|
Smoking Hypocrisy
28 February 2002
(We
link, with thanks, to the Free Republic Message Board)
Commenting on a Nova Scotia news
article that criticizes the government for not enthusiastically embracing
recommendations to "reduce smoking in the province", Dr. James O'Brien,
psychiatrist - private practice, Baddeck area of Cape Breton
comments:
"....I have reservations about
the motivation of doctors in our no-holds-barred, anti-smoking stance. ... It
is worth noting that there seems to be a distinct difference between the
attitudes of physicians toward the use of alcohol and tobacco. ..... Neither
have I heard of physicians or our organizations say much about the deleterious
effects of exhaust fumes on health, nor have I noted any trend on our part to
use more fuel-efficient, less polluting vehicles, ... "
The reason for the selectivity is
explained by his observation that "...a large
majority of physicians are non-smokers, while probably an equally large
majority are drinkers—even if mostly in moderation. ... We also love our
gas-guzzling SUVs. It is therefore easy and painless for most of us to campaign
against tobacco since our comfortable lives would be little affected even if
smoking was completely banned."
Thank you for speaking up Dr.
O'Brien. In today's climate of
approved hatred against tobacco and its consumers,
your article is courageous. While the Hippocratic Oath appears to be no longer
extant these days, it's encouraging to think that with more physicians of your
caliber, it won't devolve into one that is 'Hypocritic'.
Woman denied job because she smokes
Regina woman told not to apply to lung association
23 February 2002
A reader's
response to this article
Denied a part-time telemarketing
job by the Saskatchewan Lung Association because she occasionally lights up,
the lady is contemplating filing a human rights complaint. She will find that
it's not only legal, but also encouraged in today's sick society to
discriminate against smokers whenever possible. It's part of the government
sanctioned social engineering experiment to promote a smokefree
Canada.
The Canadian Cancer Society plays
the same game. (see FORCES Toronto - Press
Release) Rather than offering
potential employees assistance in quitting if they got the job, denial of
employment is a much better sledge-hammer and has the added 'benefit' of
diminishing the person.
"If the Lung Association came to
my door asking me for a donation, what am I supposed to say: 'No, I'm not going to donate because I smoke,' " she
said. "I don't have a problem with non-smokers, so they shouldn't have a
problem with me."
Yes ma'am, that's exactly what you
should say - to any of the 'caring societies' who go begging for bucks. If
their policy is smoker harassment, why on earth would you want to donate? Let
the financial burden of spreading this policy fall on the perfect people whose
lifestyles they applaud.
Open letter from George Kachulis, owner
of Jack Feeney's Bar And Grill - Ottawa (ban imposed August 2001)
21 February 2002
With thanks to
FORCES Maine
 , this posting is available.
So, according to the anti-smoking
faction, bans are good for business?
"This January was the worst
in 12 years of business. I was down in sales 24%. That's about $22,000. Some of
it is probably due to technology layoffs, and some to the dollar and economy,
but we have faced these type of issues before in our 12 years. The only factor
we haven't faced is your smoking bylaw. Cause and effect...even you can figure
that one out.
It's hard to argue that employees don't have the right to a
healthy workplace. Funny thing is, the only non-smokers that work in my
establishment are my partner and his wife out of 35 persons. My staff are
complaining because they are no longer making decent money.
I pay almost
$35,000 a year in property taxes. I've never paid as little sales tax or GST as
I will for January. I guess the government will charge everybody with that one,
not just smokers. "
Assuming that the "partner and his
wife" involved are simply non-smokers, NOT anti-smokers, when are the
proponents of these smoking bans going to put their money where
their mouth is when it comes to socially engineered cultural change? Few
'peasants' these days believe the
'dangers' of secondhand smoke nonsense, and even
fewer of those who weren't convinced up to now pay any attention as the
realities of this smokefree experiment really start hitting home.
Anti-Smoking Tobacco Control Insider
'Blows The Whistle' on the Anti-Smoker Agenda and
Tactics
14 February
2002
Explosive
Posted on Forces Toronto
by Permission of Luc Martial who is,
"The only professional
worldwide to have comprehensively worked on the issue from within advocacy,
national health community and government environments, Luc Martial has been at
the forefront of every significant tobacco control campaign in Canada over the
last decade. He has successfully laboured as a government lobbyist and policy
analyst with the Non-Smokers’ Rights Association (Canada’s most
aggressive advocacy group on the issue), as a Data Specialist and Public
Affairs Manager with the Canadian Council on Smoking and Health, as the
Director of the National Clearinghouse on Tobacco and Health and as an
Evaluator for both the Office of Research, Surveillance and Evaluation and the
Office of Policy and Planning within the Tobacco Control Programme at Health
Canada. In June of 2001, Mr. Martial abruptly resigned his posting with the
Government of Canada. As an independent consultant, Mr. Martial now works on
behalf of legitimate industry stakeholders in bringing much needed
accountability to the issue and legitimacy to the process."
The princess who hinted at
pleasure
14 February 2002
Reflecting on the death of England's Princess
Margaret at the age of 71, columnist Mark Steyn comments:
"...I note that most reports begin with
references to "years of heavy smoking" or, alternatively, "of heavy smoking and
drinking." The great Australian wag Tim Blair contrasts this with the
obituaries for Linda McCartney, who was respectfully styled as a "committed
vegetarian": when a committed vegetarian dies of cancer at 56, it's just one of
those things, could've happened to anyone; when a heavy smoker/drinker lives
out her three score and ten, she's a victim of her addictions."
Until a 'cure' for death is found,
we'd do well to remember the pleasure factor when it comes to living. Those
with a puritanical bent, and fierce desire to be around for the 'cure', are
free to deny themselves whatever pleasures and comforts they figure will
prolong their existence. A lot of us just don't figure existing is enough. And
that's a premise those who haven't faced the inevitability of mortality just
don't understand. |
