His being “right there with them” doesn’t make the effective segregation acceptable.
Though it is prerogative to handle himself and others how he wishes in his own home.
However this speaks of the larger picture which is the agenda to attempt to pressure smokers to cease their chosen indulgence by means of discomforting and inconveniencing them.
Anti smokers believe that if those that choose to smoke are forced, with the state’s help, to relocate or be subjected to inhospitable environments they will give up their experience altogether. This thinking is flawed.
Anti smokers will cite health statistics (sorry, guess what, cigarette smoke is reactive in my body too. Your Second Hand Smoke argument might be accurate but is not relevant).
I know that to some of you my argument for being able to sit, leaned back and relaxed in a restaurant or bar, savoring a cigarette with my bourbon or fine cognac like aged beer is an alien concept, but to some of us it is not.
Indulgence. Hedonism. I’m aware the concept isn’t for everyone.
But let’s talk hedonism:
In this age where pot smoking is gaining legal ground while the government cracks down on (heaven forbid) the smoking of tobacco, what is one supposed to think?