Debate: ARE YOU AGAINST SMOKING?
Side: NO

But you would support anything else? Like nudism, homosexuality, shooting heroin, self-mutilation etc?Also, are you saying that I can’t for example hire a hitman to kill me? In this case, my death comes with my consent. Who are you to tell me when I can and when I can’t and how I can and how I can’t end my life?I'm not not okay with nudism, I think you always need to have your genetallia covered. As for homosexuality, again, that doesn't take away any of your liberties at all unless you consider the right to force your view on others to be a liberty.And don't try and be niave about it, I'm not saying people have the right to hire someone to kill themselves because the person they hired would be, in fact, klling someone else.The problem with liberty and freedom is that they always come at the expense of other liberties and other freedoms. Some people will end up with more liberty at the expense of someone else.Heres the thing, if smoking is legal and you don't like it, take a few steps back, thats what you have to do. If smoking is illegal all smokers have to give up smoking, all tobacco business would have to close and everyone they employ would lose their job. Tell me, who is giving up more?And you clearly demonstrate this in regards to the smoking issue. You’ve basically told me that the smoker’s liberty is more important than my liberty to be in a non-toxic environment.Toxic? They aren't dumping mercury in the water their smoking, the smoke can only be inhaled if your really close to them and the wind is blowing in your direction. You have the liberty to take a few steps back, its not that hard and its what I do when people smoke, I step back I don't grab their cig and stomp it out.It’s me who has to leave, it’s me who has to take a few steps back to make room for the smoker’s habits. It is I who has to let smokers encroach on my freedoms.You don't have to leave, you can just take 2 or 3 steps back, they would have to give up smoking or buy them illegally. Your doing more against them.It’s not the smoker who should leave and smoke somewhere else. Heavens no, it’s the non-smokers who have to put up with it or gtfo.Have you ever heard of a non-smoking zone? Theres a lot of them.We can’t intrude on a person’s freedom to smoke, so I guess the best thing to do is.. to let them intrude on our freedom to have a non-toxic environment.Their "toxic" enviornment is within a few feet of them in whatever direction the wind is blowing, take 2 steps back and your fine, its what I do and it works just fine.Basically, you’re saying that not only will illegalizing smoking not stop it, but it will also encourage drug smuggling and under-the-counter style profiteering.That is exactly what I am saying, if you deny this then... well, you need to take a look at recent events and some not so recent events.Why do you think murder is declared illegal? It’s not like anti-murder laws actually prevent murder – no they don’t, murder still happens and it happens a lot. Should we then legalize murder because we can’t stop it anyway? No. By keeping it illegal, less murder will be comitted.Don't try and compare murder to smoking they are to entirely different things.Illegalizing actions and substances will most certainly decrease the amount of people making and abusing the said actions and substances. Some people are afraid to get on the bad side of the law, some people are afraid of getting on the bad side of criminals, some people simply out of principle do not want to break the law. The amount of people that smoke and drink alchohol – that amount will inescapably decrease.Really now? Then tell me why during the prohibition almost everyone drank and there were more speak easys in most cities than there are bars today? It doesn't decrease anything, just makes it unregulated and distracts police from actual issues... like murder.Also, why should the state protect freedoms that affect other people? Just by being in the close proximity of a smoker has bad effects on my health. Yet not once did you imply that it’s the smoker who has to leave, it is I who has to leave.Again, take 2 steps back and your fine, its not bad for your health. Smoking is bad because you hold the smoke in for a long period of time and it damages you over time, catching a wiff of it in your nose isn't going to give you cancer.But a guitar player can take away my liberty to a quiet walk in the park? How come he gets to take away my freedoms because he likes to play his instrument?Ever hear of ear plugs? As a musician I use them for performances, but you should buy a pair if you really don't like music. Ever hear of a music player? Listen to your own music. Ever hear of appreciating music and not finding someone who is just strumming a few chords (that you can barley hear anyway) as you pass him to be a nuisnace?I don’t see how consent from animals is relevant? I mean, everything which we use animals for – you do realize it’s without their consent? Medical tests, food, entertainment – it’s all done without their consent. Why? It’s because for the most part, we don’t treat animals as conscious beings, we treat them as resources – as means to make our lives more comfortable and pleasurable.This is true, there is nothing against killing animals and suing them as resources, theres no problem with them being used like that, but having sex with them is not making use of an animal its just rape and animal cruelty, not to say killing them isn't but they are being used as food and other resources.And with regards to heroin, see above. While you can’t stop junkies, sure, legalizing heroin will do only one thing – create more junkies.Not it won't, all it does is control it, regulate and keep it out of the hands of kids. There are only two effective ways of dealing with drugs, Milton Friedman's way and Mao Zedong's way.It’s patently absurd the notion that legalizing drugs won’t increase the number of users. My argument for this position is above.It controls the substance and regulates it, there might be slightly more addicts but there would also be less because they could go to treatment instead of being cuffed by the police and thrown in prison. And I guess I'm sorry for the long post as well.