Articles of Interest

Articles of Interest

From Canada, The Windsor Star

Gradual stripping away of freedoms

Comox Valley EchoJanuary 9, 2009

It was with dismay but not surprise that I read the editorial reprinted from the Times Colonist regarding Dr. Perry Kendall's recommendations for yet more laws to be passed dealing with alcohol. What disturbs me more is people's apparent willingness to keep tolerating this gradual stripping away of our personal freedoms.

Are we so busy being concerned about political correctness that we can't see what's going on around us? We are being told what to do and how to live constantly; in school, on TV, on the job, everywhere we go. These rules and regulations often come about as a result of "studies", a lucrative business indeed, especially in the case of health. Fats, carbs, vitamins, coffee, tea, you name it, it's been studied to death. But it doesn't stop there. Seems all the studies don't agree, so we need more. I guess to disprove last year's study, and then inform us. Or tell us they were right after all. Or because a study's no good unless it gives the hoped-for result, so scrap it and do another one. Ow, feels like a good swift kick in the wallet to me.

Bad enough that John Q Public has to foot the bill for this, like it or not, but we shouldn't have to endure the added indignity of having the "results" used to justify unfair bans and taxes. I guess the extra taxes could be used for yet more studies. Personally, I don't relish having to pay for the stick they plan to beat me with.

In the UK in 2007, the government, in a fit of absolute lunacy, decided to ban cheese ads for children, because someone somewhere had decided cheese is bad for us. Diet pop was not banned. Where has common sense gone? Britain's fanatical antismoking legislation has had a devastating effect on the economy, particularly for pub owners. Apparently, unemployment and poverty are better for your health than having a cigarette in a pub. But, that's OK, folks, because smokers are dirty, dangerous antisocial cretins who don't know what's good for them. Make no mistake, portly ones, they're coming for you next. Or have you not noticed that people seem to feel free to insult "overweight" people now, because the government has decided how much you should weigh. One of the first steps in social engineering is to ostracize the target group.

Don't things like toll-free rat lines scare anybody? Doesn't it bother you that schools undermine parental authority by promoting the government's agenda? This same government which allows big pharmaceutical companies to bombard us constantly with ads flogging pills for minor ( possibly even nonexistent) ailments, even though the side effects can kill you? Nice to hear, though, that Health Canada is "in the process of creating stronger wordings" on product labels such as Champix, an antismoking drug, because taking it might cause you to go crazy and/or kill yourself or someone else . These are the same people who expect you to believe little Willy will wilt if you smoke.

If people don't take a stand now, we could all end up living nice healthy lives, subsisting on bags of People Chow (complete nutrition guaranteed) and ingesting prescription drugs by the bucketful. That's not living, that's livestock. And what does livestock do but provide profit for the owner.

Well, I'm not livestock. And, like Winston Churchill (who, in addition to fighting for our freedoms, drank, smoked, and ate chocolates until it finally killed him at age 90), I will never surrender. They'll have to pry that KitKat from my cold dead hand.

Lynne Powell

Courtenay

Toledo Blade - Letter to the Editor January 7, 2009

Prove deaths from secondhand smoke

The Dec. 23 contributor to the Readers' Forum who wrote about Ohio's smoking ban must be clairvoyant as well as a member of the American Cancer Society. I wonder how he reached into the minds of voters to know whether or not they were misled. More than 2.2 million voters voted "Yes" on Issue 5. When they voted, they read exemptions for family owned businesses and private clubs. To me, they truly voted for these exemptions.

The writer also talked about the harm from smoking, but had no names of people who have died from secondhand smoke. That's because there are no names; these are computer generated numbers. I'll give him names: Eugene Clark, killed while "just stepping outside" to smoke outside a bar at age 30; Mazen Alwarad, stabbed when he stepped outside his 7/11 on his smoke break at age 37; Darrell Adams, who stepped outside to smoke, fell, broke his neck, and died; a Florida high school teacher who was shot as he stood across the street off school grounds; a Malaysian couple beaten to death for smoking, and a Cleveland gas station attendant who amazed police that he lived after being beaten with a brick by a man waiting for him to step outside his safe work environment to smoke so he could rob the gas station.

These are all real people who have died (or almost died) because of smoking bans and the hatred created toward smokers.

I would like to challenge the writer to produce names of people who have died from secondhand smoke. Better yet, I challenge the writer to put the evidence on trial. I've been looking at the Federal Judicial Center's Reference Manual on Scientific Evidence, 2nd Edition, and I think his proof wouldn't hold water in a federal court of law.

Pam Parker

Cincinnati Enquirer - Opinion Letter - December 29, 2008

Law Represents a Loss of Freedom to Choose

Remember the freedoms we once had to think and choose for ourselves in the not-so-distant past, before our state allowed the SmokeFreeOhio advocacy group to declare us too stupid to do so with the Issue 5 smoking ban in 2006?

Private property business owners chose smoking or nonsmoking.

Employees chose their preferred working atmosphere.

And members of the general public were not so simple-minded that they lacked the ability to guide their own feet inside or away from a business that was not of their own preference.

I suppose Ohio smokers should bask in the safety that forced protectionism affords them - I mean the safe protection of being forced outside to smoke, where they risk being robbed, mugged, raped, or murdered. It's supposed to make people healthier in the ice, rain, snow, and extreme heat or cold?

I bet the senior citizens and disabled really appreciate that.

I'm sure some freedom-hating nuts will say: "They shouldn't smoke."

How kind of them to force smokers to accept them as their master. That's a powerful example of a loss of liberties.

Ohio citizens were so "fortunate" to have the right to allow the American Cancer Society, a.k.a. SmokeFreeOhio, fan the flames of our constitution by forcing private property business owners into servitude and obedience at all cost.

When Ohioans wake up, they might remember how to speak for themselves and ask SmokeFreeOhio and the American Cancer Society who funded the smoking ban, and what product they market and profit from. I bet someone's profits increased from the sales of smoking-cessation products. What a concept!

The Issue 5 smoking ban ballot initiative in 2006 was nothing but deceit and lies.

Despite what the initiative's proponents may say, Ohioans voted for family-owned business and private club exemptions - period.

Shame on SmokeFreeOhio, and shame on Ohio for letting them get away with it. Ohio citizens and business owners deserve better.

Linda Hubbard

Readers should read the comments left to this article. As of January 9, 2009, there were 570 comments.

Support SB120:

Give Ohio the Exemptions Voted for in Issue 5 - Return Freedom of Choice & Let Free Market Drive the Decisions of Business Owners