More at stake than
what meets the nose
Dear Leda from Akeley: I agree with two points that you were trying to emphasize. Smoking is bad for you and secondhand smoke is too. From there, points get very disagreeable.
I will continue by stating that I do not smoke cigarettes. This being said, I feel it is safe to say I am not addicted to cigarettes. Therefore, I must not have a barrier to right thinking. I don't even like the smell of cigarettes or the smoke they produce. You must think it absurd that a person fitting my description would oppose the new smoking ban. Yet I do and I will tell you why.
First and foremost, I feel that our rights are compromised. It is in fact your right to breathe clean air. So find a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking. There are plenty out there with good food to choose from. No one drags you in, kicking and screaming, to eat in a smoky environment. It is your right to choose where to eat, drink, sleep and breathe. If you choose a smoking environment to eat in, please do not try to change other people by eliminating their rights. Remember prohibition?
ADVERTISEMENT
I do appreciate the concern you present for our environment. In a perfect, pollutant-free world, maybe smoking wouldn't be allowed. But for the here-and-now, don't you think there are bigger fish to fry? Please drive an electric car, live in a solar paneled house and stop the use of pesticides on our crops. Then maybe present your environmental standpoint on smoking. Lawmakers should not be wasting our time and tax dollars on this issue when so many other issues are present.
Smoking is a choice, good or bad. It is a choice made by adults as it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to buy cigarettes. After reading your letter, I believe I may take up smoking. I then propose that you and the state of Minnesota come over and babysit me and every other adult smoker in this land as it seems you are so keen to do so.
Tyson John Sievers
Park Rapids
