quittin' smoking

[Chris Rapier]

On 3/14/06, Mike Yacht <meatnog at meatnog.com> wrote:

> You feel adults should be able to make up their own minds.  But if their
> minds are made up in a way you don't like, you get pissy.

In order to have any sort of argument people need to take opposing
viewpoints and defend them. More to the point, I may not agree with
what someone has to say but I won't stop them from saying it.
Likewise, I will tell someone that I believe they are mistaken if I
actually believe they are mistaken, especially if they intially say it
in a public forum known for this sort of thing. I do try to do it
without attacking their character though.

So I don't see the hypocrisy you are pointing out.


> You don't like it when people tell you what to do, so you're going to tell
> them to stop doing it.

No, I don't like people *making* me not do something. There is a very
signifcant difference between the two.

> Oh, and I'm not mad.  I'm actually very amused.

Excellent, so next time you won't insult my character?

> Be it the smokers who think they have a right to smoke or the non-smokers
> who think they have a right to not have to inhale the smoke.  Either way it
> is exactly the same thing.  One extreme you have heavy-handed facism, the
> other end anarchy.  Not saying which is which, but in the middle there is a
> reasonable middle ground called representation (be it a republic or a
> democracy) where the society states what it wants and then you go through
> that whole checks and balances thing that can take years to get right (for
> example the PA Motorcycle helmet law).  Sometimes there isn't even a right,
> but a right-now and the laws change over time to reflect 'public sentiment'.

And how do people reach the informed opinions that are the underlying
principle of representational democracy if they don't discuss them?

> Don't like having to bend your opinions or actions to a society's whim?
> Then get the hell out of society cause they ALL do that and expect that,
> some more obviously than others.  It is the very nature of living in a
> society.

True but unless groups raise opposition then the society loses the
essential dynamism that allows for change and restructuring. As such,
you always need to have people telling other people how they should
live there lives. You absolutely need this as the alternative is drab
stultifying conformity.