05 June 2006
Ah, sweet land of liberty!
5:10 PM
My parents visited over the weekend. My mother is a former mayor of the city in which she and my father live. It should come as no surprise that my mother and I talk a lot of politics and economics.
I related to her a conversation I’d had earlier in the day at a meeting. Part of the meeting was held in a local restaurant. Now, we’re all friends (i.e., those of us involved in the meeting). As we were waiting to be seated, one of my friends said to me, “It’s going to be really nice when you can come into a restaurant and there won’t be any smoking allowed.”
“Well, bud,” I said (I call all of my friends “bud”), “I prefer to see property owners retain the right to decide whether to permit legal behavior on their property.”
My mother informs me that there are those who want to extend the provision of the ban on smoking in public to include smoking outside one’s own home.
The enemies of freedom like to talk about the “necessity” for their measures. When it comes to smoking it’s all about the second hand smoke. If so, then I think we can expect the “second hand smoke stormtroopers” to work to ban outdoor grilling, use of fireplaces, and deisel engines (what gives off more, and worse, smoke than those?). After all, those activities create much more smoke than tobacco smoking.
If someone can tell you that you cannot smoke in your front or back yard, they can eventually tell you that you cannot smoke inside your house—especially if they can already tell you that you can’t allow smoking in a business establishment that you own.
I related to her a conversation I’d had earlier in the day at a meeting. Part of the meeting was held in a local restaurant. Now, we’re all friends (i.e., those of us involved in the meeting). As we were waiting to be seated, one of my friends said to me, “It’s going to be really nice when you can come into a restaurant and there won’t be any smoking allowed.”
“Well, bud,” I said (I call all of my friends “bud”), “I prefer to see property owners retain the right to decide whether to permit legal behavior on their property.”
My mother informs me that there are those who want to extend the provision of the ban on smoking in public to include smoking outside one’s own home.
The enemies of freedom like to talk about the “necessity” for their measures. When it comes to smoking it’s all about the second hand smoke. If so, then I think we can expect the “second hand smoke stormtroopers” to work to ban outdoor grilling, use of fireplaces, and deisel engines (what gives off more, and worse, smoke than those?). After all, those activities create much more smoke than tobacco smoking.
If someone can tell you that you cannot smoke in your front or back yard, they can eventually tell you that you cannot smoke inside your house—especially if they can already tell you that you can’t allow smoking in a business establishment that you own.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
About Me
- James Frank Solís
- Former soldier (USA). Graduate-level educated. Married 26 years. Texas ex-patriate. Ruling elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(300)
-
▼
June
(70)
- Just a little bit more on the Hamdan decision
- Is the Supreme Court now an ally in the Left's War...
- Yes, both Democrats and Republicans are liberals, ...
- Dick Durbin's flag rhetoric is a desecration of logic
- Conspiracy Theory No. 73,410
- Prohibition II?
- When it comes to Democrats regaining power, no lif...
- O, the loyal (HA!!!) opposition
- More minimum wage nonsense
- WMD: an update
- Here's a strategy, Dick
- WMD found!!!
- Don't let them die...not like this!!!
- "Redeploy! Redeploy!"
- Drug cartels taking over big U. S. cities?
- A stroll down Amnesia Lane
- Under the gun
- When you can’t refute your opponent…
- Coming soon: A “conservative” judicial tyranny?
- Even in France?
- Another brilliant Christian shows the way
- Thor has video on Coulter
- Battle weary?
- Always in season
- Understanding Elites…of any stripe
- Now this is good news
- Coulter tweaks the left’s nose
- Krauthammer on the federal marriage amendment
- "Don't cry for me" -- al-Zarqawi
- On Rembrandt’s “Holy Family”
- O, Blogger! Where are thou?
- A little more on the Third Party issue
- The (marxist) social engineering goals of the inhe...
- More fodder from Molly Ivins
- Prager on target
- No good deed...
- Thank you, Zarqawi
- We're still glad he's dead, though
- Ding, dong, the wicked witch is dead
- Obscene oil profits: a post script
- Assimilation, yes, but…
- What I don’t like about the Federal Marriage Amend...
- Appropriations in S.2611
- “Innocuous” fiction
- More ad hominem in public discourse
- Speaking of Normandy
- Instapundit is the "instabeast"?
- Coming soon...
- Bogger for Word
- 060606: something a little more noteworthy
- How a nation can be its own worst enemy sometimes
- Clarification
- The DaVinci Gnostic Code
- 060606: just another day
- Why Canada???
- Ah, sweet land of liberty!
- Do we need a federal marriage amendment?
- Race isn’t an issue, but maybe…
- Freedom loving?
- And speaking of liberal strawmen...
- More on Mexico's economy
- Border hedging
- Please don't help us, Molly. Please.
- Which dike needs a helping finger?
- Self-loving in full display
- I can't believe I'm even thinking this...
- Why Mexico has no thriving economy
- If the shoe were on the other foot
- Human rights for us, too
- O, distracted multitudes!
-
▼
June
(70)
0 comments: