People Shoudn't Smoke Cigarettes

Furthering and maintaining one's life may not be the intention of everyone, but it can be said that humans are alive to live. To purposely indulge in habits that would refrain one from being able to do so would go against what could be the intention of our existence. Though we are not required to live, while we are alive it's important, though not required, to take part in actions that will allow us to do just that. Smoking cigarettes prevents smokers from being able to partake in what one may call a human duty. Though no duty is required, it is certainly present. A rational, though sometimes selfish, decision can often be thought of as one that protects or ensures a person's longevity, If a person has the intention of staying alive, and while doing so staying healthy, it certainly is irrational for them to partake in smoking. A person should not smoke because when they do they are purposely shortening the span of their life, our lives being the only thing in this world that each of us have. By evidence to Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative, one must will the maxim that can be made universal law. The smoking of cigarettes doesn't fall into this law. Yes, it may be deemed appropriate for a forty-five year old man to smoke a cigarette, but could the same be said of a three year old? There are already restrictions on the smoking of cigarettes (i.e., age restrictions, parameters in which smoking can be done, what actually goes into a cigarette). Smoking cigarettes cannot be made into universal law. It can not be said that in every circumstance there can ever be, a person should be able to smoke. Because of this, one should not smoke cigarettes because the action doesn't pass the categorical imperative set up by Immanuel Kant. By the same vein, another version of the categorical imperative states that one should treat others as ends, not simply means to an end. By smoking cigarettes, smokers treat their own bodies as means to an end. Smokers do not value the intrinsic good their bodies have, but instead soil and pollute it (as well as the environment and other humans). By doing so, smoking cigarettes fails to meet the standards of this version of the categorical imperative. Whether a smoker regrets their decision to smoke or not (often they don't) and whether or not they decide to quit is, indeed, a matter of personal framework. However, one can fall in and not regret their decision to smoke. In fact, many continue to do so until their bodies eventually give in to death. But because it is smoking that could cause their death, it's vital that smokers don't smoke. I do agree that if less people drove there would be fewer deaths caused by motor vehicle accidents. However, driving is more of a human necessity than smoking. Driving is, too, very dangerous – but there are in fact rewards to driving, while smoking provides virtually none. Though the risk and reward factor for driving still may not balance out, the margin would still be more appealing than that of smoking cigarettes. Even smoking in designated areas is dangerous, particularly to oneself. If people keep smoking, people will keep dying smoking related deaths. It is true that not all smokers suffer the same fate, but because they often do, one should not take the chance and simply not smoke.