Employer threatening to ban e-cigs...
- Thread starter estebanrey
- Start date
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 3,089
- Location
- Edinburgh
well,
Why do people smoke- happy feelings and addiction.
and with most people the happy fades and the addiction stays.
If we could have the happy without the addiction then yay.
I wasn't stating all substances in that are commonly associated with 'addicts' should be banned, just that if it causes addiction it should be banned.
"Necessity is the mother of invention"
you can take the caffeine out of coffee, take the addiction out of the happy and you've only got happy.
(wow that's a gross overlook of many fundamental parts of addiction but oh well)
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
I see your point though, they are what people consider fun, people might get genuine excitement from smoking........
Like popping a chubby after a toke on a cigar?
I kid, I kid...
But I think you're seeing the point. People smoke for the nicotine, for the rush it gives and the feeling its effects provide. While in the beginning that effect is strong, the body soon becomes resistant and so you have people going through 60 a day, or whatever ridiculous number.
Then, with smoking, the problems start. The health effects begin.
With vaping, that problem doesn't happen. And without the problem, there is... no problem. So then it moves into the realm of other people enforcing their individual opinions on the nicotine user simply because they're don't like the idea of someone being addicted to (or, in many cases, simply enjoying) something that they don't see the point of. But both you and I know what we can both do with our opinions on things of no consequence in the face of someone who disagrees with them: We can shove 'em, and accept doing so because that's how society works. Better yet, we just keep quiet and avoid conflict.
What stands out, however, is that while the reaction to vaping is indeed simply borne of personal opinion or judgement of someone's lifestyle, it seems to hold more weight to those who spew simply because it looks similar to smoking. It holds all the weight, but none of the content. Yet they're seen as the justified one having a go at a dirty addict who is doing nothing to harm anyone because of little more than a basic visual link. Which is a bit depressing when it comes to analysing those mindsets.
In short, nicotine feels good, and so people continue to use it. Some people don't like being drunk, either. Me? I love being drunk. Hell I'm probably approaching the verge of "functioning alcoholic" but still, I'm not causing an issue with my drinking, so nobody cares. Why not the same for nicotine?
Why don't some people cherish freedom ?
So to cherish freedom you have to endorse things that damage society?
What about people who want a better society and these government enforced rules are in line with that?
I think fox hunting is disgusting and i'd support a ban on it, doesn't mean i don't cherish freedom.
I think clubs/bars should have their 24hr licence revoked and have to stop selling alcohol at 12am, doesn't mean i don't cherish freedom.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 3,089
- Location
- Edinburgh
Why don't some people cherish freedom ?
If someone is addicted, then part of their freedom is taken away.
You could then argue that someone should be free to be addicted, but in being addicted their freedom to stop their addiction is inhibited
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
I refer our moralist friends to the version of Niemoller's poem:
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out-- Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
Nicotine is fine if A) Its not effecting me and B) Isn't causing an issue for society.
Now i have no idea what your like when your drunk, but a lot of people get aggressive, lose self control and inflict harm upon others due to being drunk.
Now that effects me and causes issues for society, which in my case is why i have a problem with it.
Last edited:
Giggidy
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
Wise words, I'll abstain from eating food or drinking H2O from the morning.
That's a wise move. Dihydrogen Oxide has been shown to have serious potential for poisoning, you know.
Soldato
- Joined
- 11 May 2007
- Posts
- 9,213
- Location
- Surrey
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
I rather think it does.
I think fox hunting is cruel so I don't do it. I don't expect other people to behave the same, because I cherish freedom. I see minor security risks in habib/burka stuff but I don't campaign for a ban because I cherish the freedomn to dress how I want. I don't have a car but I accept the enviro damage because I cherish freedom. I don't get drunk and fight and throw up in town on a Friday (Tuesday is my night
) but I don't immediately say, "Let's ban alcohol".
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 3,089
- Location
- Edinburgh
Wise words, I'll abstain from eating food or drinking H2O from the morning.
you see you're being pedantic
People who are addicted and can't quit need help.
There is no reason anyone should take a substance and become addicted to it.
Addiction is a problem we have no need for, in all it's forms.
Food in order to survive isn't an addiction.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
I still don't see the point in that, though, when the addiction causes no problems. Someone living with a silent addiction might as well just be treating it as having food. Nobody would ever know, or care. If it never becomes a problem, then where's the problem?
It seems you're speaking from more of a moralistic standpoint, which is entirely subjective.
I rather think it does.
I think fox hunting is cruel so I don't do it. I don't expect other people to behave the same, because I cherish freedom. I see minor security risks in habib/burka stuff but I don't campaign for a ban because I cherish the freedomn to dress how I want. I don't have a car but I accept the enviro damage because I cherish freedom. I don't get drunk and fight and throw up in town on a Friday (Tuesday is my night
Ok i see where your coming from.
All they would have to change is either killing the fox quickly i.e. shotgun to the face or replace the fox with a dummy.
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
That isn't pedantry. You are addicted to oxygen, energy, and water. You need them, you seek them out, almost at the exclusion of everything else, and you are rewarded with continuing life (hopefully).
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2013
- Posts
- 3,089
- Location
- Edinburgh
I rather think it does.
I think fox hunting is cruel so I don't do it. I don't expect other people to behave the same, because I cherish freedom. I see minor security risks in habib/burka stuff but I don't campaign for a ban because I cherish the freedomn to dress how I want. I don't have a car but I accept the enviro damage because I cherish freedom. I don't get drunk and fight and throw up in town on a Friday (Tuesday is my night
.....not sure if hyperbole or....
you accept environmental damage because you cherish freedom?
You accept people should be assaulted because you cherish freedom?
It's like saying murder's ok because he's free to do it....
If it effects other people then your freedom should be considerate of others