Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
My point is that the anti-smoking side has, for all intents and purposes, won the battle, and won it decisively.
It boils down to this:
Smoking is bad and it kills people and second-hand smoke is unfair to non-smokers and it hurts them, so we have rightly eliminated it (almost) entirely from public spaces.
Burning enormous amounts of unnecessary fossil fuels is bad news and causes health problems and is unfair to people who don't partake in this activity, but we don't do anything about that. We sure as hell don't see the militancy and griping about it that we do about smoking.
If the health of non-smokers is the major issue, there are much bigger fish to fry, but we only fry one fish. And nowadays, it's a minnow.
|
Because the two issues are not even close to the same Rouge.
I will be the first person to say that people own vehicles that they don't need, but you cannot compare smoking to the ownership and usage of certain types of vehicles.