Is smoking in public rude?

Things change.

In the past 100 years:
- We know second hand smoke kills
- People now bath more and smell less
- Health costs are more shared

So if I walk into a room and do something that is unpleasant, unhealthy, and could cost the other people in the room monetarily (e.g. that sweather must be washed now), isn't that rude?


LVL 10
BobSiemensAsked:
Who is Participating?
I wear a lot of hats...

"The solutions and answers provided on Experts Exchange have been extremely helpful to me over the last few years. I wear a lot of hats - Developer, Database Administrator, Help Desk, etc., so I know a lot of things but not a lot about one thing. Experts Exchange gives me answers from people who do know a lot about one thing, in a easy to use platform." -Todd S.

jonnyz0109Commented:
I think it's rude to smoke around people in general, whether in public or not.  I personally have athsma and am allergic to cig. smoke (so I have a hard time breathing and I get migraines when around cig. smoke).  It drives me up the wall when people stand just outside a door and have their smoke (i.e. in the north when it is cold), because the smell comes right into the lobby area, or when they stand downwind of a stationary group of people.

Previous I am speaking about outside... I think people should not smoke inside public buildings at all, and when they are in private buildings they should ask whoever lives there / owns the building.

Not to mention the health concerns, and the other things that you mentioned.

~ Jonny

Whats more rude... talking on the cell phone around people or smoking around people, in public?  I would say smoking...
0

Experts Exchange Solution brought to you by

Your issues matter to us.

Facing a tech roadblock? Get the help and guidance you need from experienced professionals who care. Ask your question anytime, anywhere, with no hassle.

Start your 7-day free trial
MattuuggiCommented:
Is it rude?  Good question.  I am a smoker and have generally been aware that not everyone smokes and try to act accordingly.  If I am in a designated smoking area, or in public then I have the right to smoke.  Having said that , if someone ever asked me to put  out my cigarette then I would.  Most people do not and take the passive aggressive approach and complain to someone else.  The army generally taught me not to smoke inside and to clean up my butts, but I know not everyone does this.  

0
RDAdamsCommented:
Yes, smoking is rude.  I will qualify this by saying if you are in your own private space then what you do is your own business.  But in a public area where your actions will and do affect others then it is very rude.  

I am a non-smoker.
0
Cloud Class® Course: Microsoft Azure 2017

Azure has a changed a lot since it was originally introduce by adding new services and features. Do you know everything you need to about Azure? This course will teach you about the Azure App Service, monitoring and application insights, DevOps, and Team Services.

jonnyz0109Commented:
>>Having said that , if someone ever asked me to put  out my cigarette then I would.  Most people do not and take the passive aggressive approach and complain to someone else.

I guess I haven't ever asked someone to move away or put out their cigarette, but this is because I have always figured I would get scoffed at...  most people probably could care less about being considerate in my opinion.
0
MattuuggiCommented:
>>I guess I haven't ever asked someone to move away or put out their cigarette, but this is because I have always figured I would get scoffed at...  most people probably could care less about being considerate in my opinion.

You would be surprised how many people out there are willing to listen when asked, but it is all in the delivery though.
0
BabalooInternetCommented:
Well, Like Mattuuggi said, it IS a good  question!! I'm a ex-smoker, and find smoking now more anoying than before I used to smoke.  But as long as a person smokes in a respective way, I do not have a problem with it at all.  I used to enjoy smoking but always kept a few etiquettes in mind

*Ask people around you if they mind you smoking
*Blow your smoke upwards instead of down or strait into the faces of other people
*Breath your smoke in as deep as possible, so that most of it stays inside your loungs and less comes out for other people to breath(it is the objective after all!)
*Never through your buds on the ground
*Try NOT to ash anywhere but INSIDE an ashtray
*Never leave your sigaret half-burning in an ashtray
*Don't talk with a sigaret stuck between your lips
*Never smoke while other people are eating
*Try not to smoke inside unventilated areas where there are other people around you(if you are realy "dying" for a sigarette you don`t have to take the people around you with you)
*Think of all the sh** you put into your body everytime you lid a sigarette!!

There's definitly many more smoking ettiquettes, and as long as people have respect for other around them I don't think it's that bad.  
Lov 'n Respect môn!!,  as the old Rasta used to told me!!
0
SMartinHamburgCommented:
to come back to the original question: yes, it is (my opinion)
0
germanpennCommented:
Smoking is socially admitted in open spaces. But save from that, rules are far from clear. Sometimes you see that smoking is forbidden (no smoking), but there are places that use a totally different rule, stating where you can smoke and banning smoking everywhere else (restaurants in general).
IMHO, it cannot be considered rude if you are exercising your rights. It can be thoughtless, depending on the place or the circumstances. tho (e.g., next to pregnant women, in the subway, etc.).

I am a non-smoker.
0
jonnyz0109Commented:
Being thoughtless, to me, is the same as being rude.  I know they are not the same word and their definitions differ, but this is my opinion just the same.
0
mattisflonesCommented:
First of all, this thread dont belong in a tech-TA, ask a moderator to move it to the lounge.

Secondly:
- We know second hand smoke kills
>>Says who? No study from a independent source exists.. But tons of studies of air pollution states that that is a much worse problem.

- People now bath more and smell less
>>And thus we smell the bodily odors more.. A couple of hours after opening hours on discos the whole place stinks of sweat and horrible amounts of perfume... Yach!

- Health costs are more shared
>>Dunno what you mean by that.. All i know is that i pay much more in tobacco taxes than i will ever cost the health system.

>>Ask people around you if they mind you smoking
Hmm.. 90% of anyone in a pub i`ve been to smokes, or they stay there of their own free will... So shut up! or open your own friggin non-smokers club.
The only exeption in my mind is establishments whitch serves food.
0
RDAdamsCommented:
ahhh that includes 99% of the PUB's in the world mattisflones I haven't been in all of them so I will refrain from stating 100%.  
0
mattisflonesCommented:
Dont know where you are trying to go with that comment, but if you read my comment you`ll see that i reffer to pub`s I have been in...
0
RDAdamsCommented:
Do the pub's you have been in not serve any food?
0
BDBushCommented:
Smoking in public is incredibly rude. Never mind that smokers are putting their own lives in jeopardy, but when they go out and start spewing their poison smoke in an area with children and non-smokers, it's the height of rudeness.....and should be considered criminal. Second-hand smoke has been proven to kill scores of people subjected to it. I think it's also quite insane to think that a smoking and non-smoking section in a restaurant is a practical idea. No matter how much you try, the odor and smoke itself will and does get into the non-smoking section. I think stronger laws need to be enacted for people who lack the common sense to use their automobile cigarette ashtrays instead of tossing their used butts out the windows or on the ground. Ultimately, the only place smoking should be permitted is within the confines of the smoker's home or car. Anywhere else definitely infringes on the rights of the non-smokers.
0
RDAdamsCommented:
Just as an aside the building I work in has been here for over 30 years and there is the "Smokers Corner" so to speak in the front of the building.  Even on a cool day when no one has been in the area for hours you can still smell the smoke from the accumulated odors of the years.  
0
mattisflonesCommented:
>>Do the pub's you have been in not serve any food?
Most don`t...

>>and should be considered criminal
So should driving a car, using hairspay, and so on..

>>Second-hand smoke has been proven to kill scores of people
Prove it! Not even WHO can present a non-partial research on that.
0
MattuuggiCommented:
>>I think stronger laws need to be enacted for people who lack the common sense to use their automobile cigarette ashtrays instead of tossing their used butts out the windows or on the ground. Ultimately, the only place smoking should be permitted is within the confines of the smoker's home or car.

Most states have litter laws that apply....in Tennessee...$250 - $500 fine plus community service picking up litter.  I believe it is safe to assume that it is comparable in other states.  My point being that it is not a matter of laws, but a matter of enforcement.  Most police officers have more pressing issues than chasing someone down for throwing a butt out the window.  BTW I do not throw them out.

0
BDBushCommented:
>>Prove it! Not even WHO can present a non-partial research on that.

Well how about using some common sense? Smoking puts an obvious pollutant into the body and into the air. You're going to try and argue that second-hand smoke doesn't hurt people?
0
germanpennCommented:
>>Smoking in public is incredibly rude

that is going too far. I told you 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 not to exaggerate!

>>Second-hand smoke has been proven to kill scores of people
Prove it! Not even WHO can present a non-partial research on that.

Mattisflones, I acknowledge that "scores of people" is, again, too much, but try hard not to make your judgment depend on statistics and so-called scientific research. Common sense is way better than that, and common sense indicates that smoking is really bad for your health, and can produce cancer. I do not rely on any possible lack of evidence to that effect, and so shouldn't you .

On the other hand I insist. Smoking in allowed places is not rude. You have the right to do that. You might be thoughtless, which is not the same as being rude. (e.g., If I do not say hello to a neighbour I am rude. If I say hello to him but omit to ask him how his sick child is, I am thoughtless). To be rude is to do what you shouldn't. To be thoughtless is not to do what you might do to make others' life better (but you are not making it worse if you don't).
0
BDBushCommented:
<<On the other hand I insist. Smoking in allowed places is not rude. You have the right to do that. You might be thoughtless, which is not the same as being rude. (e.g., If I do not say hello to a neighbour I am rude. If I say hello to him but omit to ask him how his sick child is, I am thoughtless). To be rude is to do what you shouldn't. To be thoughtless is not to do what you might do to make others' life better (but you are not making it worse if you don't).>>

Regardless.....it's rude.
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
mattisflones:

<<<First of all, this thread dont belong in a tech-TA, ask a moderator to move it to the lounge.>>>
Oops.  Honest mistake on my part.


<<<Secondly:
- We know second hand smoke kills
>>Says who? No study from a independent source exists.. But tons of studies of air pollution states that that is a much worse problem.>>>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2053840.stm

<<<- People now bath more and smell less
And thus we smell the bodily odors more.. A couple of hours after opening hours on discos the whole place stinks of sweat and horrible amounts of perfume... Yach!>>>

Two differences there.  First, those people are under the delusion that they are *improving* the environment.  Second, it's just an annoyance while in the proximity (i.e. it won't kill you and you can wear the same jacket the next day)

<<<- Health costs are more shared
  Dunno what you mean by that.. All i know is that i pay much more in tobacco taxes than i will ever cost the health system.>>>
I was just saying that the costs of smoking 200 years ago weren't being born by the nation (mostly just the family)

But why do you think "i pay much more in tobacco taxes than i will ever cost the health system"?
http://www.physorg.com/news2071.html


<<< Ask people around you if they mind you smoking
Hmm.. 90% of anyone in a pub i`ve been to smokes, or they stay there of their own free will... So shut up! or open your own friggin non-smokers club.  The only exeption in my mind is establishments whitch serves food. >>>

Is that different from "If you're black and you don't want to be hung, stay out of town after dark"?
0
jonnyz0109Commented:
In CT (and other states, I've heard) a new law passed with overwhelming support, both from the government, and the general people.  No smoking in any establishment that serves food or drink - including bars.

And I'd say about 9 out of 10 people I talk to (even many smokers) agree that this was a great idea.  Because like BDBush points out, the smoking/non-smoking section doesn't work unless they are separated somehow.
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
germanpenn:

<<<To be rude is to do what you shouldn't.>>>
Yes, that is the point.  I'd argue that you shouldn't do something that unnecessarily degrades an area in terms of safety and comfort.

For example, if I decided to spill coke on your white sweater (making it unpleasant to wear until washed) that would be rude, right?


0
jonnyz0109Commented:
<< To be rude is to do what you shouldn't. To be thoughtless is not to do what you might do to make others' life better (but you are not making it worse if you don't). >>

So smoking in public around other people is thoughtless, not rude.  By your defination that means you are not making their lives worse by being thoughtless... but how can that be?  I think (nearly) everyone here agrees that second hand smoke is NOT healthy, to say the least.  So, you must be making their lives worse, don't you think?

It's thoughtlessly rude.
0
germanpennCommented:
BDBush
>Regardless.....it's rude.

No, it's not.


BobSiemens
>Yes, that is the point.  I'd argue that you shouldn't do something that unnecessarily degrades an area in terms of safety and comfort.

I agree up to a point. For example, if I didn't have a bath in a month I would be stinking like hell and will be degrading the area (e.g., my office) in terms of comfort; but that cannot be regarded as rudeness. I would be thougthless in that case. I would be acting with disregard towards the comfort of the others, but I would not be violating any positive rule of courtesy.

Hmm...however, the difference is very slim...
0
BDBushCommented:
germanpenn
>No, it's not.

Yes, it is. If you're going to knowingly spew that crap from your cigarette in an area where non-smokers can come in contact with it, you're both thoughtless AND rude.
0
germanpennCommented:
I do not smoke, and I am greatly displeased by the smell of cigarettes. However, smoking is legally allowed in most places, and I do not think that sticking to the law may be considered immoral or rude, as it is part of the exercise of your civil freedom. It is a bit totalitarian to think that you can ban something just because you don't like it. If it is permitted, you can do it. If it is forbidden, you can't. If the smokers are so kind as to stop smoking because you are not at ease, it is because they are kind. But not being kind does not mean being unkind. They are not mofos just because they do not make an effort to indulge you.  
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
<<<However, smoking is legally allowed in most places, and I do not think that sticking to the law may be considered immoral or rude, as it is part of the exercise of your civil freedom.>>>

Most things that people would call rude *are* legal.  If I habitually walked behind plump women that I didn't know and said "Wow, you sure have a fat ass" that would be rude and not simply an exercise of my civil freedom.

Acting with disregard towards the comfort of the others is discourteous.  If it didn't occur to you and should have, that would be thoughtless.
0
germanpennCommented:
>>If I habitually walked behind plump women that I didn't know and said "Wow, you sure have a fat ass" that would be rude and not simply an exercise of my civil freedom.

Yeah, you are right there. But I am not defending smoking to that extent. Let me elaborate.

If I insult a fat woman, I know that will piss her off. But if I light a cigarette, it might not disturb the people around me. Not everyone is bothered by other people smoking nearby. So, in the first example I am being rude because it is socially agreed that insulting others is wrong, and everyone knows it bothers people. But in the second example there is no unanimous opinion. Some people may be bothered, some others not. In this latter case, I would only be rude if I smoke next to people I know (or should know) that will be disturbed by that. However, a thoughful person would first ask if anyone minds his lighting a cigarette (as cab drivers usually do).

In conclussion, it is not rude to smoke when you smoke (i) where it is allowed, and (ii) next to people you don't know or shouldn't know that are bothered by your smoking. But even though, it is thougthless if you do not make sure of the latter requisite.

What do you think? I think it is fairly consistent.
0
BDBushCommented:
<<In conclussion, it is not rude to smoke when you smoke (i) where it is allowed, and (ii) next to people you don't know or shouldn't know that are bothered by your smoking. But even though, it is thougthless if you do not make sure of the latter requisite.>>

You can't assume people aren't bothered by it, especially if you're not in a specially marked smoking area. It's produces a foulness in breathing air and a foulness in odor in the air. You're going to just assume people don't mind that because you don't know them? What person wouldn't consider it rude for someone to stand there and spew that foulness in the air around them? It's extremely rude.
0
germanpennCommented:
>>You can't assume people aren't bothered by it, especially if you're not in a specially marked smoking area... you're going to just assume people don't mind that because you don't know them?

BDBush. I do not smoke, I will never smoke, but anyhow, I am not bothered by it. Neither my family, nor many people I know. If you assumed they were bothered, you would be wrong. I am not talking about a metaphysical assumption. It is a FACT that many people could not care less about somebody smoking next to them. For that people, smoking in allowed places is not rude. So you cannot generalize. If thousands are bothered, and thousands not, there is moral and factual freedom. It is not like cussing, spitting, etc. which are generally looked down on.

If you choose to make your assumptions taking into account the anti-establishment side, it's your self-restriction problem, but you cannot force others to assume the same. Many like them, many don't, so it is totally reasonable that smokers shouldassume their freedom, and if they want to avoid any assumption, they will ask first.
0
BDBushCommented:
<<It is a FACT that many people could not care less about somebody smoking next to them. For that people, smoking in allowed places is not rude.>>

Afraid not. The FACT is that many people ARE annoyed and irritated when someone lights up around them. I never said it was rude if you're smoking in a smoking-permitted place.

<<Many like them, many don't, so it is totally reasonable that smokers shouldassume their freedom...>>

Actually it's not reasonable. It's a disgusting, vile habit that common sense would tell a person that others wouldn't want to be around it.
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
<<<Many like them, many don't, so it is totally reasonable that smokers shouldassume their freedom, and if they want to avoid any assumption, they will ask first. >>>

Well, probably almost no one *likes* them.

But if, as you say many like them and many don't, isn't it fair to say that a significant fraction won't?  Might that not be the crux?  If there was one person there, maybe fine, maybe not (i.e. ask).  Several?

Everytime I'm asked "Mind if I smoke", I say "No, go ahead".  I actually do mind, but it's good that they asked and I don't much like conflict.

I'd agree with your previous statement.  If you honestly believe no one minds, you aren't being rude.  But what constitutes due diligence in this case?  Also, is it OK to damage someone's health if they don't object?  Maybe so?
0
germanpennCommented:
>>The FACT is that many people ARE annoyed and irritated when someone lights up around them.

I agree. Many are irritated, but not all. Many are not.

>>Actually it's not reasonable. It's a disgusting, vile habit that common sense would tell a person that others wouldn't want to be around it.

I agree to the second part. It is indeed a disgusting vile habit. But that has nothing to do with your first assumption, this is, that assuming your freedom is not reasonable. Please logically elaborate why it is not reasonable that you should assume your freedom when there is no unanimous social tendency against smoking not any positive rule that prohibits smoking (save express prohibition).
0
germanpennCommented:
BobSiemens.

I agree. The best way to act is to ask first.

Do you agree that it is reasonable to assume your freedom when there is not an express prohibition? I know what you mean, if the minority that is not bothered by smoking is irrelevant, then you should assume otherwise, this is, that your smoking bothers the others. Thati is right, but it depends on factual evidence that I cannot provide. Based on my home-made, fellow-narrow-range statistics, I think that most of the people is bothered, and many is not (the minority, but I should not say an irrelevant minority, let's say 3 out of 10). I think that freedom is so important, so precious, that for that 3, I would not socially ban (mind you I said socially) smoking.
0
jonnyz0109Commented:
So it seems to me like the conclusion is that it is rude to smoke in public around non-smokers without asking if they mind first.  And I think I would generally agree with that statement.  And for the record, IF I could remember every single time someone DID have the courtesy to ask before lighting up in a public area (and I'm talking about people who wouldn't know whether I minded or not), I could count the number of times on a single hand.

Also, I'm a teenager (well actually I'm 20 now but I still feel like I'm a "teen") and I'd really like to see you ask most high school smoking peers to put out their cigarette.  They do what they want...

So that's why I came to my original conclusion that smoking in public is rude.. the fact is that most do NOT ask if others mind, at least in my world.  And I'm basing my conclusion on the majority.  
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
<<<Do you agree that it is reasonable to assume your freedom when there is not an express prohibition? >>>

I don't at all agree.  Some people like to be verbally humiliated.  If I said to the woman "You have a fat ass" it might turn her on.  Probably not.  Doing harm to someone based on 1) it isn't against "the rules" 2) they might not mind doesn't mean I should feel free to act.
0
germanpennCommented:
>> Doing harm to someone based on 1) it isn't against "the rules"

I did not mean legal regulations, but moral rules. Where do you think the qualifications of "rude" or "non-rude" come from? Rude is not what you personally and isolatedly think is rude. Rude is what society regards as that. Those are the "rules", the ethic and moral rules. And, indeed, if something does not go against such kind of "rules", it cannot be morally disregarded. Those are the rules I was talking about.

>>2) they might not mind doesn't mean I should feel free to act.

I totally agree. In fact, I could not care less about their individually minding or not minding. As long as society does not in general look down on smoking, people is free to smoke (excluding express prohibition). Like it or don't, it is part of democracy to bear other people's different tastes, whether they coincide with yours or not.
0
BDBushCommented:
It can be likened to a person with (pardon the crude example) flatulence. Common sense and decency would tell most people that others do not want to be around that odor or the person it eminates from. You know it's foul and vile, so it's logical to conclude that without having to ask a person around you if it bothers them, that it does. The same applies with smoking (at least when around others that you're not sure of their smoking or non-smoking status). Most smokers recognize the foulness of it but simply don't care because they're after their nicotine fix. Smoking is much worse than flatulence because the smoke has been found to harm anyone around it. It has a detrimental effect on the health of others around. It's a matter of common sense and common courtesy for a person to assume that someone doesn't like it and refrain while they're still around, than to assume "sure, they probably don't care" and then light up and cause harm to their health.
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
<<<I did not mean legal regulations, but moral rules. Where do you think the qualifications of "rude" or "non-rude" come from? Rude is not what you personally and isolatedly think is rude. Rude is what society regards as that.>>>

I more or less agree.  But the sticky point is that we have a sort of duality here maybe mostly based on tradition.

Do you think it is moral perform an act that is:
  - Volentary and purely for self gratification
  - Tends to physically degrade others health
  - Makes their clothes smell so bad as to make them unwearable if other clothes are available
  - Makes their hair smell (forces them to take a shower)
  - Makes their eyes burn
The answer comes back an easy 'No, that wouldn't be moral.

Do you think it's moral to perform an act that is:
  - specifically legal
  - commonly done
The answer sounds a lot more like "Sounds moral"
0
germanpennCommented:
It sounds too much to say that smoking is "immoral". I think it is just "uncomfortable" or something similar. I can't justify it, but immoral sounds too hard.

I don't mind telling I may be wrong after all http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2004/pr89/en/

It seems smoking is becoming rude. That is good. I do not smoke and agree it is prejudicial for health. I was just stating a theoretical point based on civil rights and democratic freedom.
0
BDBushCommented:
Another link....this one on the rudeness of smoking:

http://www.babelloyd.com/likeitis/likeitis0003.html
0
logicbodCommented:
No one seems to have pointed out the addictive qualities of this drug yet.  It's all good and well for you "unafflicted" non smokers to sit in your ivory towers shouting "RUDE BOY" at us smokers,  but you basically have no idea how hard it is to give this **** up !   Every time I have a cigarette in a public place (e.g. a bar)  I feel incredibly guilty and spend most of my time looking around when anyone coughs .....just incase they're dropping a hint.

This stuff is more addictive than heroin,  I'd love to stop , but I become the HULK every time I've tried.  
I think NON Smokers tend to see smokers as selfish people who are just like themselves.....but who like to get a buzz every now and then by having a cigarette........but thats IS NOT true.

It's true when you're 17 and been smoking 1 cigarette a day after college with your mates to tey and fit in......... but that only lasts for a month of two. After that you're hooked .......20 a day..... and taking no pleasure from it whatsoever. It's either that or become a jibbering nervous wreck who'll lose their temper at anyone or anything that gets in their way. Non smokers simply do not understand the GRIP that smoking has over you.

A little more consideration for the afflicted would be nice ! The poor fools who had a few puffs to impress they're buddies,  then became the grey smelly subjects of posts like this 10 years later.

Ooooh I'm getting stressed now..........time to go outside for a cigarette
0
mattisflonesCommented:
@BobSiemens..
Your link is worthless, it points to a WHO financed survey. ie: Can`t be thrusted.

For your two differences, being close to a smoker is neither going to kill you, and you can wear the same jacket the next day. (unless you sit IN the smoke, and very very close to the smoker for a very long time. But hey.. that was your choise!)
This over sensitivity crap is just another way of justifying the totally unreasonable claim for a smoke free environment.
The fact that Norwegian bars/restaurants now is moke free makes the sweat/perfume a big problem because the ventilation rate (whitch is expencive) is lowered, and asthmatics and others now cant go out!
(So the ones this BAN was fore, still can`t use the PUB`s)

>>I was just saying that the costs of smoking 200 years ago weren't being born by the nation
Awright, but it hardly is that way anymore.. well, exept for Iceland maybe.. (No public healt insurance system)

>>But why do you think
I dont know where they got their numbers from, but i suspect that they have added costs for diseases and so on that is "caused" by smoking.. which makes it worthless!
0
BobSiemensAuthor Commented:
- Your link is worthless, it points to a WHO financed survey. ie: Can`t be thrusted.
- This over sensitivity crap is just another way of justifying the totally unreasonable claim for a smoke free environment.
- added costs for diseases and so on that is "caused" by smoking.. which makes it worthless!

You illustrate another aspect of the problem.  People who are addicted are faced with 'cognitive dissonance'.  To maintain their addiction, they are forced to operate in a way which would be unacceptable to them if they were willing to accept reality.

So, as an alternative to acknowleging that his behaviour is immoral to him, Mattis is forced to conlude that the BBC and the World Health Organization are unreliable.  

So, is distorting reality to favor your actions immmoral?  If you have distorted reality sucessfully, would your actions still be moral.  I guess I tend to think that if you are only morally obligated to operate in concert with your perception of reality.


<<<The fact that Norwegian bars/restaurants now is smoke free makes the sweat/perfume a big problem because the ventilation rate (whitch is expencive) is lowered, and asthmatics and others now cant go out!
>>>

Thanks for all the good work you've done to help the Norwegian asthmatics
-------------------------------------------
Would you believe a Philip Morris executive who says second hand smoke causes disease?  Or are they out to get the Norwegian asthmatics too?

http://www.altria.com/media/executive_speech/03_09_02_37_MPfeil07222004.asp
Look, tobacco has long been a controversial business. Our tobacco companies manufacture a dangerous product. A product associated with some very real problems - addiction, youth smoking and the serious diseases caused by smoking and second hand smoke. As a parent and executive, I think about that question.
0
germanpennCommented:
Again, "immoral" is way too much. I find it hard to consider it rude within a democratic environment. If it is rude, it is because it may lead to unhealthy or uncomfortable consecuences for others, but up to that. It is not immoral. Peeing in public is immoral, not smoking. I think we have to be a bit more moderate people. It is a widespread habit, and it would be really odd to say that hundreds of millions of respectable citizens are immoral because they smoke. Don't come with the "oh, but the mass can be wrong as well" because we all know that. One thing is being wrong, and another is being immoral. Otherwise we will end up stating that smoking is a sin, come on. Again, moderation is more healthy for society than fresh air.
0
mattisflonesCommented:
Bob, >>You illustrate another aspect of the problem.
Well, i certainly do not illustrate what you claim i do. Dont know where you get your ideas from, but it sure as hell is not from something i said...

>>So, as an alternative to acknowleging that his behaviour is immoral to him
So just because you think something i have to think the same? Sounds dangerously like the voice of a fanatic to me! And whats this crap about  "moral", nothing i have said have anything to do with moral, nor anything i have refferenced to.
First of all, BBC is a newschannel.. ie: they publish anything that sells. The only party i say anithing about is WHO. Whitch is well known for financing healthstudies, and pushing scientists..  just like the tobacco companies.

>>Would you believe a Philip Morris executive who says second hand smoke causes disease?
No, but i believe anyone that say that it MAY cause disease.

>>"Thanks for all the good work you've done to help the Norwegian asthmatics"/ "Or are they out to get the Norwegian asthmatics too?"
I dont have a clue what you mean with that, so i wont comment!

Seriously Bob, you have performed one of the worst cases of shoot-own-foot i have seen. Start reading before commenting, and ask if theres something in a comment you dont understand..
0
santosh_phalleCommented:
Yes, I feel Smoking in public is rude, if it has discomfort level to others.
Even one more thing that a smoker should keep away himself from public areas as it might effect the health of people arround there and even he is spoiling his own health.

As per the survey the one who doesn't smoke get more effected then the person who smokes. So the smokers should even take care of others health also.
0
Nathan RomanoSystems ConsultantCommented:
Smoking in public is rude and is a health hazard for people exposed to the smoke.

it is just as rude as farting in someones face.

It should be avoided and it should be banned ( and I don't care if you really like it or you really think it is your right to smoke, it is everyone elses right to breath)

The worst I have seen is parents or future parents (pregnant or wife pregnant) of young kids or babies. the babies are cosntantly sick or are born sick in one way or another.  (not all kids will show this but they are all affected in one way or another)

If you smoke and you think that it doesn't harm anyone then the first news I have for you is that the first thing it harmed was your brain.

Everyone has the right to do what they want with their OWN bodies and minds (or lack there of), as long as you don't afect someone else it is your problem, but when you do it in public you are making it everyone elses problem, as simple as that.
0
BDBushCommented:
<<Everyone has the right to do what they want with their OWN bodies and minds (or lack there of), as long as you don't afect someone else it is your problem, but when you do it in public you are making it everyone elses problem, as simple as that.>>

I agree. If you want to suck on the tailpipe of a bus to get a smoke fix, then do it, but don't sit there and spew your garbage into the air.....air shared by non-smokers who have just as much right to want to breathe clean air as smokers say they have the right to smoke. If you smoke outside of your home or car, really ANYWHERE that's out in the open, you're infringing on others' rights.
0
Nathan RomanoSystems ConsultantCommented:
even if you do it in your own home, but you have people that don't smoke, or kids, you are affecting them and it is still rude (and immoral because of the damage to them)
0
germanpennCommented:
>>it is just as rude as farting in someones face. It should be avoided and it should be banned ( and I don't care if you really like it or you really think it is your right to smoke, it is everyone elses right to breath)

Yeah, but what about everyone's right to fart in someone else's face? The famous Shaq thought he was exempt from that, he is so tall, but he had to admit that when using the stairs he was at risk, insofar as the fumes of the farters in the upper steps burst out at his nose level. But nothing he could do, as there is a right to fart in anyone's face, hand, chest, or wherever, provided that it is not done with malice or gross negligence.
0
Nathan RomanoSystems ConsultantCommented:
germanpenn, you have been smoking havent you? lol
please stay in the subject
0
germanpennCommented:
sorry for the digression ;-)
0
It's more than this solution.Get answers and train to solve all your tech problems - anytime, anywhere.Try it for free Edge Out The Competitionfor your dream job with proven skills and certifications.Get started today Stand Outas the employee with proven skills.Start learning today for free Move Your Career Forwardwith certification training in the latest technologies.Start your trial today
Miscellaneous

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.

Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.