FairwoodKing wrote:
dwccrew wrote:
FairwoodKing wrote:
dwccrew wrote:
FairwoodKing wrote:
majorspark wrote:
FairwoodKing wrote:
Apparently the legislators agree with me. That's why these laws were passed.
In Ohio the smoking ban law was passed directly by the voters bypassing the legislature.
In that case, the voters agreed with me. That's why the law was passed. I must not be the only anti-smoker in this world.
Yes, the voters do agree with you, which is fine; I may not agree with it, but it is the way of it. Which is why I don't understand why you get so upset with what has happened in California when the voters voted down gay rights.
Let's talk about gay rights on the other thread.
I wasn't trying to focus on the gay rights so much as I wanted to focus on the electoral process. Same principle for both issues.
The will of the people is not always right. I'm gay and I want equal rights for people like me. That's why I disagree with the voters of California. On the other hand, I believe that smoking in public is a major health issue, and I support the votes taken in Ohio and Washington on this issue.
I totally agree with you, the will of the people is not always right. I also believe gays should have equal rights under the law as a heterosexual. The government should not distinguish any difference in law abiding citizens.
However, I disagree with the smoking ban as a non-smoker. I believe in public buildings and places that it should be banned i.e. schools, hospitals, airports, eating establishments in which majority of the business is food service. Drinking establishments should not be subject to the ban in my mind. But, the will of the people has spoken, although I don't feel it is right.
