It was widely predicted that bans on smoking in personal autos when children are present would lead to bans in parents’ own homes. Personal choice and rights are irrelevancies to the anti-smoking mind-set. Blogger Michael Siegel, MD, has no problem admitting that guardians of property rights "told him so."
Is passive smoking dangerous to children or adults? It is sufficient to watch the short documentary that we have just produced to realize how ridiculous just asking that question is.
Michael Siegel points out sacred points on the foundation of family and parental custody – foundations that “tobacco control” has no problem violating and destroying to proceed with its criminal agenda of cultural engineering and social intimidation. Siegel says: “If you are willing to control the behaviors of adults in their private home merely in order to reduce health risks for their children, then there is a whole slew of regulation that you should be willing to support, including …” and the list begins – as a dare to “public health” to suppress and control virtually every move any citizen could make. In fact power-thirsty and immoral “public health” is not likely to shirk at tyrannizing over anything and everything.
However, early in his essay, Siegel states: “In fact, secondhand smoke exposure in the home is a far more serious public health problem; thus, it becomes incumbent upon you to also promote smoking bans in the homes of children. Alas – this is a line that we should not cross.”
It’s a line beyond a lot of lines that never should have been crossed, but after decades of passive smoking being propagandized as something far worse than mustard gas (with a good chunk of the foolish public now believing this), the antismoking bastards MUST cross the homeowner’s threshold — for the children! … and then for the old folks, for the guests, for the cable guy, for the dog, the imperiled mailman, the defenceless dust mites … it would be "immoral" if they didn’t!
How would Michael (and all those who have accepted "reasonsble restrictions on smoking" in the first place) feel if the parents where exposing their children to crystal meth? After all, it produces poisonous fumes to which children are often exposed although, according to the trash propaganda circulated by “tobacco control”, the “passive smoking-related deaths” far exceed those of crystal meth. The crucial point, in a sane world, would be that intense exposures and explosions in home crystal meth factories really do kill real people. Sanity however is lost. "Passive smoking deaths," or "statistical corpses," are delusions, but have no doubt whatsoever, the deluded will invade every corner of your life, and send you to jail, exactly as their paranoia directs them to do.
We are sure that even the most hardcore Libertarian would not object too much if parents who prepare truly fuming and explosive drugs in front of their children were punished to protect the child, right? What’s the fuss about home invasion or parental custody, then, if the parents exhale other propagandized “deadly fumes” around their children, given that Siegel states that, “In fact, secondhand smoke exposure in the home is a far more serious public health problem”?
We are where unbridled fanaticism and fraud get you. The fact is that secondhand smoke – anywhere and for anyone – does not represent a danger for health. Its dangers have been fabricated by criminals who have used blatant epidemiological frauds to create the moral and legal bases for the eradication of smoking from society, which delights immense pharmaceutical interests (not just the sale of smoking cessation trash, but that of antidepressants, too), that pay off most of the tobacco control bastards in the first place.
As long as the public health fraud on passive smoking stands as a health issue, and as long as epidemiological junk science is the basis of policies, arguing where to draw a line that has no reason to exist will do no good whatsoever, as there will be no limit to the abuses and to the constitutional or moral rights violations. Lots more will follow, such as alcohol and food control and prohibition, as the issue here is total behaviour control everywhere the citizen is, whatever he does, whoever he is.
The more apathetic we remain, the more we delay punishing the “public health” fraudsters, the greater the hurdle (and the cost!) will be to get rid of them when we will not be able to bear their abuses anymore. Cowardly compliance with rotten laws shall be repaid with ever-increasing tyranny. We are where we are, in Hell, because too few fight back. The temperature will keep rising right up until the moment you find the courage to do what you must do.