Ban on smoking!!!

OK, first of all I should declare here that I am a smoker and that does, of course, dictate to a certain degree, my attitude in this matter. However, I believe that I am able to stand outside my own preferences and imagine what stance I might take if I was not a smoker, but merely a liberal person, mostly left of centre, who supports human rights and civil liberties. I am absolutely incensed by the City of Frankston's decision to ban smoking in public places just to keep certain factions of the community happy. It is, I believe, a violation imposed on smokers, who on the whole form part of a group of people who are already considered less worthy and who are only expressing their right to engage in an activity that they enjoy. Individuals 'self medicate' in various ways and for numerous reasons. Perhaps smokers can only tolerate engaging with the public by employing this mode of self medication. Smokers are already used as scapegoats, one being that they fill up hospitals because of the diseases they ultimately suffer. Sorry, but there are many people who take up hospital beds who have gravely damaged their own bodies and the bodies of others because they drive too fast, drink and drive, take drugs and drive, are involved in street fights, have liver and kidney cancer, etc. etc. I don't doubt that smoking is not good for your health, but excess food, alcohol, lying out in the sun, and any number of activities may threaten our health and well being, and people who engage in these activities are not continually targeted! No, I think this campaign is primarily about eroding the pleasures of others; much like the media's obsession with people who over-eat or who are obese. Many of us would rather starve ourselves than look even slightly over-weight and so we attack those who look like they are having a real good feed! It's a matter of 'if I'm not eating, then you should bloody-well not being eating either'. Or perhaps the campaigners for smoke-free zones and quit smoking are just trying to free up hospital beds for those who've had so much alcohol that they need a liver transplant or the aging population who requires hip replacements, I don't know, but it's certainly turning into a vendetta of sorts. I am reminded of Slavok Zizek's piece of writing, which states: "A close look demonstrates that we truly enjoy smoking and drinking only in public, as part of a public “carnival,” the sacred suspension of ordinary rules. The same goes even for swearing and sex: none of them is at its most radical an activity in which we “explode” in spontaneous passion against the stifled public conventions – they are, on the contrary, both practiced “against the pleasure principle,” for the gaze of the Other. (A personal note: I like to swear only in public, never in private, where I find doing it stupid and inappropriate, indecent even.) Violating the public rules is thus not done by the private ego, but is enjoined by the same public rules which are in themselves redoubled, divided". http://www.lacan.com/essays/?page_id=397. The issue of whether or not smoke from someone who is smoking in the open air affects the health of others, is not, I believe the issue here ~ what about all the fumes that we must inhale from car exhaust and industry? I believe that the rationale is that smoking stinks and that that the shopping centre will attract more people if there is a no smoking rule. So, is the rule just all about shop keepers making more money? Why is the god-almighty dollar ruling our lives? Ok, if they really want to ban something and impose fines, what about those who openly drink alcohol in public and make a nuisance of themselves with their loud and unruly behavior. What about people who wear copious amounts of perfume and after-shave lotion on public transport, which is a real inconvenience to people like me, who are allergic to it! And what about passing wind? Should those who fart in public be fined? I'm attempting humor here, because otherwise I might get too serious. Perhaps we should ban those who wear t/shirts with slogans that we find offensive, or those who wear the color green. It's all totally ridiculous. Perhaps we should demand that those who smoke should wear a special tag as identification so they can be excluded from certain areas before they attempt to light up. Mmmm, didn't the Jews have to wear a yellow patch so they could be identified - thus creating possibilities for their persecution? Wasn't there a time when blacks could only sit at the back of buses and were segregated from the white community? When will all of this stop? Why do the orthodox always have to be involved in attempting to destroy the pleasure of others. Are their pleasures the only ones worth preserving?