My aplologies for making an "offcolor" joke. I often use extremes to make a point and as for labeling, it has been done to me for being a southerner and remains on that thread. I took no offense because I understood the tongue-in-cheek humor.
Let me try again:
I feel the smoking/nonsomking issue will be a subject for politicians to spin on their campaigns in order to gain votes. I cannot for the life of me believe that the arguements that arise for/against are anything other than bipartisan.
I believe that the arguement of "I don’t agree with this so why should I pay for it?’ Is moot, as it opens a can of worms for tax-payers to dictate where there medicaid deductions go based on personal issues rather than the good of the whole. If we go that route, it is self-defeating from the outgo, I tried to make that point by imitating "mindless political rhetoric" in opposition to the tone taken with me, but I exercised poor judgement by being too explicit and for that I apologize. In light of two extreme positions and a country divided, this question leaves no room for compromise.
My idea for a solution would be to post "smoker friendly" signs visible from the road for businesses who choose to cater to smokers. In Georgia a few cities have chosen to be smoke-free. As far as a state ban, it has come before the GA congress, been passed by one side (don’t remember which) and voted out by the other. Perdue is on his way out due to this issue along with a few others. Not because of what he supports but because he gave a whole different message while campaigning. I see this issue (smoking/non) as a tool in the hands of politicians to further divide, and DIRECTLY AFFECTING THE FOOD BUSINESS, thereby drawing them into politics whether they would like to be there or not. If you believe this is a non-politically driven issue you are sorely misguided.
Because this issue is deeply entrenched in bipartisanship, it has become an issue of NO COMPROMISE. Why can’t a privately owned business decide for itself? Publicly display their preference and then let citizens choose for themselves? Some taverns go as far as to post "We are Cigar Friendly". One will know at the door and choose to leave or stay. Why is this not even a proposed option?
BECAUSE IT IS POLITICALLY DRIVEN. Otherwise a business owner could decide for Him/Herself how they wanted to handle this issue. Based on their particular circumstances they could make the best business decision for their individual needs/clientele/culture etc. There is such a diversity in our country that I just don’t believe anyone should make a decision for us all, especially not knowing ones circumstances.
Another solution might be a "Club". By this I mean if a proprieter/proprietess chooses to cater to cigarette smokers, cigar smokers, and pipe smokers He/She could do so on a membership basis. This would make it possible for those who wish to smoke with their meal/drink to be able to do so. Charge a buck, heck charge $5.00 to join, whatever. But then it is no longer a public place. Make it easy at the door to gain membership. I have seen this used for after hours clubs and restaurants. Folks can do what they came for and those who do not wish to partake can stay away.
I guess this solution is too simple.
Copper
PS In the event this is my last post here, Hasta Luego.