Welcome to PatsFans.com

Where's the ACLU...?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by QuiGon, Nov 29, 2006.

  1. QuiGon

    QuiGon Banned

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2006
    Messages:
    6,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    A guy gets fired for engaging in a completely legal activity after his workday was over. What is this man's crime that got him fired..? Well, he's the lowest scumbag of them all: He's a smoker. And he is fighting back with a lawsuit. Good for him, says I, and I haven't smoked a day in my life.

    Where's the ACLU...?

    http://www.boston.com/business/ticker/2006/11/mass_smoker_sue.html
  2. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    The Republicans have been denying people individual liberties for years. For instance, in 33 states it's legal to fire someone just for being gay. While that issue pits the religious right against freedom, this issue pits business interests against freedom. These are all issues of discrimination. I know you're quick to defend racist and homophobic comments in this forum, but perhaps there's a little light of hope in that you're concerned about the rights of smokers. Good for you.

    It kind of makes me think of the great quote by the German anti-Nazi pastor, Martin Niemoller:

    "In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up."
  3. wistahpatsfan

    wistahpatsfan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2005
    Messages:
    15,672
    Likes Received:
    11
    Ratings:
    +11 / 0 / -0

    No one's rights were violated. I think smoking in public should be legal, like drinking and sex. I think that when you work for a private company that pays for your health benefits and life insurance (assuming this company does), then they have a right to make certain demands related to their costs of doing business. I also think the rule should be grandfathered for those who were employed prior to a rule. When you enter a private workplace, you agree to the terms of employment.
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    Wistah, I thought you were somewhat libertarian? Am I mistaken? You think a company has the right to fire an employee who smokes on his own time and not on the premises? Could a company also tell people that if they get too fat they'll be fired or if they listen to too much loud music they'll be fired? After all, such activities can cause health problems.
  5. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    There's a lot of confusion about what libertarians believe because the word doesn't mean the same thing everywhere in the world.

    In much of the world, "libertarianism" is used for what's properly called libertarian socialism, based on the ideas of Mikhail Bakunin and his followers. That flavor of libertarianism abhors most direct uses of authority that infringe on the individual. Under that school of thought, which is probably what you had in mind, smoking regulations would probably be seen as an unjust overstepping of someone's personal sovereignty.

    In North America, libertarianism refers to what's actually known as free-market libertarianism and is based on the US Libertarian Party and its movement in the 1970's, which itself came from Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism. US libertarians wouldn't object to workplace smoking rules - they're part of a private contract between two parties: the employer and the employee, and US libertarians believe the government shouldn't interfere with the right of adults to enter into a contract. There are lots of other branches and sub-branches of libertarianism, too.
    Last edited: Nov 29, 2006
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    Libertarianism is also used more broadly in the U.S.. Liberal, another confusing word on the international stage as well as in the U.S., has it's roots in "liberty," and many people who call themselves libertarian seem to be referring to classical liberalism.
  7. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,068
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    When are they going to go after the "Rappers, Bloods, and Crips" GUNS the way they go after Tobacco?

    When are they going to go after the "Illegal Alien Invaders" the way they go after Tobacco.

    When are they going to go after the "Baggy Pant School Yard Drug Dealers" the way they go after Tobacco?

    When are they going to start giving life sentences and go after the Scummy Slimey Nambla Pig Dog PEDOPHILE the way they go after Tobacco?

    All the above things and more that I can't think of right now are "AGAINST THE LAW, THEY ARE ILLEGAL"

    Tobacco is a LEGAL product.

    Stop worrying about a law abiding citizen smoking a Cigar in his own house and try to do something about the "poor mixed up kid" on the street corner wearing $900 sneakers giving his silly hand signs to his "home boys" and start worrying about the 9MM Hand gun in his "Baggies", start worrying about getting these bastards off the streets and into cages where they belong.

    I DON'T SMOKE, I QUIT 35 YEARS AGO.
    :bricks:
  8. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    You're right, which makes your challenging of Wistah on his libertarianism seem especially odd.
  9. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,068
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    Soon the "Morons" will be telling you it's OK to buy a car but don't drive it.

    How many people get killed by cars EVERY DAY?

    Second Hand Smoke is bad for your health.

    Drunk Drivers, Car Jackers, Car Thieves, are bad for your health.

    Who do the Whacko's go after (the guy in his own living room with his legal ciggarette)
    :confused:
  10. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    Not really, Wistah strikes me as an independent libertarian, with a somewhat liberal leaning. I could be wrong though. Perhaps he's more corporate minded than liberal. There's a lot of in liberalism that supports the rights of smokers.

    Where the issue gets confused is (1) Many people assume that those against smoking are more likely to be liberal than not, which I do not think is true and (2) liberals do believe that the tobacco companies should be held responsible for covering up and manipulating information about smoking that might have helped save lives.
  11. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I would guess that liberals, by a wider margin, support regulations against smoking, including banning smoking in public, raising taxes on cigarettes, and supporting litigation.

    To me, if a company intentionally misleads a consumer and that contributes to their death, they should be liable under out tort system. Where consumers had access to information and made an informed choice, the companies should not be liable. Marketing their product to children should also carry liability.
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2006
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    I think on taxes and litigation you're right, but at least this article cites a Gallup poll showing that Republicans are more likely to support regulations!

    http://www.secondhandsmokesyou.com/resources/one_news_article.php?id=98

    Republicans are more likely than Democrats or independents to show increased support for smoking bans in restaurants, hotels and motels, and the workplace.

    Currently, 62% of Republicans want to ban smoking in restaurants, up from 47% in 2003 -- a 15-point increase. By contrast, independents are eight points more likely to support a ban in restaurants (from 40% to 48%), while Democrats are only five points more likely (from 48% to 53%).

    A similar pattern is found among partisans about smoking in hotels and motels. Forty-one percent of Republicans support a smoking ban in these establishments, compared with 28% of independents and 33% of Democrats. For Republicans, the current figures represent an increase of 15 percentage points over a similar reading in 2003, but only a 6-point increase for independents, and a 5-point increase for Democrats.

    In the workplace, Republicans show an increase in support by 11 points (from 36% in 2003 to 47% in 2005) and independents by 5 points (32% to 37%). Democrats show an insignificant one-point decline, from 41% to 40%.
  13. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I didn't say Democrats or Republicans, I said liberals and conservatives. And I know which party has more of which, but the mapping between party and beleifs isn't clear-cut.
  14. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +295 / 4 / -2

    I've discussed this very topic a few years ago. My position is similar to yours. I feel that a company may, stress may, have the right to not hire people who smoke. However, I have a tough time with them firing an existing employee who smokes. Some have said that employees should be able to hire and fire as they wish, which I somewhat agree with. My problem with firing people for smoking, and citing healthcare, is that smoking in and of itself, would not, or then should not, be a limitation. If one could say cigs are bad, then how about junk food? How about athletics? Could I fire someone for not exercising? Where do you draw the line? To me, what someone does at home, is their own business. I wouldn't fire someone for smoking, although I'm not sure about whether or not an employer should have a right to. Employees do deserve certain rights, but by the same token, it is the employers money at risk. It is his business. I think workplace safety and rights are a must, but I'm not sure any person has the right to employment. It's a tough issue.
  15. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +295 / 4 / -2

    Listen, I know alot of Libertarians. Most of which reside in Kalifornia (I use a K when I post with them). Anyhow, they all ***** about Dems and Repubs, and how there is no difference. They all oppose "party" politics, and do not believe in collectivism, yet, when I argue with them that they members of a political "party", they get pissed. My words to them were simple. That by being members of the libertarian party, they were no different than a Dem or Repub stooge. Alligning yourself with a party does that. Furthermore, this bunch tried to tell me what Libertarians stood for, and the best part was, none of them could agree on what that was. They ranged from lunatic, to normal. Basically, they were like everybody else. The best was when they all tried to tell me that if Libertarians were in power, there wouldn't be the political BS there is today. Of course, when I pointed out that the 3 of them couldn't agree on anything, so how could a whole party, they got real quiet.

    The moral is, I have no idea what a Libertarian is. I think they are for limited government, for non US involvement abroad, and for the constitution, but beyond that, who knows. I'd like to think that they are part conservative republican, minus the foreign policy & religion. Most Libs I know are disgruntled fiscal conservatives, or at least seem that way. Until that is, you listen to Bill Maher.
  16. Pujo

    Pujo Rookie

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2005
    Messages:
    6,572
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    US Libertarians (as in members of the US Liberarian Party, which I'll refer to with a capital L) generally agree on core beliefs better than most Democrats or Republicans would with other members of their party. But you're right that there's a lot of disagreement on specific issues.

    Some Libertarians think roads, police, and even the military should be privatized (this school of thought is called Anarcho-capitalism). Other Libertarians believe the government should control industries where a natural monopoly has to exist (like owning roads, since you can't have meaningful competition because you can't just add roads if you don't like the existing ones). That school of thought is called Minarchism. Geolibertarians believe in private ownership of everything but land, which they hold to be a communal resource. There are other schools of libertarian thought, too: agorism, Lew Rockwell's "paleo-libertarianism", left-libertarianism, etc.

    The real problem is that if you put any 100 people in a room, you'll always get 100 opinions. No group can perfectly represent all of its members, and we're just trying to fit a square peg into a round hole by trying to limit people based on their label.
  17. Real World

    Real World Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    144
    Ratings:
    +295 / 4 / -2


    I agree. That last point was what I was trying to explain to them. Also, it's easier to agreewhen your agreement holds no weight. For example, we here could agree to a set of guidlines to solving an issue, but we aren't in office. If there were 51 Libertarians in the Senate, we very well could see the same set of BS we see in the Senate today. When differing opinions matter, as in signing policy into law, divisions and practices change dramatically.

    As for the types of Libs you describe, you are right on point. Some were certifiable loons. They were opposed to licenses of any kind, opposed to borders, and felt that government should be optional in virtually every sense, as privatization would take its place. How do you privatize roads? Who gets to drive on them? What if someone doesn't want to pay for the road, where do you go from there? Police, Fire, ect...wierd stuff from some of those people. Not all, just some.
  18. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,730
    Likes Received:
    125
    Ratings:
    +160 / 4 / -4

    Oh, come on, Pujo. The vast majority of Republicans are conservative. (Do I really need to prove it?). There are more conservatives in the Democratic Party than there are liberals in the Republican Party. That would mean, if anything, that more conservatives than the Gallup poll showed support anti-smoking regulations.
  19. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,068
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    Why don't they criminalize Tobacco, make it ILLEGAL, for Christs Sake the god-damn screwballs are telling law abidng citizens that they can't use a LEGAL substance in their own f-cking house.

    Where is all the outrage from the dorks that don't want us to look in Arabs Sneakers?

    WHERE THE F-CK ARE THE LEFT WING SOCIALIST FREEDOM FIGHTERS, WHERE ARE THE CONSTITUTION CRYBABYS, WHERE ARE THE CIVIL LIBERTIES WHAILING SLOBBERING BLOWHARDS, WHERE THE F-CK IS JIMMY SISSY CARTER AND CRAZY AL GORE?

    TOBACCO IS LEGAL IT IS SOLD IN THE SUPERMARKET AND THERE ARE BASTARDS OUT THERE THAT ARE TELLING PEOPLE THEY CAN'T USE IT IN THEIR OWN HOME.

    JESUS CHRIST, DON'T WIRETAP SOMEBODY THAT WANTS TO KILL YOU BUT CRUCIFY THAT GUY THAT WANTS TO SMOKE IN HIS OWN KITCHEN.

    Please help me Jesus :eek:

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>