line. We deal with hazards. every single job in america deals with hazards. Barbacks, servers, waitresses, bartenders are no exception.

You know - people are just letting the gov't control too many things. A free market will work itself out. If Moe's is smoke free and Joe's down the street is full on smoking - that will work itself out and the majority will be represented through how successful these locations are. To make it a law is absurd.

When the government starts providing free healthcare then they can start to dictate what a restaraunt can and cannot do, and what I should and should not eat or smoke. Until I see the hundreds of dollars a month I pay for my family stop they should stop their dictatorship and give me a twinkie and a stogie

djenks wrote:I like the fact that there is a civil debate about legislation and politics on this board - most people can't handle themselves with this type of discussion.

I agree that it's wonderful that people here can handle themselves with civility, but legislation and politics are really off-topic for this board.

When they are connected to food and restaurants (as this thread began), they're on-topic. When they drift into bigger picture arguments about government responsibility and personal liberties, we've jumped off track.

I'm locking the thread now. Thanks for your understanding.

Aaron, for the moderators