The dangerous habit of pointing the finger at other potential or current targets of “public health” in the hope of distracting it from persecution of smokers stubbornly persists in spite of the glaring evidence of failure.
As an example amongst many, here is that of George Koodray, complaining about the singling out of smokers as victims of discrimination and unfair health care fees. Who can disagree with the statement: “This kind of philosophy in general is punitive and almost a predatory philosophy towards smokers, because I think they’ve just been an easy target over the past few years”? Certainly not us.
But what would fat people think when they read: “There are a lot of other lifestyle habits, including overeating …”
What about smokers when they read: “ I’m a cigar smoker, and I have only three or four cigars in a given week at the most. … [But should policies like these] include a person who’s at three packs a day and include them with a person who might smoke a cigar or two a week?”
What about drinkers when they read: “Why is it that there isn’t some sort of consideration for those who drink alcohol to excess, or use drugs, for that matter, or engage in other unsafe practices? That can involve all kinds of things, from parasailing to motorcycling. It opens up an entire, unlimited universe."
So, let’s put it all together.
To render justice to smokers, perhaps fatsos must be put on a scale and tie health insurance fees to excess pounds.
To render justice to cigar smokers or light smokers, maybe insurance fees should be tied to the number of cigars or cigarettes smoked – it’s inevitable! How that is going to be determined is hard to tell, however. Perhaps by using some kind of implant in the body to measure the consumption?
To render justice to smokers, drinkers should be punished also, along with “drug users and other unsafe practices”.
So, after admitting that smoking and drinking and eating are unsafe practices (implication: “safety-minded” people should avoid them), and thus implicitly accepting “educational” government intervention (and proportional punishment), justice should be rendered by going after all those other lifestyles as well: it is unfair to punish smokers only – so punish them all!
They are getting there, Mr. Koodray, they are getting there – and fast. And don’t you think for a minute that they won’t dare. The unlimited universe you are talking about is just opening up. And one of the reasons is because the victims keep on pointing fingers at each others and beg the tyrant to be fair, instead of disobeying and overthrowing the tyrant so that there will be no more victims. So… "public health" simply complies with the “popular demand” of smokers and goes after the rest!
Just look at what’s happening in England about drinking and food, for example. Let us, for once, break an arrow in favour of “public health”: the poor chaps need technical times to persecute 90% of the population and render justice to cigar smokers! Not even good old Adolph managed to round up all the Jews in concentration camps in a day, did he?… Please be patient! And when complete persecution is achieved, against whom will we point our finger next? No one, probably, as we will all feel content to be treated “equally”.
Not us, thanks – especially when the "other side" of Mr. Koodray, Helen Darling, President of the National Business Group on Health which supports the discrimination, states that "There’s no healthy way to smoke or use tobacco … a terrible behaviour and a long-term suicide." Using tobacco is so unsafe and terrible, in fact, that our Darling cannot even scientifically prove that one death is caused by it amongst the million claims by the dazzling statistical shell gane of the health cons.
She is welcome to come to us and demonstrate that death, but she will not, of course. What does ideology have to do with science, anyway? And as long as smokers keep on pointing fingers at other groups, they will deserve all the abuse they are getting – and all that is still to come.