Viewing Thread:
"Smoking (thread closed)"

This isn't another "omgay, smokin is bad 4 u!!!" but more of a question to anyone here who smokes - is it just the cardboard chemical crap from the UK/US companies or more rarer exotic stuff like Giantes? Not a smoker myself but I'd like to know.

smv wrote:
> Yay for Light, voice of reason in this thread. And a non-smoker to
> boot!

Alright..I'll say it. Ahem.

What a kiss ass..

:)

munn wrote:

> So should we just raise awareness rather than stop people who
> self-harm or stop people from trying to commit suicide?
>
> That's harming their bodies, but it makes sense to stop them rather
> than saying "that's bad, you could die blah blah blah".
>
> Smoking is doing the same thing, essentially, as well as harming
> other people with passive smoking.


What an absolute stinking pile. "I don't understand why people smoke, but they're harming themselves so they must be the same as self-harmers." For fu...

First up; the passive smoking has already been kicked to the kerb. Unless you're going to continue your approach to health when it comes to driving and subsequent pollution, I think we've fairly comprehensively shown that the "passive smoking" bleat is entirely irrelevant.

Secondly, if you're going to try and apply that rather loathsome "stop people doing things that harm them", then one assumes you're going to apply the exact same logic to drinking? Or are you going to say that people who smoke should be given the same psychiatric help that self-harmers have access to? Perhaps you think someone should be put in restraints rather than be allowed to light up?

It's been a while since I read such a blatant piece of "I don't do this, ergo no-one should" bilge, but it's almost refreshing to do so.

Celestine wrote:
> stuff

Of course, when it comes to you my dear, I'm in favour of smoking being compulsory. If only we still had the good old days, where spitehags like you could be burnt for witchcraft the very instant you started getting annoyed that you're not getting paid enough attention.

Hehe! Charming as always. :-)

Anysway, in reply to Munns point, not sure about smoking but excessive drinking is kind of "treated" in the way self harm and the like is.
I guess that smoking damage isn't quite as extreme and is something that adds up over a very long period of time rather than instantaneous damage, like self harm and alcohol abuse can be...

Strafio wrote:
> Hehe! Charming as always. :-)

Oh, you know me...patient to a fault.

>
> Anysway, in reply to Munns point, not sure about smoking but
> excessive drinking is kind of "treated" in the way self
> harm and the like is.
> I guess that smoking damage isn't quite as extreme and is something
> that adds up over a very long period of time rather than
> instantaneous damage, like self harm and alcohol abuse can be...

Thing is, self harm has it's roots in psychological problems (usually self-loathing in some way, shape, or form). Alcoholics almost always have low self-esteem, as do self harmers. Hence the similar treatment.

Smoking has no roots whatsoever in self loathing. It's a social activity for the most part (how many people d'you know who only smoke when they're also drinking with friends?), which can lead onto addiction. Hence the need to ensure that education about what smokers are doing to themselves is available.

Coming up with spurious reasons to try and stop people smoking for no reason than you personally don't like it (a la Munn) is something that immediately marks one out for full membership of the Conservative Party...

As long as somebody doesn't wave their fag all over me in a restuarant then I don't really mind.

Banned it in transport/offices so that isn't an issue. Though I sympathise with people who get thrown outside of buildings like lepers. Also, I think it is kind of crap if every local pub has to ban it... people that go for a pint/smoke for decades get told they can't all of a sudden.

Or something, haven't we has this discussion before?

SHEEPY wrote:

> Or something, haven't we has this discussion before?

Many, many, MANY times.

Light wrote:
> SHEEPY wrote:
>
> Or something, haven't we has this discussion before?
>
> Many, many, MANY times.

It's still always a thrill, apparently, for Light to engage in a topic where he can spread his gargoyle wings and toot his horns, overrunning the topic with his crappy opinion drafted with such eloquent malarky. I've never heard of anyone with such a stick up their ass, except for righteous conservative holy rollers. Yet he'll turn it out and wave at everyone to maintain liberal ground. I think he just needs to overcompensate. But, the clear fact of the matter is that he's just full of shiat and it just spews in major chunks.

It's all blah blah blah, look at me and how smart I am...I'm right and your wrong crap. Alriiiiight Liiight, you're the foremost expert.. of malarky.

And, I don't smoke. But, I won't steal your show of thunderous, attention-seeking crap..please continue to bash me and everyone else for that matter for speaking our minds and having an opinion other than your own..

You obviously need this more than I do. *hugs*

I seriously missed the thread where you two first hit it off.

Ineedsleep wrote:
> I seriously missed the thread where you two first hit it off.

Oh, it was a treat to be sure...