You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #129: so does the fumes from the cleansers used to sanitize buildings... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
NuttyFluffers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-08-06 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #63
129. so does the fumes from the cleansers used to sanitize buildings...
so do the contagions people carry around when they don't wear masks when they're sick. should we start writing laws for that, too? how about gloves as well? y'know, illnesses do take a heavy toll on the body. all impurities lead to another step closer to death. oh noes!

look, i don't mind sharing the world with smokers and non-smokers. and i know our world is chock full to the brim with carcinogens, disease, and dangers every single place i go. i learn to live with it, ask for intervention for the really big, i'm powerless to inform and protect myself in time, stuff (like radioactive materials, health codes for food prep, outside air quality, etc) and ask for common courtesy of live and let live for the rest. some places, like nurseries, hospitals, airplanes, and some restaurants shouldn't have smoking inside. some places like some clubs, casinos, and dance halls should. i am powerful enough to inform and protect myself in time when it comes to areas that would expose me to secondhand smoke. i am not helpless enough in this case to require a huge power like gov't for intervention.

does everyone need their own polyurethane bubble to be happy? have we learned nothing from kindergarten? is sharing really all that hard?

jeez, take a chill pill, we're all gonna die, freakin' out over this isn't gonna buy you a day longer. besides, there's far more serious health risks out there for non-smokers than second hand smoke allowed in a few avoidable establishments that choose to cater to a smoker clientele. i think the, now overruled, toronto policy was best, let the business itself choose. that way you can choose the level of risk you are comfortable with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC