companies are now allowed to discriminate against smokers and not hire us? Should we not be eligible for disability benefits? Since it is getting more and more difficult to find a job? and quitting is next to impossible for some smokers, shouldn't we have the ability to go on disability?
2007-07-02 05:35:13 · 11 answers · asked by RubyUnicorn 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Ok, it is harder to quit than heroin and they studies have proved it over and over again. I live in Ohio and things are fast becoming a Nazi state. Recent studies have also proven that shs is not as damaging as first believed. All of the shs studies included toxic gases and chemicals not just cigarette smoke!!
2007-07-02 05:49:15 · update #1
REMEMBER THERE HAS NOT BEEN ONE DOCUMENTED DEATH BY SECOND HAND SMOKE!!! NOT ONE!!
2007-07-02 05:57:59 · update #2
Smoking is the current "bad boy" of legal addictions. Unfortunately, you are on the negative side of this.
As fewer smoke and more smoking bans are enacted, society will find itself having to look for a new legal addiction upon which to pounce with leoline ferocity.
Caffeine? Possibly.
Alcohol? Probably not--too many people would get too upset about that one being restricted.
2007-07-02 05:52:44 · answer #1 · answered by Mathsorcerer 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The whole "smoking is more addictive then Heroin " statment was started by the anti-smoking Nazi's, as a way to get people to not smoke. How many smokers do you know who have quit there job,and started pan handling for cigerette money? How many smokers have you seen who would rather smoke then eat? How many smokers do you know that rob,and steal to support thier habit? I can tell you as someone who is a recoverying alcoholic,and used to chew tabacco. Tabacco was a breeze to quit compared to something as addictive as alcohol. I never got the shakes when I quit tobacco. I never got depressed when I quit tabacco,and I never had to go thru treatment to quit tabacco....sober 17 years....tabacco free 2 years
2007-07-02 05:57:17 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Try putting down the cigarette. Smokers are a huge burden to health care costs. Of course, its your right to smoke if you want to. It shouldnt be my responsibility to pick up that added cost on my insurance premiums.
It only makes sense that smokers pay an added cost to compensate for the added expense they create.
2007-07-02 05:44:51 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Drug addicts aren't eligible for disability for their addictions, why should smokers? Many times treatment is available for drug addicts and alcoholics who want to get better. The same is true for smoking cessation programs.
2007-07-02 05:44:46 · answer #4 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I have always said that. If they are so bad and so addictive why doesn't the government show some backbone and make the sale of cigarettes illegal just like the sale of other addictive substances?
2007-07-02 05:38:19 · answer #5 · answered by Brian 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
no. Addiction isn't a disability. I also disagree with gov't mandated smoking bans.
2007-07-02 05:58:37 · answer #6 · answered by hichefheidi 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe in some cases it can be covered under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
2007-07-02 05:39:09 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
an honest question.. not poking fun here... what state do you live in that they are allowed to discriminate and not hire you?
2007-07-02 05:40:30 · answer #8 · answered by pip 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"more addictive than heroin"
no, it is not.
try the patch.
2007-07-02 05:43:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sure, alcoholics get disability, why not????
2007-07-02 05:37:57 · answer #10 · answered by JOSE G 1 · 3⤊ 2⤋