Hi Dragan..



>>Personally I'd ask that a seminar be in a smoke-free environment but I am not in favor of forcing the establishment (in this case) to obey smoe (IMO) overly-intrusive set of laws. Let the free market decide...
>
>Well how free is it?

Not nearly as much as even a few years back I suppose.

>
>Funny that the country where smoking was invented, and whose movie industry was advertising smoking for decades, now turns so sensitive about any trace of smoke in the air, and yet you don't see so much sensitivity about the contents of the food (antibiotics, hormones, pesticide residues, aspartame, escherichia coli), or the air or the water. Fox News fired two reporters because they didn't want to tweak their findings about the contents of the milk - the dairy industry is heavily advertising there. The burger industry successfully avoided the enforcement of federal inspection against escherichia coli, by some high court ruling.

Indeed.

Still, it makes no sense to me whatsoever to blame the hamburger for the fat kid. Where's the notion of personal responsibility in all of this.

Remember... Whenever someone uses the word "other" that means you and me. <g>

>
>These stories can be found in the media, can be found on the web (can't speak of censorship), but the only thing which is extensively campaigned for is to stop smoking. Everything else of the kind, you have to search for, or be just lucky to stumble upon. Sounds so much like a scapegoat to me.

Indeed..

As I mentioned, while I do not smoke anymore (I quit in 1972) and while I also find the smell of smoke distasteful as Tamar does, I do not agree with what seems to me to be the over-demonization of smokers. I think it's quite rude but apparently it 'fits' the "everyone is a victim" mentality.

Why not restrict life as everyone dies from it. <bg>