I don't mind if you marry your gay partner... but don't you DARE smoke in here!
Just this week the Supreme Judicial Court ruled that there's nothing in the Massachusetts Constitution that says anything about forbidding gay people from marrying. Very nice, I say! Let's see where that takes us. I felt the decision was well-argued, clear-headed, and sensibly construed. Reasonable people may differ as to the implications, but that's another story.
And then yesterday Massachusetts' legislature proved that the Bay State is allergic to doing ANYTHING 100% right, when it passed a bill which simultaneously permits communities to allow Sunday liquor sales and bans smoking in all public places statewide.
That's right: good-bye blue laws, hello brown laws! That is, provided the bill becomes statute. You can marry who you'd like, but NO SMOKING.
For a real insight into the tangled world of half-measures and entrenched interests that is Massachusetts' political landscape, go read the article. I guarantee your eyes will glaze over by the time you get to this part, which decisively proves that Massachusetts is collectively insane:
"In 1990, the Massachusetts Legislature relaxed alcohol rules to allow Sunday sales between Thanksgiving and New Year's Day and in cities and towns within 10 miles of New Hampshire and Vermont, which permit Sunday sales. Border legislators determined to preserve that competitive advantage helped doom a House attempt to lift the ban last month. But the measure was presented as a separate bill, and the idea's inclusion in a broader measure helped push it through last night."
[wik] I should note here that I support smoking bans on personal grounds (I don't like to smell like smoke, the bartender black-lung question, etc.) but don't really like it on libertarian grounds. I'm real conflicted and stuff.
[alsø wik] And don't give me that crap about secondhand smoke being harmless. Bullshit. Bullshit. Bullshit.
on
| § 2
§ 2 Comments
[ You're too late, comments are closed ]
As the voice of public health
As the voice of public health - smoking bans are not about personal liberty but about preserving the public health of the commonwealth. If smoking did not effect other people, this would be an intrusive law, but it does effect other people.
Liquor sale bans effect personal liberty because liquor, if consumed in moderation and not a prelude to operating heavy machinery does not adversly effect other people.
Well put. Public health is an
Well put. Public health is an issue that libertarians (whether "L" or "l") miss too often when bemoaning the loss of individual liberty. For all that many libertarians talk about "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins," the actual reality is much more complicated than that.
What surprises me is that people still bicker over whether secondhand smoke is bad for you. If it weren't, my wife wouldn't have a seasonal dry, hacking cough that starts when, and only when, our neighbors bring their two-pack-a-day habit indoors.