The Glade 4.0

The same line that it currently is.

Smoking is bad for society.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Then so is chocolate cake I guess.

Smoking causes cancer of the lungs, throat, and mouth. It causes asthma and emphysema, and a litany of other diseases not only in those who use tobacco products, but in those who may simply be unfortunate enough to share space with them.

I won't argue that chocolate cake isn't bad for society (LOL?), but I will argue that it is not nearly as detrimental as smoking is to the economy and to the health of society.

Your argument is illogical. You should be arguing that not only is it OK to discriminate against smokers, but that it is beneficial to society for us to dispose of them.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

To expand on Rynar's point, the issue is with moderation.

Having a cigarette or cigar once in a while is perfectly fine and not really a huge hazard to anyone. Possibly annoying to those around you if they don't like the smell or have allergies, but that's about it.

Similarly eating chocolate cake once in a while is perfectly fine and not a hazard to anyone.

However most "smokers" don't smoke occasionally. They smoke regularly and constantly. Generally a 1/2 pack a day habit is consider to be a very light habit. Cigarette packs are a minimum of 20 cigs, so that's smoking 10 cigarettes a day.

That would be like having a slice of chocolate cake for breakfast, lunch and dinner and then probably a morning and afternoon snack as well.

I challenge anyone to claim that doing that would not be disasterous to one's health.

I'll simply suggest you're speaking from a position of extreme bias and that you really don't have evidence to support this argument.

_________________

Not exercising is harmful as well and is arguably bad for society. Maybe employers should make this mandatory as well?

If he were making that argument, he would be arguing on the side of the collective rather than that of the individual.

It sure would be easier if the Gov't disposed of "them" for the good of society...

_________________
"Dress cops up as soldiers, give them military equipment, train them in military tactics, tell them they’re fighting a ‘war,’ and the consequences are predictable." —Radley Balko

I think that if you broke down the calories you'd find that most people do in fact ingest a "slice of chocolate cake" for every meal and then some.

_________________

With our move towards universal healthcare, it absolutely is. Now if were talking about high fructose corn syrup, as opposed to chocolate cake, I might agree with you.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

The issue is one of logical consistency.

There is nothing logically wrong with an argument in favor of collective good rather than individual rights. You can scream all you want about the morality or effectiveness of such thinking, but from a logical standpoint it's just as valid as an argument regarding individual rights. One can even logically attempt to create some hybrid assigning a value both outcomes.

Lex is not obviously doing any of that, but merely randomly assigning personal opinions to the argument. Logical consistency is really essential in any form of discussion for it to be anything but a shouting match.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

So are most recreational drugs when used at a frequency considered recreational as well as lack of exercise and poor diet. You're only reinforcing the point you are supposedly arguing against within the context of the framework being discussed.

Like not following the laws and rules of society, thus endangering others' lives and property?

Lex, I would think that you'd be hugely in support of employment and citizenship requirements. If everyone is on the same page health/ability-wise, we're bound to grow even faster technologically (which I believe to be your desire), as we can shift our focuses elsewhere.

Unless you're only willing to go so far to achieve your idyllic society.

An example of "too far".
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/01/05/ne ... sidewalks/

GREAT NECK, N.Y. -- A tiny village on Long Island's "gold coast" is banning smoking on public sidewalks.

The Great Neck village board approved the ban at a meeting Tuesday night. It claims to be the first municipality in the state to enact such a restriction.

Mayor Ralph J. Kreitzman says the ban was enacted after officials got complaints about smokers standing outside stores in the village. He says the law will also benefit pedestrians who might have been subjected to second-hand smoke.

Kreitzman says violators found smoking on sidewalks in the 1.2-square-mile village could face fines of up to $1,000.

Neighboring New York City is currently considering a smoking ban in parks and pedestrian plazas.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

This is not true. Solving health issues is a major impetus for technological advances. Furthermore, unhealthy people who are skilled in an area should not be prevented from working.

Avoiding problems is usually preferable to being forced to solve them.

I'm craving chocolate cake now.

_________________
A man who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself. ~ John Stuart Mill

Not to mention cheaper and more efficient. Meaning more productive.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

No it's not. I imagine a perfect world where people can be lazy all day and not have to work and just have fun. Nutrition won't matter, exercise won't matter, etc. Of course they can exercise for the good feeling, but it won't be for health reasons. It's good to work towards that goal. People can smoke as many cigarettes as they want in this world. I don't see the point in banning them and then allowing them again.



There's more to life than just how productive you can be.

ALOL. You've constructed a futuristic utopian counter-reality? And your beliefs conform and report to it?



Your inconsistancy knows no bounds.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Productivity is great, but when it runs counter to free choice of lifestyle then it's not worth aiming towards.

Freedom of choice of lifestyle includes the freedom of association, which includes the right of someone to deny another person employment based on their personal preferences. Again, your logic is horribly flawed.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20 

Hiring people who aren't smokers isn't included in my version of lifestyle. It isn't horribly flawed at all.

The people you choose to associate with isn't included in what a lifestyle is? Bad argument is bad.

_________________

Ezekiel 23:19-20