Another one o' them smoking ban threads....

[cacophony]

Originally Posted by IsiliRunite

I don't want to pay for medical problems people bring on themselves.

Just like I believe there should be no healthcare coverage for a victim who wasn't wearing his seatbelt; he should have to pay the bill. If you smoke, drink heavily, or do other dumb shit that you choose to hurt yourself with, it should not hurt everyone else's wallets.

about a month ago i went to the ER after stupidly sticking my finger into an immersion blender. i use the immersion blender all the time and i'm always careful. this one time, this one single split second moment, i had a brain-fart and stuck my finger in there. at that moment the blender rolled in my hand, my palm came up against the power button, and the high-speed blade chopped my finger to the bone.

it was a stupid, stupid injury. i'm still reaping the rewards of it, with weekly physical therapy sessions, covered my my insurance. should i instead be sent to the poorhouse or left to suffer with my mangled digit because i did something stupid? have you ever made a stupid decision or are you above such imperfections?

and take the seatbelt example. do you think it's impossible that someone who usually wears their seatbelt might one day make the stupid decision to go without because they're just popping up the street to the corner store? is that person's life worth less than yours?

Originally Posted by IsiliRunite

Drinking heavily, like eating a "high-fat diet", is not something you measure truly objectively so I believe their should be no universal healthcare. Just like censorship, it is a slippery slope in which it is nearly impossible to fairly draw the line. People should be held accountable for the circumstances they create. Part of being "free" is benefiting or faulting on your own actions...not anybody else's.

and how about the non-drinker on his 21st birthday whose friends say, "aww come on, you have to celebrate" and he binges himself into alcohol poisoning. stupid stupid mistake. should be be left to rot because you're so much smarter than that?

and "high fat diet?" heh. how often do you eat out? how often do we all eat out? how many of us have REALLY looked at the nutritional information for most of the popular mid-priced restaurants? big shocker, most of us are too stupid to realize that a simple dinner out at the local chili's restaurant packs more calories and fat than your typical thanksgiving dinner. you might be shocked to realize how many "fat" slender people are out there.

when you give yourself the right to be judge, jury and executioner on "lifestyle choices" and deem some decisions "smart" and others "stupid" and impose limitations on healthcare based on those judgments, you enter very dangerous territory where suddenly statistics will be more important than the worth of a man's life.

obama is a smoker. still trying to kick the habit, as a matter of fact. if he quit today, his lungs would still not be considered "normal" for the next 15 years. and even after that he'll spend the rest of his life at a higher risk for lung cancer than us non-smokers. now, the man could become president. he could bring peace between warring nations, he could resolve the crisis in north korea, he could turn the country around, yadda yadda yadda.

the question is, if lung cancer is in the man's cards, is his life worth less because he made the "stupid" decision to smoke? should he be rejected from healthcare coverage and forced to cope with the ramifications of his stupid decisions because you want to stick it to him for failing to pass your "smart decision" test?

you're treading dangerous waters, my friend, when you endeavor to establish limitations on who "deserves" a fighting chance at life.