This is in the same state I live in.I'm not surprised.
I am shocked they felt the need to branch out they seem busy enough to me.
Yes, you have every right not to smoke in your home, but you have no right to tell someone else they cannot smoke in theirs. Or even on their outdoor terrace. Next will you tell people that if they have visitors in your smoke-free environment that their visitors cannot smoke in the parking lot?
"I'm for smoking cessation," he says, a former smoker himself. "But with a benefit so disappointingly low, and adverse effects that are piling up — blackouts, aggression, heart events, suicide and depression — the bad things outweigh the small good effect of the drug. So what we are saying is we should restrict its use."Restrict it's use?
Banning tobacco will cause a dichotomy of smokers and non-smokers. The non-smoker majority undeniably already has a negative view of smokers, and if the State makes a stand, smokers would be at risk of becoming social deviants, or worse, outcasts.
Whether it is an outright ban, a gradual ban or denying only elective surgery, there would be a creation of "folk devils" or the Singapore version of a witch-hunt anxiety.
Smokers would be judged because despite laws that protect non-smokers, there is no suggestion to protect smokers from non-smokers' moral, ethical, political or social "gazing".
This is more than a harmless stare. The gaze of an employer toward his or her employees or an institution toward its members involves an element of judgement. Previously, it was racism. Will it be Tobacco-phobia next?
It is heartening to see how our society has modernised and become health conscious. It is disheartening to see the constant attack on smokers and their way of life.