Georgie, listen...

...to your church.

Or do you now call the Methodist Church yet another focus group to ignore?

NO on I-902

Let's call this a libertarian post. No doubt most health-conscious liberals will hate me for this, but when I go to the polls in November, I will vote NO on Initiative 902. Let's be clear. Anyone who has ever read this blog knows that I'm a lefty, pinko liberal. I'm all for federally-funded programs for the underprivileged and underrepresented. Big government is good, when it is protecting us and protecting our rights. That's my lefty side. My moderate side wants this, as long as it's in moderation. But this initiative goes too far. You're taking away rights of smokers, who aren't doing anything illegal. Business owners such as bar owners, whose customer base includes a large number of smokers, will lose money. So not only does it take away rights of people not doing anything illegal, it hurts businesses. This is not my idea of good government. I understand the proponents of this initiative: it will reduce health risks and cut down on the rate of cancer, emphysema, etc in this country. That is true, and I empathize. But this is about choices. Just as it is a smoker's choice to puff away, putting his health at risk and a burden on our national health care, it also a non-smoker's choice to frequent or not to frequent a bar that allows smoking. There are plenty of non-smoking places to go. And the same goes with anyone who works at a smokey bar. You have the choice to work elsewhere. We shouldn't legislate this decision.

The national attitude is changing about smoking. Although we're the fattest country on the planet, the national percentage of smokers in the population has gone down. We have smoking sections, and the tobacco industry is not beyond legal reproach. But we don't have the right to take away the rights of smokers in the way this initiative proposes, and we shouldn't be taking away property owners' rights. I'm an ex-smoker, but I feel no allegiance to smokers. I'm against the precedent this law is going to make. What's next? How far is too far when it comes taking away our rights in the name of protecting ourselves?

I-902 is winning in the polls, because it's been spun that if you're against it, you're for cancer. (What's ironic is that if you only read the last two sentences and removed the word "cancer" from the last sentence, you might think you're reading something about my opinion of Bush and his fucked up "war on terror"). It will surely pass, but not with my help.