Perhaps we could utilize new technologies (and create jobs) by placing air filters of a grand sort instead of just banning everything a group finds personally wrong. It is the spirit of compromise that is sorely lacking in the mpls government. Unless of course big companies (read target for one) need something that is where the local dfl will fall to. Many of us are not libertarians or republicans, we are old school farmer laborites. Dain Lyngstad edina/phillips --- Andy Driscoll <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What Mr. Atherton always wants is no government > whatsoever, no public > control of any private enterprise, and that means no > dictation of public > health moves to keep the air breathable. What never > seems to occur to > libertarians is that Minnesota and Minneapolis have > for two centuries > regulated private business by insisting on licensure > to keep food > uncontaminated, and facilities and toilets clean and > as free of disease as > humanly possible. > > Would Mr. Atherton prefer a solid dose of salmonella > for the same customers > who breathe the poison others create with their > stogies and cigarettes? > Without other health regulations, that's what we'd > get. > > Andy Driscoll > Saint Paul > -- > The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be > ruled by evil men: Plato > > "Everything secret degenerates, even the > administration of justice; nothing > is safe that does not show how it can bear > discussion and publicity." - Lord > Acton > -- > Visit our weblog: http://newswired.blogspot.com > > > > From: David Shove <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > This is a misrepresentation and slander of most > people's motives to want > > to ban smoking. My own motive is SELFISH - I (ME, > D.S.) don't want > > PERSONALLY to have to put up with godawful smoke. > Personal. Selfish. For > > me. I want it for ME. > > > > And that is where most other people start. > > > > I also want if for all the other people who want > it for themselves. > > People can smoke as much as they want, as long as > it is not near me or > > anyone else who doesn't want it near them. > > > > A lot of people HATE being in dense cigarette > smoke. Personally. for > > themselves. > > > > Of course, if you're for smoking, or for Big > Tobacco, or corporate > > dictatorship, then you're likely to make up the > nastiest sounding motive > > possible for the anti-amoking people and ban. > > > > David Shove > > selfish in Roseville > > > > On Sat, 2 Apr 2005, Michael Atherton wrote: > > > >> Robert Lilligren wrote: > >> > >>> The place was full. Many people, including two > smokers, > >>> commented on how nice it was to be able to > breathe cleaner > >>> air. One smoker said, "This will probably help > me quit > >>> smoking," which is, I believe, the objective of > the ban activists. > >> > >> This goal, and the people who support it, are > soooooo narrow > >> minded that they can't tell the difference > between oppression > >> and freedom. > >> > >> "I will lead you to Jesus and Salvation." A goal > that throughout > >> history has been the "intended good" used to > torture, persecute, > >> and kill millions of innocent people. A well > intended goal > >> does not justify ignoring the beliefs and desires > of others. > >> Isn't that what multiculturalism is about? > Honoring the customs > >> and desires of others? At least now that they've > won, smoking > >> opponents are being honest about their true > intentions: to Save us > >> from ourselves. I hope that everyone see the > parallels between this > >> and dunking, public humiliation in the stocks, > and witch burning, all > >> practiced by our Puritan ancestors for the "good" > of their victims. > >> I'm sure that they honest felt that they, just as > the anti-smoking > >> advocates do, that they are helping others. I > would hope that rational > >> people can see that ANYTHING can be justified in > the name of helping > >> "purify" others against their will. At least the > Nazis never > >> bothered to rationalize the Holocaust as being > for the good of > >> their victims. It's very scary to know that one > of our city > >> council members is ignorantly promoting such > "intended good." > > >> Michael Atherton > >> Prospect Park > > REMINDERS: > 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at > http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a > member is in violation, contact the list manager at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. > > 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. > > For state and national discussions see: > http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html > For external forums, see: > http://e-democracy.org/mninteract > ________________________________ > > Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused > Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy > Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: > http://e-democracy.org/mpls > __________________________________ Yahoo! Messenger Show us what our next emoticon should look like. Join the fun. http://www.advision.webevents.yahoo.com/emoticontest REMINDERS: 1. Be civil! Please read the NEW RULES at http://www.e-democracy.org/rules. If you think a member is in violation, contact the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] before continuing it on the list. 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait. For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract ________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[email protected] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
