How can you tell Simon Chapman is mucking about over his head?
Petrol panic: it's hard to tell who's stupider, the Government or the governed
The changing fortunes of KFC in its homeland and overseas
Home smoking bans are "a serious encroachment on privacy"
Sugar taxes are unfair and unhealthy
Adelaide considers taxpayer-funded prostitutes
New York's Department of Education bans over 50 words including 'dinosaur', 'Halloween', 'birthday' and 'dancing'
"Popcorn may be the perfect snack food"
Internet porn banned in Egypt
A social engineering experiment too far
ID cards were nothing compared with this government's snooping plans
Farting fish
2 comments:
I notice the Salon article still manages to point out all the "health hazards of SHS". As long as they stick to upholding "the fraud", then how can the expect not to encourage more infringements on private property rights by way of rental and condominium housing private home smoking bans. They want it one way, "the fraud", yet they want it the other way, without giving recognition to "the fraud" (of SHS) being the fraud that it is in the first place, thus perpetuating the infringements on rights and liberties. And of course, all the anti-smoking commenters pick up on "the fraud" (SHS harm) and use that to say the smoking-bans are legit. Unless and until someone addresses the SHS Fraud and publicly denounces it, then infringement of property rights and liberties will continue. And it won't be the smokers denigrated. It will be everyone denigrated. And they can't complain, after all, they still continue to uphold "the fraud", so they will have to lose all property rights altogether. It's like slitting their own throats, these anti-smokers who believe in "the fraud", giving it credence.
I knew it would come to this, given enough time. On that list of 50 words being banned from utterance in NYC, it includes:
"Alcohol (beer and liquor), tobacco, or drugs
"Cigarettes (and other smoking paraphernalia)
"Junk food
Post a Comment