Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
smoking as religion
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>
>I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all internal
>combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything whatsoever which
>pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do anything so crass as to
>drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things do, after all, spew
>noxious fumes and thus cause or risk causing harm to others.
"And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>
>I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all internal
>combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything whatsoever which
>pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do anything so crass as to
>drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things do, after all, spew
>noxious fumes and thus cause or risk causing harm to others.
"And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
Bruce Watson wrote:
> In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
> Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>> I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all internal
>> combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything whatsoever which
>> pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do anything so crass as to
>> drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things do, after all, spew
>> noxious fumes and thus cause or risk causing harm to others.
>
> "And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
> as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
> its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
> automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
> cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
> retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
> high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
> smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
>
> Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
Mmm, no. The issue to hand was what you were putting into the air that
is being breathed by others.
Pollution *is* causing a rise in disease among non-smokers. I don't see
the second hand smoke crusaders abandoning their cars...
Bruce Watson wrote:
> In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
> Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>> I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all internal
>> combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything whatsoever which
>> pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do anything so crass as to
>> drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things do, after all, spew
>> noxious fumes and thus cause or risk causing harm to others.
>
> "And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
> as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
> its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
> automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
> cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
> retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
> high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
> smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
>
> Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
Mmm, no. The issue to hand was what you were putting into the air that
is being breathed by others.
Pollution *is* causing a rise in disease among non-smokers. I don't see
the second hand smoke crusaders abandoning their cars...
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
> Bruce Watson wrote:
>> In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
>> Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>>> I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all
>>> internal combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything
>>> whatsoever which pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do
>>> anything so crass as to drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things
>>> do, after all, spew noxious fumes and thus cause or
>>> risk causing harm to others.
>>
>> "And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
>> as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
>> its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
>> automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
>> cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
>> retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
>> high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
>> smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
>>
>> Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
>
> Mmm, no. The issue to hand was what you were putting into the air that
> is being breathed by others.
>
> Pollution *is* causing a rise in disease among non-smokers. I don't see
We know.
Mark K. Bilbo wrote:
> Bruce Watson wrote:
>> In article <g62g9b$4ju$3@news.albasani,net >,
>> Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarnason@gmail,com > wrote:
>>> I assume, based on this, you're actively working on banning all
>>> internal combustion vehicles, coal-power plants, anything
>>> whatsoever which pollutes in any manner - and you would *never* do
>>> anything so crass as to drive a car or even take a bus, right? These things
>>> do, after all, spew noxious fumes and thus cause or
>>> risk causing harm to others.
>>
>> "And why dwell on smoking as the prime suspect? There was arguably
>> as much reason to blame the gas-guzzling automobile culture, with
>> its ubiquitous spread of noxious fumes and asphalt dust. While the
>> automobile pollution might well be contributing to the rise in lung
>> cancer, Hammond and Horn noted, it could not explain why the
>> retrospective studies to date were revealing a disproportionately
>> high incidence of the disease among smokers; if cars were at fault,
>> smokers and nonsmokers ought to be affected equally."
>>
>> Richard Kluger, Ashes to Ashes, Knopf, 1996, p. 146.
>
> Mmm, no. The issue to hand was what you were putting into the air that
> is being breathed by others.
>
> Pollution *is* causing a rise in disease among non-smokers. I don't see
We know.
=>A noble cause: Fighting with a few pipe smoking seniors for thrills<= Shane has really hit the big
On Jul 20, 2:52 pm, "Pink Freud" <somewh...@here,com > wrote:
> "Bruce Watson" <anon3...@nyx.nyx,net > wrote in message
>
> news:1216579492.711245@irys.nyx,net ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <g5vvuk$5m...@news.albasani,net >,
> > Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail,com > wrote:
>
> >>Him? Dunno. Doesn't suck to be me, despite being a smoker. I don't
> >>force my habits on others, I smoke away from areas where others
> >>congregate, I apply basic social grace to the matter.
>
> >>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
> >>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
> >>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
> >>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>
> > Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
> > areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
> > away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
> > to walk close by."
>
> And do the same with your cars, barbeques, candles, fireworks etc.
> Also dogs, since their droppings can cause dangerous infections.
>
> If you have a cold, don't leave the house please, as you may infect others
> with your virus.
>
> Or we could all just agree not to be stupid, and have a mutual respect for
> each other's freedoms.
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "When I die, I want to pass away peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle
> Derek, and not crying and screaming, like the passengers in his car."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Non inhaling pipe smoking seniors evrywhere will suffer the wrath of
Shane! Pathetic and kinda funny! No?...
On Jul 20, 2:52 pm, "Pink Freud" <somewh...@here,com > wrote:
> "Bruce Watson" <anon3...@nyx.nyx,net > wrote in message
>
> news:1216579492.711245@irys.nyx,net ...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article <g5vvuk$5m...@news.albasani,net >,
> > Kelsey Bjarnason <kbjarna...@gmail,com > wrote:
>
> >>Him? Dunno. Doesn't suck to be me, despite being a smoker. I don't
> >>force my habits on others, I smoke away from areas where others
> >>congregate, I apply basic social grace to the matter.
>
> >>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
> >>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
> >>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
> >>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>
> > Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
> > areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
> > away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
> > to walk close by."
>
> And do the same with your cars, barbeques, candles, fireworks etc.
> Also dogs, since their droppings can cause dangerous infections.
>
> If you have a cold, don't leave the house please, as you may infect others
> with your virus.
>
> Or we could all just agree not to be stupid, and have a mutual respect for
> each other's freedoms.
>
> --
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> "When I die, I want to pass away peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle
> Derek, and not crying and screaming, like the passengers in his car."- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Non inhaling pipe smoking seniors evrywhere will suffer the wrath of
Shane! Pathetic and kinda funny! No?...
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
Bruce Watson wrote:
> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
> to walk close by."
That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
--
L. Raymond
Bruce Watson wrote:
> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
> to walk close by."
That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
--
L. Raymond
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>Bruce Watson wrote:
>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>
>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>
>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>> to walk close by."
>
>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>Bruce Watson wrote:
>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>
>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>
>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>> to walk close by."
>
>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
On 20 Jul 2008 18:58:53 GMT, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson)
wrote:
>In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>
>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>
>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>> to walk close by."
>>
>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>
>Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
Being a fucking idiot is not acceptable, yet here you are....
On 20 Jul 2008 18:58:53 GMT, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson)
wrote:
>In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>
>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out of
>>>>their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or some
>>>>equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing while I
>>>>smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>
>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>> to walk close by."
>>
>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>
>Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
Being a fucking idiot is not acceptable, yet here you are....
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>
>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>
>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>> to walk close by."
>>
>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>
> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>
Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
tobacco smoke will be present. This protects the rights of both smokers
and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
adults. We're human beings, with rights. I've heard there are a few
towns that have outlawed these human rights. Perhaps you should move
there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
can grumble and groan all you like.
Yes. I think you're an asshole, asshole.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Separator of Church and Reason.
Convicted by Earthquack.
One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>
>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>
>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>> to walk close by."
>>
>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>
> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>
Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
tobacco smoke will be present. This protects the rights of both smokers
and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
adults. We're human beings, with rights. I've heard there are a few
towns that have outlawed these human rights. Perhaps you should move
there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
can grumble and groan all you like.
Yes. I think you're an asshole, asshole.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Separator of Church and Reason.
Convicted by Earthquack.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld,com > wrote in message
news:Xns9AE17ED5220B3vicman@207.115.17.102...
> One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>
>>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>>
>>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>>> to walk close by."
>>>
>>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>>
>> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>>
>
> Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
> tobacco smoke will be present.
You really are one deluded tobacco-sucking addict, aren't you?
There will be no tobacco smoke present because civilized society
has OUTLAWED your noxious putrid cancerous behavior from
PUBLIC places.
Now go suck at home.
> This protects the rights of both smokers
> and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
> speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
> different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
>
> Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
> adults. We're human beings, with rights.
There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
Deal with it, loser.
> I've heard there are a few towns that have outlawed these human rights.
IQ 130 ?
ROTFLMAO !!!
> Perhaps you should move
> there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
> accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
> can grumble and groan all you like.
No need to, we've relegated your wretched tobacco-sucking to the
one place where you can legally suck suck suck all you desire ...
in the privacy of your own putrid abode.
"Uncle Vic" <address@withheld,com > wrote in message
news:Xns9AE17ED5220B3vicman@207.115.17.102...
> One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>
>>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>>
>>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>>> to walk close by."
>>>
>>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>>
>> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>>
>
> Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
> tobacco smoke will be present.
You really are one deluded tobacco-sucking addict, aren't you?
There will be no tobacco smoke present because civilized society
has OUTLAWED your noxious putrid cancerous behavior from
PUBLIC places.
Now go suck at home.
> This protects the rights of both smokers
> and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
> speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
> different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
>
> Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
> adults. We're human beings, with rights.
There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
Deal with it, loser.
> I've heard there are a few towns that have outlawed these human rights.
IQ 130 ?
ROTFLMAO !!!
> Perhaps you should move
> there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
> accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
> can grumble and groan all you like.
No need to, we've relegated your wretched tobacco-sucking to the
one place where you can legally suck suck suck all you desire ...
in the privacy of your own putrid abode.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
"Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote in message
news:6ehi7qF76sthU1@mid.individual,net ...
>
> "Uncle Vic" <address@withheld,com > wrote in message
> news:Xns9AE17ED5220B3vicman@207.115.17.102...
>> One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>>
>>> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>>> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>>>
>>>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>>>> to walk close by."
>>>>
>>>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>>>
>>> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>>> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>>> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>>> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>>>
>>
>> Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
>> tobacco smoke will be present.
>
> You really are one deluded tobacco-sucking addict, aren't you?
>
> There will be no tobacco smoke present because civilized society
> has OUTLAWED your noxious putrid cancerous behavior from
> PUBLIC places.
>
> Now go suck at home.
>
>> This protects the rights of both smokers
>> and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
>> speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
>> different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
>>
>> Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
>> adults. We're human beings, with rights.
>
> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>
> Deal with it, loser.
>
>> I've heard there are a few towns that have outlawed these human rights.
>
> IQ 130 ?
>
> ROTFLMAO !!!
>
>> Perhaps you should move
>> there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
>> accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
>> can grumble and groan all you like.
>
> No need to, we've relegated your wretched tobacco-sucking to the
> one place where you can legally suck suck suck all you desire ...
> in the privacy of your own putrid abode.
>
>
When did you get to be such an arrogant asshole?
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
----------------------------------------------------------
"When I die, I want to pass away peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle
Derek, and not crying and screaming, like the passengers in his car."
"Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote in message
news:6ehi7qF76sthU1@mid.individual,net ...
>
> "Uncle Vic" <address@withheld,com > wrote in message
> news:Xns9AE17ED5220B3vicman@207.115.17.102...
>> One fine day in alt.atheism, anon3c67@nyx.nyx,net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>>
>>> In article <rc8c94sn5giz$.2runpe00fo50.dlg@40tude,net >,
>>> L. Raymond <badaddress@...,com > wrote:
>>>>Bruce Watson wrote:
>>>>> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>On the other hand, I also occasionally see some jerkwad who goes out
>>>>>>of their way to walk close by and do the "critiquing cough" thing or
>>>>>>some equivalent. To those I say look, you can simply stop breathing
>>>>>>while I smoke and it won't bother me one bit.
>>>>
>>>>> Obviously, you're not doing enough to "smoke away from
>>>>> areas where others congregate." Try harder. Go farther
>>>>> away. Far enough so that no one can go "out of their way
>>>>> to walk close by."
>>>>
>>>>That's not remotely obvious from what he says. There are rude jerks
>>>>who'll walk halfway across a city park to parade their smug
>>>>self-perceived superiority over those they disdain.
>>>
>>> Then the smoker should be farther away than "halfway across
>>> a city park." The smoker should not be in the park at all. The smoker
>>> should be in a private place like his own home alone. Smoking
>>> is no longer acceptable in public. Any public place.
>>>
>>
>> Sez who? You? Civilized organizations put up signs warning people that
>> tobacco smoke will be present.
>
> You really are one deluded tobacco-sucking addict, aren't you?
>
> There will be no tobacco smoke present because civilized society
> has OUTLAWED your noxious putrid cancerous behavior from
> PUBLIC places.
>
> Now go suck at home.
>
>> This protects the rights of both smokers
>> and non-smokers. Putting smokers "away" is like Bush designating "free
>> speech" areas, miles from the event they'd like to protest. People are
>> different. Learn to live with it, pussy.
>>
>> Smoking is quite acceptable in public - by other smokers and civilized
>> adults. We're human beings, with rights.
>
> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>
> Deal with it, loser.
>
>> I've heard there are a few towns that have outlawed these human rights.
>
> IQ 130 ?
>
> ROTFLMAO !!!
>
>> Perhaps you should move
>> there and live with the rest of the pussified smug assholes that can't
>> accept *all* of society. Or just stay in your home all alone where you
>> can grumble and groan all you like.
>
> No need to, we've relegated your wretched tobacco-sucking to the
> one place where you can legally suck suck suck all you desire ...
> in the privacy of your own putrid abode.
>
>
When did you get to be such an arrogant asshole?
--
----------------------------------------------------------
Pink Freud, Dark Side Of The Couch
----------------------------------------------------------
"When I die, I want to pass away peacefully in my sleep, like my uncle
Derek, and not crying and screaming, like the passengers in his car."
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
"Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>
>There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
with impunity.
And spare me your clever retort about how hard boiled eggs don't hurt
anyone. The point I'm addressing is that rights are assumed , unless
statue says otherwise.
"Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>
>There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
with impunity.
And spare me your clever retort about how hard boiled eggs don't hurt
anyone. The point I'm addressing is that rights are assumed , unless
statue says otherwise.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
Richard Evans wrote:
> "Reality_Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>
>>
>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>
> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
> with impunity.
Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
Richard Evans wrote:
> "Reality_Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>
>>
>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>
> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
> with impunity.
Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
<theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>Richard Evans wrote:
>> "Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>
>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>> with impunity.
>
>Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
I do.
atheist@home#1554
>
On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
<theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>Richard Evans wrote:
>> "Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>
>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>> with impunity.
>
>Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
I do.
atheist@home#1554
>
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
atheist@home,com wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>
>> Richard Evans wrote:
>>> "Reality_Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>>
>>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>>> with impunity.
>>
>> Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
>
> I do.
Not for long, addict.
atheist@home,com wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> <theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>
>> Richard Evans wrote:
>>> "Reality_Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>>
>>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>>> with impunity.
>>
>> Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
>
> I do.
Not for long, addict.
Re: smoking as a pathetic drug addiction !
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:48:06 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
<theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>atheist@home,com wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
>> <theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>>
>>> Richard Evans wrote:
>>>> "Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>>>
>>>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>>>> with impunity.
>>>
>>> Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
>>
>> I do.
>
>Not for long, addict.
For as long as I like.
atheist@home#1554
On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:48:06 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
<theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>atheist@home,com wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:20:17 -0600, " Prof. Jonez "
>> <theprof@jonez,net > wrote:
>>
>>> Richard Evans wrote:
>>>> "Reality Checkİ" <Reality@Check,it > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> There is no right to smoke in public, never was, never will be.
>>>>
>>>> There is no right to eat hard boiled eggs in public, yet I can do it
>>>> with impunity.
>>>
>>> Too bad you can't smoke in public with impunity, eh loser?
>>
>> I do.
>
>Not for long, addict.
For as long as I like.
atheist@home#1554
Next: TROLL "TWINKIE" SHANE'S , , ,
Previous: Dutch cafes miss their smoke - use artificial means to bring back the smell
