I think the anti-smoking campaigns were about two things: generating revenue and reducing the number of smokers. In order to sell this to the American public and politicians, I don't think you could have it any other way. It is a compromise as are lots of things; however, I think many in government like the revenue generating aspects of anti-smoking taxes.

Without freedom, there is no virtue.

I just wish the smokers would stop flicking their butts all over the streets and parking lots.

I think the anti-smoking campaign run by "thetruth.org" has to be the stupidest "Don't do this, kids!" campaign I've ever seen in my life, and I was a DARE kid in the 80's. Some scruffy alternaboi with his agitprop attitude saying essentially, "Hey kids, smoking is bad for you!" Ooh, so underground and subversive! Wow, smoking IS bad for you! Way to talk the real truth to the people, man! Hey, maybe next they can subvert the evil Clorox company by telling the youth of today not to drink bleach! The whole campaign smacks of government bureaucrats trying to talk hip to the young people.

djs:

Without free will there is no virtue. Without virtue freedom is unsustainable. Freedom is a means, not an end.

I just wonder about the $200B settlement being paid when we are down to just one smoker, a transmission mechanic named Leroy Johnson in Charlotte, N.C.

He'll have to have a million-pack-a-day habit

Harry:

By then, the AGs will be collecting from many other sources (like Dick Grasso). The letter that Spitzer's flunky wrote in the WSJ today is a classic. Just wait until they start suing websites for connection 'fees'.

Smoking is not, actually, a sin.

David:

All self-destructive behavior is sinful--you are ordained to God, not to yourself.

David,

Life is destructive. We all die in the end, smokers just picked a different poison.

OJ:

I am not a believer. Therefore, I disagree that I am ordained to $DEITY.

The government has no business dictating how people should live their day-to-day lives as long as they don't interfere harmfully with the day-to-day lives of other people.

If Americans gave up their costly habit of trying to police the lifestyles of others, perhaps we could save billions on law enforcement and prison space. And perhaps we could put all that money to good use: against actual criminals, such as terrorists, but mostly back into the pockets of taxpaying Americans.

Finally, self-righteousness and moral superiority are even less attractive than the prospect of kissing a heavy smoker.

All self-destructive behavior is sinful? Can a Christian really believe that? What behavior isn't, ultimately, self-destructive? Is drinking beer sinful? Childbirth for a woman? Steak?

The government has no business dictating how people should live their day-to-day lives as long as they don't interfere harmfully with the day-to-day lives of other people.

Freedom must also include certain well-defined privileges to interfere harmfully with other people.

And, for what it's worth, I'm laic, not ordained. But, in any event, you're begging the question. G-d hasn't told me not to smoke.

David:

beer, steak, childbirth are all necessary and healthful parts of life--in moderation. Cigarettes are harmful with no redeeming quality.

As one of the Chosen you are arguably more ordained than any gentile can be:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=ordain

Problem here is that they are all going to get fat now that they quit smoking.

Mr. Cohen: Can you please explain how childbirth is harmful to a woman? I can't think of any reason why it would be, unless you are one of those Scarlett O'Hara types who think maybe adding a couple of inches to the waistline is a tragedy (which doesn't even happen to all women, but then maybe your are looking for a perpetual pinup, in which case aging is harmful to a woman too).

Buttercup:

Until modern medicine, the cause of death for roughly 20% of all women was pregnancy or post-partum complications.

Which, by OJ's reasoning, made pregnancy a sin.

Also, it seems that many female saints are characterized by self-destructive behavior. But I guess self destruction is OK if you are doing it for God.

Of course, as a non-believer, all this whole ordained to God thing (what's with the passive voice, anyway?) is just a load of hooey. So why do non-believers have to pay the tax?

Allowing the government to decide for us which personal risks we may take is to create Nanny Statism.

How European of you, OJ.

Buttercup:

I meant only that childbirth, like smoking, is a voluntary activity that, if engaged in, requires one to run the risk of an early death.

Nor am I suggesting that the benefits of the two activities are commensurate, though OJ is nuts if he thinks that people smoke cigarettes for no benefit whatever.

Personally, I don't smoke cigarettes and have never understood how people manage to train themselves to do so. I also have no objection to added inches around the waist.

Jeff:

You don't get to turn down your ordination, just squander it.

OJ:

A) I do.

B) The ordination, such as it is, is between me and whatever God is, or isn't. It certainly isn't between me and you, or me and the government.

C) Unless, of course, you want to make government the ordaining authority for all personal decisions. How very European of you.

BTW--I have never smoked, and don't like it in the least. But I like the Nanny State even less.

Jeff:

No, you don't.

No, it isn't.

No.

Yes, you've elevated means above ends--that error lies at the core of libertarianism.

OJ:

I turned it down at 7:16am. Just checked, and I am still not ordained.

If there is a limit beyond which you don't want government intruding in personal decisions, it isn't the least obvious.

I don't elevate means above ends. Unlike you, I am not the least bit worried about government underreaching its grasp.

Jeff: My problem is that you say pretty things about limiting government, but you object to any other institution having any ability to impose limits.

Jeff:

You are.

There isn't.

Its grasp is infinite--that's a means, not an end.

The ant-smoking crusade with its imposition on the rights of property is wrong. Taxing tobacco is perfectly within the limits of the proper role of government since, like whiskey, it has harmful properties and the tax is aviodable. Over-tax it and smuggling will occur and the rule of law will be harmed. It is, like all consumption taxes, a self-regulating process.

Tom:

It doesn't happen though. Folks tend to obey laws.

oj-

I agree with you up to a point. If it becomes cost effective for a so-inclined "business' person to smuggle, he will smuggle. It is a venerable and ancient American tradition. Human nature hasn't changed.

Jeff's attitude shows why Libertarians will never win more than 1% of the vote. What libertarians really preach are atheism and libertinism under the guise of liberty. Thankfully, the vast majority of Americans can see straight through their act.

Tom:

But who will buy?

OJ:

Actually, I'm not. Like I said, I checked. God told me it was my life to do with what I wanted, and to stop bugging him with such obviously silly questions.

David:

I don't have any problem with private institutions imposing limits on their voluntary adherents. Mormons, for instance, prohibit their members drinking alcohol or smoking, and if you don't like it quit.

That is fine. That is also why we don't need a statist government taking these matters into its own hands. Or, if you favor that outcome, then stop whining about statism.

Jeff:

You are and you even seem like the kind to recognize it before it's too late.

Sorry, OJ, God was quite explicit on that matter. In fact, He thought it a pretty silly notion that He would give humans free will and simultaneously yoke them in such a way.

A religionist's concept of "ordained" at once claims to know what God's plan is, while simultaneously proclaims God's plan is beyond human ken.

This "ordained" thing, though, is an excellent tool to justify any coercion the claimant might have in mind.

Just ask the Taliban.

Jeff:

You're being ordained to God does not make you behave in any way, it requires you to do so to make yourself fully human as He intended. You can waste the gift.

Folks tend to obey laws forbidding them to do what they weren't going to do anyway.

It's always been against the law to buy cigarettes and booze if you're underage, but everybody I know disregarded those laws.

I bought my first pint of rum when I was 16 from a state-operated store.

Fifty years ago. Believe it or not, and I know you don't, that which you personally experience does not describe a universal experience at all times in Man's history.

OJ:

Take it up with God, not me. I'm taking His Word for it--He didn't Ordain anybody.

You can tell it is the True Word because of all the capital letters.

Jeff:

Why do you think He's talking to you? To let you know you're Ordained.

Uh, no, quite the opposite. Unless, of course, God's word means nothing to you.

Why?