Winnipeg Free Press
28
October 1999
The following are excerpts from Tom Oleson's
Thursday column:
as reference, please see Punishing a Minority
"Moral fanatics blow smoke "
Having had the temerity to point out in this column last week that the anti-smoking crusaders should at least have the honesty to present the justification for their crusade, as this is a kind of phony holy war, rather than continue to try to defend with discredited science their intrusion into the rights and freedoms of others, I find myself accused of many odd things and challenged to defend many others. ...None of this really has anything to do with where or when people should be allowed to smoke, except that there is no convincing science - at least no science that would convince anyone who was not already converted that secondhand smoke is seriously bad for anybody.
The kind of evidence that we do get in support of of the anti-smoking crusade can be seen in a report released this week by an anti-smoking coalition. No one knows what causes Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), a phenomenon in which children simply and inexplicably die in their sleep. The coalition, however, reports with absolute certainty but no proof that 105 children in Canada in 1999 died from SIDS ''caused by second hand smoke." This is not science. It is an expression of faith; worse, it is an expression of fanatical belief.
Governments have the right to ban smoking wherever they choose to. (No person's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session is an article of faith that cannot be repeated too often.) But when they pass bylaws that say restaurants or bars and other privately-owned establishments must ban smoking, they should admit what they are doing. They are not enforcing any scientifically supported health measure; they are infringing on the rights of others through what can only be called moral fascism. I don't like it, so you can't do it.
Let's not pretend that it is anything else that has a basis in science or religion, although certainly it has precedents as old as the first moral dictator. That is why smokers and non-smokers alike who value their freedoms should oppose it.Tom Oleson is a Free Press editorial writer. His column appears on Thursdays.