Why must people try to assume a position of moral authority based on the silliest things?

[Bocaj2000]

snip

I will answer the only part of the OP that was a question:

Probably not.

*EDIT: Now on with my anger. First of all, more people smoke than you think, and considering smokers a minority is ignorant and downright stupid. Second of all, you have no idea how arrogant your self-righteousness sounds. And lastly, I haven't seen anything about smoking on this forum; you're exadurating and making a mountain of an anthill.

Good luck with ending that apartheid against smokers!

 

[theironbat46]

If you smoke, fine with me. You know the risk, you don't need someone yelling at you 24/7 about it. If I had a friend who smoked, we would still be friends, I would just tell him to take it out outside and don't do it around kids and pets. You know, common courtesy.
Any way:
I can't drive because I'm not old enough.
Can't pay taxes because I don't make enough money too.
I recently stopped eating fast food because most of it started tasting disgusting. The only stuff I get now are frappe from McDonalds. And not to be a hipster ass. Because they taste AWESOME.
I have no idea where my trash goes.
So you know.

 

[Wedlock49]

My body is a temple. Tobacco and Marijuana are my incense.

 

[schroing]

Were you planning to contribute something more than a discussion of semantics? This thread is a response to a recurring series of threads, and while it MAY be ironic, it's actually completely relevant. I'm asking people to demonstrate some courtesy, just the same as I try to random individuals in public. I'm also trying to highlight the general hypocrisy of people that live in industrialized countries, claiming that smoking is horrid; so obesity, but I don't see any threads about that, simply because obesity has no immediate and direct second-hand health impacts. It still kills more people than smoking does.

My first and second statements were contributions within themselves; this thread is ironic. "The exact opposite of what it should be."

But, of your arguments; believing against things and taking action against them are two different coins altogether. Not everyone has the means to take as drastic measures as you suggest, first of all, and not everyone is entirely educated about them. That doesn't make them hypocrites, it makes them people in unfortunate situations.

=Use the search bar, and type in 'smoking'. I'll wait.

*twiddles thumbs*

Okay, I searched, and there's close to 100 results for smoking, throughout the Escapist site. I've posted in at least 4 threads about smoking over the last month, and in each of those threads, a majority of people have decried smokers as people that are marginally better than sewer scum.

Seriously, I'm not supposed to get tired of that after a while? Next, you'll tell me that the civil rights or women's rights movement were just a bunch of people that took their mistreatment a 'little personally'.

My opinion, just like my habit, is a minority position, from the outset; that doesn't mean that the majority gets to treat me like shit, because if I was any other obvious minority, people would scream 'discrimination', even if I wasn't inclined to.

People feel sorry for drug addicts, and will contribute to public rehab programs and publiuc education, but they'll vilify and marginalize people that at least pay exorbitant amount for a LEGAL bad habit?

#1 - I've read through a few of these threads, and again, I'd call your claims hyperbole. From the most recent one, for example, I can recall exactly one poster who claimed that smokers were stupid in any other way than deciding to smoke. Lots of people say things like "They're idiots," but what exactly does that mean? Are you going to interpret it as "smoking is bad," or "people who smoke are bad"? I have a pretty good feeling of the way the people meant it.

#2 - Speech and action, again, are different things.

#3 - You made a conscious -choice- to become a smoker. People don't make choices to be black, white, gay, etc. Lots of people do the exact same to say, chavs, or the religious, or the anti-religious. None of them cry about it, and when they do, they're generally dismissed for that reason.

#4 - I doubt that people who support the...illegalization of tobacco wouldn't then pay for things like rehab and public education - oh, they do pay for public education - nor do they consider the legality of it to be a deciding factor.

 

[schroing]

I wouldn't -be- insulted.
Because this is the internet.

Holy shit. News flash: Not everyone thinks like you, and that doesn't make them wrong.

Right back at 'cha.

 

[Commissar Sae]

you don't drive
you don't buys things that have to be transported to you by non-green vehicles
you don't pay taxes towards road and transportation upkeep
you don't get your power from a coal-burning power plant
you don't (knowingly or unknowingly) support clear-cutting, the oil-sands, or resource-harvesting corporations
you don't eat fast food
you don't buy cosmetic products or consumer good that are made of, tested, or otherwise harm animals
you don't have a dwelling that remains weather-proof due to oil-based products
you don't produce any sewage or waste that goes into the river and lakes, or must be transported to a landfill
you don't maintain your dwelling, or allow it to be maintained using gas or electric landscaping methods, or non-natural products.

Well:
-I don't drive or own a car, public transport all the way.
-Most of my recent purchases have been via digital distribution and I buy a lot of my clothes second hand so that cuts out most of the transport damage.
-I pay taxes but as a low income student get pretty much everything back in returns.
-Living in Quebec all my electricity is produced by hydro-power
-I don't actively support clear-cutting or such-much but some probably happens in my name anyway, not much I can really do and don't care overly much anyway.
-I eat plenty of fast food so you've got me there.
-I don't buy cosmetics period. I guess maybe my deodorant, shampoo or soap may have been tested on animals but its probably unlikely.
-Sewage goes to a treatment plant that then eventually ends up in the river, nothing I can do about that.
-I have no control over the buildin since I'm a tenant. But still don't really care over much.

So overall my impact is rather small. Do I somehow feel superior to everyone because of this... No not really. You smoke, power to you, I won't support your habit but I'm not going to critisize you for it either. Don't blow the smoke in my face or smoke in my apartment and were fine.
I do agree that self-righteous people condemning the faults of others are generally a pain in the ass and should probably be a bit more introspective. They suck but what are you going to do?

 

[Commissar Sae]

My body is a temple. Tobacco and Marijuana are my incense.

That sir deserves a cookie!

 

[Sonofadiddly]

...Discussion value?

What? This topic is loaded with discussion value! Jesus, how could you not think of anything to discuss?

At the time, I thought there wasn't any and it was just him bitching.

Now, however, I DO know that there is much, and not due to your post, discussion to be had.

Okie dokie then.

I also think it's interesting how people tend to see anyone engaging in a behavior that is addictive and/or bad for your physical health and label them as bad people. This includes drug usage, smoking, playing video games, and eating. I recently had a "body image" discussion, and it's seems to be true that eating for pleasure is looked down upon because it suggests that the person who is eating lacks some kind of self-control. Often when referring to eating for pleasure, we say "I was bad." But eating, even to the point of binging, does not make someone fundamentally "bad." But if people engage in this behavior, it's like there's something wrong with them, either that they are not strong enough to maintain a constant diet where they deny themselves everything that they crave, or they lack some kind of morality. This applies to smoking as well, and gaming. They are all activities that people are made to be ashamed of, when they don't actually hurt anyone else and don't necessarily hurt the person who engages in them.

 

[Aerodyamic]

Obviously, that doesn't apply here. Do you think that 'textual abuse' is a thing?

That's your arguement? That I used 'verbal' to describe the written word? Way to focus on the point. Are you saying text can't contain insulting and abusive words?

So you believe in, say, cyberbullying?

It's not a case of believing in it yourself. It's a case of the thousands of moronic school girls who take all forms of communication so seriously that they suicide etc.

Besides scale, what exactly differentiates the OP from this? He read some opinions that he didn't like, they got through his skin and he took them personally. Instead of committing suicide, he's just angry (or at least hostile).

Use the search bar, and type in 'smoking'. I'll wait.

*twiddles thumbs*

Okay, I searched, and there's close to 100 results for smoking, throughout the Escapist site. I've posted in at least 4 threads about smoking over the last month, and in each of those threads, a majority of people have decried smokers as people that are marginally better than sewer scum.

Seriously, I'm not supposed to get tired of that after a while? Next, you'll tell me that the civil rights or women's rights movement were just a bunch of people that took their mistreatment a 'little personally'.

My opinion, just like my habit, is a minority position, from the outset; that doesn't mean that the majority gets to treat me like shit, because if I was any other obvious minority, people would scream 'discrimination', even if I wasn't inclined to.

People feel sorry for drug addicts, and will contribute to public rehab programs and public education, but they'll vilify and marginalize people that at least pay exorbitant amount for a LEGAL bad habit?

What? you want support for your habit? There is rehab for smoking too you know.

You know why it's vilified? Because it is legal for you to smoke poison. More importantly, it is legal for companies to push poison into you for higher and higher prices. No one here is saying that you as a smoker are an evil fiend, they are saying that you as a smoker are breathing poison and they don't want your poison around them.

Again, you missed the point. If I was addicted to heroin, I would be pitied, and coddled, but as a smoker, I'm treated as though I'm worse than the guy that breaks into houses to steal things to sell for heroin.

And to go with the whole 'no smoke stacks in their room'? I don't live with anyone but a cat, and I've pointed out before, I CHOOSE to not smoke when people that don't are in my home or in my car. However, if you walk down a busy street, you're going to inhale pollution produced by cars, like it or lump it.

Where do you people live, that smoking inside of ANY PUBLIC PLACE isn't against about 4 different civic statutes? If I smoke inside an open-air bus shelter, I can get a ticket for smoking in a public building, which is a $500 dollar fine, and charged with public mischief, which starts at a $250 fine, and requires a court appearance, and the possibility of a criminal record.

Seriously, all the smokers have been chased outside, in 99% of the industrialized countries.

Well, I was thinking more on the outside of a restaurant, you know, where they have the tables covered with umbrellas sometimes.

But regardless of my wording on that, I hope you got my point; neither one of you are in the better moral ground here. The problem is that you're vehemently trying to justify your own habits with strawmen/ad homenims and disregarding any valid points that the "high horses" are making.

No, around here, you can't smoke within 15' of a public access, or any patio, so that's still not a plausible situation. Anyways, you're telling me that my smoking is a greater pollution producing that a car? What, not a valid argument?

...I've never mentioned anything about pollution or that cars cause more pollution than smoking....and no it's not a valid argument because it's not the pollution that kills people (second hand smoking notwithstanding). Pollution has never been the argument against smoking. It's like saying "if you hate people who drink alcohol, then tell me that you don't dump food in the garbage because the wastes pollutes our water source more than alcohol!" See? Doesn't fit.

Um, you're a little off target there, sonny.

People complain that second hand smoke has negative health impacts, and so does a car. Cars produce more ppm of harmful airborne pollutants than cigarettes do. In fact, it's often claimed that second-hand smoke is a massive factor in cancer amongst non-smokers (I'm not up-to-date on those stats, so I'll let you worry about that), and I've pretty accurately pointed out that the direct pollution from a car is more dangerous than my second-hand smoke, because of the massive difference in the scale of exposure.

If my argument can be directly supported and relevant, it's not a strawman. If it doesn't agree with you, however, it obviously must be.

 

[The Austin]

I don't know.
I hate people like that, people who just assume that their beliefs are better than yours.

If you smoke, good for you, that's your choice, just as long as you don't do it anywhere where it inconveniences people, than why not?

 

[SuperSuperSuperGuy]

Anyone who deliberately gets on a metaphorical high horse and parade around on it frankly deserves to be pushed off it. So, yes, I agree.

I really don't think anyone was on their high horse in those threads.

This just looks like the OP is trying to make excuses for doing something he enjoys. Mostly via finger pointing.

Did you read any of the threads over the last month that concern smoking? I'd guessing that you had too many other, important things to do to bother. Let me give you examples from the 'poll without a poll' from the other day:

Your poll's missing a poll. And personally, I find it disgusting. I have friends who smoke, and I won't call them out on it or anything, but I do really wish they'd give it up. It's just a really filthy habit and anyone who does smoke is risking their life, the lives of those around them when they smoke, and are basically perpetuating and supporting an industry that does so much harm to people and profits from causing ill health in others.

Smoking is disgusting. Absolutely disgusting. I don't quite understand what stupid idiot introduced something so terrible into our society. My mom smokes. It's awful. She coughs all the time and my teachers at school were concerned about me because my clothes always smell like smoke until I told them that my mom smokes. I hate it. *Sniff* OK, now my eyes are watering. Smoking's always been a touchy subject. I know what it does to people. It, to me, is a complete disregard for common sense. I'm... concerned, y'know? Millions of people are suffering. Tortured. Having their lives controlled by tobacco. Throwing away thousands of dollars just to satisfy a craving that will, eventually, in some way or another, kill them. There have been many, many people who have lots loved ones to the cigar or cigarette. I just hope that I won't be the next one to lose someone...

Yellowed teeth, foul breath, acrid smoke. Yeeeeaaaaaah, no way that's attractive. Oh, did I mention the death?

These are the people I'm talking about. However, since you brought it up, nowhere do I 'justify' my bad habit; I do point out that I'm by no means as great a danger to the fabric of space and time as many other people, and yet I'm treated as though I have a penis covered with seeping boils growing from the middle of my forehead by people on these forums.

Funny, I don't ever shirk from admitting that my habit is unhealthy, but maybe I should point out that I'm an industrial roofer. Guess what the prevailing cause of death among roofers is?
Lung cancer. Lung cancer from inhaling fumes that are produced by the products we use to make roofs water-tight.

I think life is going to kill me before my cigarettes do, and I'm also obliging when people are willing to be adults about requests that I smoke in a way or place that won't cause immediate respiratory distress responses. For instance, asthma attacks, severe allergies, children or elderly being present, and the like.

Finally, I'm completely aware of the health risks associated with my smoking, but are you aware that if you walked up to me on the street and harassed me about smoking, you'd be accepting health risks too? Think about all those cars zipping by, producing exhaust, and tell me that it's so much healthier to breathe those fumes, which are being produced in much more massive quantities than my second hand smoke.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. Wait a minute there, pally. I know that that second post's mine. I don't hate anyone specifically because they smoke. Nope. It's just a touchy subject with me. See, my mom smokes. I can see that it's having a REALLY negative affect on her life. I mean, a lot. I'm worried... And I can get carried away. If you enjoy your lifestyle, then more power to ya! I love to see people doing what makes them happy. It's just that, well, I'm concerned for my mom. She smokes a lot. She coughs all of the time. She's tried to quit, multiple times, even, but nothing's working. And, you know what, yeah, I pollute. Yeah, I accept health risks. You can, too, if you want to. I just think that smoking is not good, but that's 'cuz it directly affects my life the most. If someone I loved got run over by a car, I'd probably stop riding in one as much. I don't like the habit. Doesn't mean I automatically don't like you.

Once again, touchy subject. I, personally, think that it smells awful. I don't have anything, like, asthma, but, whenever I inhale a puff of second-hand smoke, I go into a coughing fit, and I can just taste the toxins. It's a horrible experience.

Would I ever smoke? No. Would I ever spend my life with someone who smokes? Probably not. Would I ever try to persuade anyone from trying a cigarette? Yeah, definitely. Would I actively try to get a friend who already smokes to quit? Well... no, unless they are obviously in need of some help. Would I stop being friends with someone who decides to smoke? Nope.

 

[Aerodyamic]

Were you planning to contribute something more than a discussion of semantics? This thread is a response to a recurring series of threads, and while it MAY be ironic, it's actually completely relevant. I'm asking people to demonstrate some courtesy, just the same as I try to random individuals in public. I'm also trying to highlight the general hypocrisy of people that live in industrialized countries, claiming that smoking is horrid; so obesity, but I don't see any threads about that, simply because obesity has no immediate and direct second-hand health impacts. It still kills more people than smoking does.

My first and second statements were contributions within themselves; this thread is ironic. "The exact opposite of what it should be."

But, of your arguments; believing against things and taking action against them are two different coins altogether. Not everyone has the means to take as drastic measures as you suggest, first of all, and not everyone is entirely educated about them. That doesn't make them hypocrites, it makes them people in unfortunate situations.

=Use the search bar, and type in 'smoking'. I'll wait.

*twiddles thumbs*

Okay, I searched, and there's close to 100 results for smoking, throughout the Escapist site. I've posted in at least 4 threads about smoking over the last month, and in each of those threads, a majority of people have decried smokers as people that are marginally better than sewer scum.

Seriously, I'm not supposed to get tired of that after a while? Next, you'll tell me that the civil rights or women's rights movement were just a bunch of people that took their mistreatment a 'little personally'.

My opinion, just like my habit, is a minority position, from the outset; that doesn't mean that the majority gets to treat me like shit, because if I was any other obvious minority, people would scream 'discrimination', even if I wasn't inclined to.

People feel sorry for drug addicts, and will contribute to public rehab programs and publiuc education, but they'll vilify and marginalize people that at least pay exorbitant amount for a LEGAL bad habit?

#1 - I've read through a few of these threads, and again, I'd call your claims hyperbole. From the most recent one, for example, I can recall exactly one poster who claimed that smokers were stupid in any other way than deciding to smoke. Lots of people say things like "They're idiots," but what exactly does that mean? Are you going to interpret it as "smoking is bad," or "people who smoke are bad"? I have a pretty good feeling of the way the people meant it.

#2 - Speech and action, again, are different things.

#3 - You made a conscious -choice- to become a smoker. People don't make choices to be black, white, gay, etc. Lots of people do the exact same to say, chavs, or the religious, or the anti-religious. None of them cry about it, and when they do, they're generally dismissed for that reason.

#4 - I doubt that people who support the...illegalization of tobacco wouldn't then pay for things like rehab and public education - oh, they do pay for public education - nor do they consider the legality of it to be a deciding factor.

My claims may be hyperbole, but they're not unjustified; most of the respondents in the latest thread were of the 'smokers are stinky, evil, polluting people that have no consideration for anyone else.' So, I've countered by pointing out that I, as an example, am conscientious, and well aware of the health risks I impose on myself. I'm also pointed out that there are many things that have a greater health impact on the world around us, that people willingly ignore.

On the point of 'people may have said this and meant something else', I, like you, am forced to interpret what I read based on the tone of the response, because the written word so rarely directly projects the meaning or intent of the writer. So, when I see people write 'smokers are idiots', and little else, I'm forced to interpret that as a loaded and literal description of the smoker, from that point of view. I will then relegate that person to the same place I relegate religious bigots and fanatics. It sucks, but they're obvious unwilling to even meet me halfway, in a civilized discussion.

And I seriously doubt that the people that would like to see tobacco made illegal would then support rehab. I wouldn't mind my rights extending as far as theirs do, though; they have the right to disapprove, and I have the right to pursue my bad habit, and we should be equally courteous, and try to not aggravate each other.

That so rarely happens, in my experience.

 

[Agayek]

Holy shit. News flash: Not everyone thinks like you, and that doesn't make them wrong.

In this regard, it actually probably does. Getting upset at just about anything on the internet is extremely silly, especially considering the propensity for trolls.

 

[Normalgamer]

Didn't know that unborn fetuses can survive and move outside their smoking mother, and I didn't realise that babies can move from the man smoking in the restaurant.

I'll agree that bothering you about it is extremely annoying, but if your smoking in a public place with children around I'd be annoyed too, you seem sensible enough to where your not so your harming anyone thus nobody has the right to ***** to you.

I don't smoke, I find it to be a, to be frank, disgusting habit, and I've had a bit too much experience with cancer to even be tempted to do start.

As for your points:

1) It is the responsibility of the parents, and no one else, to ensure the health of their child. That means taking the proper precautions during pregnancy, and exercising control of their children in public places. No one else is responsible for that. If they choose to expose their children to such things, it's probably for the best. That way, we might actually be able to evolve past the astonishing level of stupidity/lack of common sense that's so prevalent in humanity.

2) Public places are just that. Smoking should be perfectly legal, especially since second-hand smoke is more or less a fallacy outdoors. You would have to be standing within 3-5 yards of the smoker for the entire time he was smoking to even feel the effects, and it's basically impossible for permanent damage unless you make a habit of it. If it's indoors, the only person who has the right to decide that is the owner of the building.

I should not have to move to avoid you're cloud of death.

And, if I smoked, I shouldn't have to stop just so you don't have to walk an extra 10 feet.

Your argument is "I disagree with X, therefore it must be banned". I sincerely hope I don't have to explain why that is a terrible way for any government to run (hint: it's the slogan of dictators and tyrants throughout history).

1) No no no no no no no no n o no on on onwin ai;r nv;ioanwinvrwin NO! "Responsibilty of the parent's" is such bullshit in my opinion, a child can't choose his/her parents, and because you got knocked up and chose to be a parent doesn't make you any wiser or more able to take care of a child, why should the child have to suffer for the parent's dumbassery? I will mount the horse so high I can reach the ceiling when I get to discuss wether or not parents should be allowed to smoke with their children near-by.
2) I'm not saying it should be illegal, I'm explaining why some people might ***** to him about it.

 

[Jumplion]

Um, you're a little off target there, sonny.

People complain that second hand smoke has negative health impacts, and so does a car. Cars produce more ppm of harmful airborne pollutants than cigarettes do. In fact, it's often claimed that second-hand smoke is a massive factor in cancer amongst non-smokers (I'm not up-to-date on those stats, so I'll let you worry about that), and I've pretty accurately pointed out that the direct pollution from a car is more dangerous than my second-hand smoke, because of the massive difference in the scale of exposure.

No, I'm not off target. Again we're not talking about pollution, you're going on a strawman [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman] here (though I could be completely wrong there, I admit). Where have I ever commented on pollution with smokers? Of course cars with their emissions cause more pollution, but I've never argued that.

What most people argue with smoking is the personal destruction of your own health. Like I said before, the Tobacco industry is one of the few industries that profit from the deaths of their customers, right next to the funeral/cremation/burial/ect... industry.

You're trying to justify your own bad habit when nobody really asked you to (and yes, it is a bad habit, you cannot deny that). You know the risks and consequences of being a frequent smoker, right? And yet you still choose to smoke, at least initially, until the addiction kicked in and it became a habit. That's what people do not like about it.

Once again, I don't mind smokers. You are free to to what you want with your body, whether it's drinking till you black out, sucking a "cancer-stick", sticking syringes in your arms, or yodel before bed. But you have to understand where the "high horses" are coming from, right?

If my argument can be directly supported and relevant, it's not a strawman. If it doesn't agree with you, however, it obviously must be.

Now you're just trying to patronize me, ironically acting on a "higher horse" like the pople you're complaining about. Your statistics may be supported, but we're not talking about pollution. In your original post, you go on to say "If you're so pure and innocent, why don't you prove to me that you [pointless list here]". The problem is, nobody you've quoted ever claimed that they were clean from environmental impact. I believe that's an Ad Hominem [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem] fallacy, though, again, I'm not good at pointing out fallacies, so take it how you will.

 

[Agayek]

1) No no no no no no no no n o no on on onwin ai;r nv;ioanwinvrwin NO! "Responsibilty of the parent's" is such bullshit in my opinion, a child can't choose his/her parents, and because you got knocked up and chose to be a parent doesn't make you any wiser or more able to take care of a child, why should the child have to suffer for the parent's dumbassery? I will mount the horse so high I can reach the ceiling when I get to discuss wether or not parents should be allowed to smoke with their children near-by.

See, here's the thing. If we leave it all up the parents and they make dumb decisions, one or both of the following will happen: 1) The parent(s) die(s) or 2) The child dies. In either case, it's entirely the fault of the parents, who if they are alive should be held accountable for involuntary manslaughter at the least, or we've rid the gene pool of one more contributor of the stupid gene. It's a tragedy if the child were to suffer consequences for it, but you, nor I, nor anyone else has the right to dictate another's actions.

 

[Agayek]

No, he's the problem. If you're a problem you should have to take the punishment for it.

So you have the right to walk up to someone and order them to leave because you don't like what they're doing?

We can take your argument and apply it to music. For example, someone's standing at a bus stop waiting on their bus listening to a boombox or something. Your argument insists that if it is music you personally find disgusting and headache inducing, you have the right to insist he stops the music or leaves, even though he's been there God only knows how much longer than you.

That's probably one of the most selfish and narcissistic worldviews I've ever seen.