Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Jreengus]

I am not Christian! Your quotes bounce of my impervious atheist skin! In fact I'm going to go out and do the exact opposite to what they said!

Some one find me a wooden beam to stick in my eye!

EDIT: wooden not wonder, yay for misclicking when spell checking.

[G-Flex]

All Siquo is saying is just because you don't enjoy something that's not harmless doesn't mean it's worthless and/or should be banned.

Nicotine is a drug that by all sense and logic should be as illegal as LSD, the only reason it is not is because the ciggy companies were too well established to shut down when dangerous and addictive drugs started getting outlawed and make far too much money (both for themselves and for the government) to be shut down. That, combined with the scarily high addiction rate, near social acceptability and few serious short term effects all combine to allow millions of people every year to happily poison themselves with an exceedingly toxic cocktail of addictive chemicals while thougherly enjoying the expierence.

For example, LSD shouldn't be illegal.  When you read that, you're going to dig up or spout claims that LSD is dangerous.  You'll say it can provoke psychosis, or make people jump off buildings.  You might even say outright falsehoods like "it's a poison" or "it makes your brain bleed."  Then I would say something like "some of the most amazing experiences of my life were on acid" and that even though I haven't touched the stuff for some time and have no intention of doing so again I have absolutely no regrets.

The analogy doesn't hold because LSD actually has profound psychoactive effects that people often find positive, and isn't so destructingly addictive. It just isn't the same.

Indeed. On your part.

That's not what W'all said. What W'all said was:

W'all: We'll allow you to bash us for smoking once you stop driving cars!
Y'all: NO THAT MAKES NONSENSE CAMELS DON'T RUN UP BLUE!
W'all: I don't think you're listening.
Y'all: DON'T GIVE ME THAT ADDICT LOGIC DO I NEED TO REPEAT MYSELF?!@?!one!1

Thank for you again completely misrepresenting what people are saying in order to support your own argument.

Driving cars and smoking are not analagous. Yes, it is bad to drive cars when unnecessary, but it is often socially necessary to drive cars. Cars are necessary for the way of live of many, many people, and if everyone were to stop using gasoline overnight, society would suffer severe repercussions. It is not feasible for people to stop using it because they rely on it. There is no decent reason why anybody needs to rely on tobacco; it is a completely unnecessary evil.


You keep saying stuff like "You DO know that YOU harm people, RIGHT?". Yes! I do know that! It's important in ALL aspects of one's life to try not to contribute to harming others at all. However, it's not really feasible to live in a first-world country and never do anything that harms anyone, because some of those things are fundamentally necessary to our way of life. Sure, conserve gasoline and energy, but your average person in the US simply doesn't have the reasonable choice to just stop using fossil fuels. There is a strong difference between harming people as an indirect and unwanted side effect of living in a society you don't have absolute power over, and harming people/yourself by doing something that is completely unnecessary and provides no benefit, like habitual smoking.

[nil]

....doing something that is completely unnecessary and provides no benefit, like habitual smoking.

Here's where your argument breaks down.  That smoking harms your health is without question, but that that is has no benefits whatsoever is your opinion, and an easily contested one at that.  Lots of people claim to enjoy smoking. I may not be a habitual smoker, but I myself enjoy a cigarette occasionally; as long as you don't inhale too much it can be a pretty pleasant little stimulant. 

edit: Not that I really want to defend the car analogy, unless someone is arguing for a sidewalk cigarette ban (which I don't think you are, right?).  Something you need to get a job is in a different category than optional vices like cigarettes and MMORPGs.

[Aqizzar]

In Arlington, Texas, it's illegal to smoke inside your own car if you're too close to a commercial building.  "Too Close" being I think 100 feet, which as even the cops will point out means that to smoke anywhere in downtown Arlington you'd have to be standing on the median of the main boulevard.  The cops don't bother enforcing it.

I just thought I'd throw that real-world scenario out there.

[Alexhans]

hey! Mister! lady!

f you wanna watch ridiculous arguments pulled from a magician's hat, with no sense at all, nor any visible desire to try and put oneself in the other man's position...

Read this thread...

It will stink like a jean jacket after a good ol' smoke.

Disclaimer:  The people who made those obviously flawed arguments won't go back to them if they realize how flawed they were.  They will just pretend they never happened.

[G-Flex]

....doing something that is completely unnecessary and provides no benefit, like habitual smoking.

Here's where your argument breaks down.  That smoking harms your health is without question, but that that is has no benefits whatsoever is your opinion, and an easily contested one at that.  Lots of people claim to enjoy smoking. I may not be a habitual smoker, but I myself enjoy a cigarette occasionally; as long as you don't inhale too much it can be a pretty pleasant little stimulant.

That's pretty much why I continually refer to "habitual smoking", where it's not even so much for pleasure as it is to satisfy an addiction.

So I guess "no benefit whatsoever" is a bit too absolutist. If smoking weren't addictive, I probably wouldn't be saying half of what I'm saying, but its addictiveness is pretty goddamn extreme. After all, I don't have a problem with a guy having a cigarette every once in a great while because it helps him relax or does whatever else, but that's not what most smoking is. Most smoking is done to satisfy a physiological and psychological need created by smoking.

It's about its usefulness vs. how much damage it actually causes. Its usefulness is debatable on the individual level. The damage it causes is irrefutable, and even continues to damage people who no longer want to use it whatsoever, due to addiction, and corporations profit from said addiction hand-over-fist. That's the problem.

A lot of things are of arguable utility that varies with the individual, but you have to consider the harm it actually does in practice.

[Rashilul]

Anyway, (Has not read whole thread) I don't drive a car (unless I really need to) and am against smoking.
I can't abide the smell of car exhaust or cigarette smoke.
Every time I go to a city I literally get sick. But, whereas car exhaust may be bad, cigarette smoke will get me into a fit of coughing. I have to cover my mouth every time I go near one.
So, you can smoke if I can throw up on you. Fair deal?

Note: Not directed at any smokers with trouble quitting as much as 'cool' kids who are just starting up.

[nil]

A lot of things are of arguable utility that varies with the individual, but you have to consider the harm it actually does in practice.

That's totally fair.  I only object to singling out smoking as categorically different from all the other things that aren't all that good for you that normal adults do.

[Neruz]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

[Reasonableman]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Except for the many PSA's, warnings, educational programs, and other, to put it bluntly, propaganda (accurate and necessary, maybe, but propaganda nonetheless) in all manner of American media. I'd swear it's illegal for tobacco companies to run ads on television nowadays.

[Aqizzar]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Your very existence and activity in this thread proves how wrong that assumption is.

[Neruz]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Except for the many PSA's, warnings, educational programs, and other, to put it bluntly, propaganda (accurate and necessary, maybe, but propaganda nonetheless) in all manner of American media. I'd swear it's illegal for tobacco companies to run ads on television nowadays.

What i mean is that if you're an Alcoholic, generally people do not want to be affiliated with you, you'll usually receive huge pressure to go clean and people will usually be pretty disgusted with you.

If you're a Smoker, people won't want to be around you when you're Smoking, but you won't be subjected to anything like the same level of derision and if you're not smoking at the time most people won't care at all.

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Your very existence and activity in this thread proves how wrong that assumption is.

Har har; i meant society in general Aqizzar.

[Aqizzar]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Your very existence and activity in this thread proves how wrong that assumption is.

Har har; i meant society in general Aqizzar.

And what makes you think you're the minority?  Try lighting up a cigarette anywhere near a middle-scale restaurant or outside a hotel, and watch how fast people look at you like you just tried to light a fart.

[Neruz]

I feel i should also point out that addicts of any kind (Alcohol, Food, Video Games, Drugs) are generally looked down upon by society, with the singular exception to Nicotine.

If you're addicted to anything else, shame on you. But if it's Nicotine, hey, that's fine.

Your very existence and activity in this thread proves how wrong that assumption is.

Har har; i meant society in general Aqizzar.

And what makes you think you're the minority?  Try lighting up a cigarette anywhere near a middle-scale restaurant or outside a hotel, and watch how fast people look at you like you just tried to light a fart.

Yep, and they'll be looking upset at you because of the cigarette, not because of you.

If an alcoholic downs a bottle of scotch everyone will be pretty disgusted, and will continue to be disgusted even if you take the bottle away. If a nicotine addict lights up everyone will be pretty disgusted, but only until he puts the ciggy out; they're disgusted by the cig, not by the smoker.

[ToonyMan]

Untrue.