Have Any Of You So-called "liberals" Read This... maybe question your fascist roots?

Question

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/250407antismoking.htm

Answer 1

Ummm, maybe I'm mistaken, but weren't the Facists
ultra-conservative ? And isn't "liberal" the antithesis of ultra-conservative ?

:-(

Answer 2

What is it with you right-wing lunatics?
First, there is no scientific proof that relates smoking to lung cancer, so we can't ban smoking. You get the proof that was being hidden by tobacco companies, while they were denying it, and you still act like it doesn't exist.

Then a mention of global climate problems are suggested. It is ignored, claimed that more research needs done. 3 decades of research is done which results in global climate change ideas. The same so-called scientists, that stated smoking didn't cause cancer, once again step forward to deny Global warming, in a way that seems more like they are denying the effects of pollution on the environment, rather than global warming, and you people buy the corporate response again.
Please do tell me why you people constantly and without fail, buy each and every corporate sponsored denial and excuse, as long as it is attached by right-wing blow-hards, to make-believe demonized liberal ideology!

Whats wrong? wasn't that PC enough for you?

Answer 3

As a liberal, I believe strongly in personal rights, including the right to do absolutely anything you want so long as it doesn't hurt anyone else. As a smoker, drinker, and such myself, this is an issue particularly dear to my heart.

As much as I love to compare anyone who is against drinking to Hitler, I feel compelled the article cited here is somewhat overreaching in its claims. Despite what we may be programmed to think, the Nazi party was not lead by Satan and intended as the embodiment of ultimate evil; the vast majority of party members really did believe themselves to be doing the right and Christian thing. On top of this, nobody is really as good a sociologist to predict the incidental positive (or negative) effects of their actions. Compare the situation in which Coca-Cola was saved as a result of the Coca-Cola company attempting to phase it out. "We were neither as smart or as stupid as anyone would have you believe," was the summation one of the then-executives gave of the situation.

Answer 4

This is only the beginning. No prayer in schools, no spanking your children, and I am talking a swat on the bottom, no smoking in your home or car, no religious freedom, no Christmas, and the list will be getting longer the more we sit and let it happen. Put that together with making women dependant on welfare to raise the next generation, and you have a new marxist movement of an entire generation who will be dependant on the government.

Answer 5

To be fair, simply because two groups hold an idea in common does not mean the groups share any other ideas or characteristics.

That said, "Slow Burn" (http://www.amazon.com/Slow-Burn-Great-American-Antismoking/dp/0961946539 ) is an eye-opening book on the topic.

Answer 6

I guess we should do our patriotic duty and smoke then. After all, smoking, by your reasoning, would be fighting the fascists right?

Answer 7

This from the people who brought us prohibition and criminalized homosexuality. Of course, I guess I'll break it to you the Nazis were cons. And the only people I see banning life's joys these days are the cons.

Answer 8

the difference is that Hitler did not do it because it's harmful to non-smokers...he did it because "he said so"....Sorry this is a terrible attempt to discredit Liberals...The truth is that it's a PUBLIC BUILDING and it is a law enacted by elected officials who represent the citizens.....Go outside and smoke or chew and spit in your pocket.

Answer 9

Well, I was going to take this question seriously, but then I saw it was an Alex Jones site...

Never mind. LOL

Answer 10

Wow, that's really stupid and arguing ad hominem.

I would use Godwin's Law, but I really can't, since Hitler actually did that.