Non-smoking GOGO's!

[jacko 8,822]

BS. You are free to not go places you know allow smoking. Smokers are free to not go places that don't allow smoking. If you want a naked Thai spinner bouncing on your lap, well, most of those places also allow smoking. You are free to make the tradeoff.

 

Keep your slippery slope to western nanny state fascism back in your home country.

My friend, if you are stupid enough to smoke, you are stupid enough to believe such things.

My home country is Thailand ........

Well more accurately, it is the place I now call home.

Edited April 16, 2012 by jacko

[tko 219]

My friend, if you are stupid enough to believe banning something is freedom, you are stupid enough to believe your home country is Thailand. You live in Thailand. Your home country (and your mindset) is western.

 

Banning = restricting = NOT freedom.

[jacko 8,822]

My friend, if you are stupid enough to believe banning something is freedom, you are stupid enough to believe your home country is Thailand. You live in Thailand. Your home country (and your mindset) is western.

 

Banning = restricting = NOT freedom.

I know where my home is thank you, you do not. Home is where you hang your hat. When I say to a GGG I am going home, I am not heading for the airport.

Thailand bans gambling, is that then freedom?

When your will is strong enough, apply it to stopping smoking, you will benefit for it! Your weakness and addiction and devotion to a dried leaf is hardly freedom. Get that albatross off your back!

Edited April 15, 2012 by jacko

[tko 219]

I know where my home is thank you, you do not. Home is where you hang your hat. When I say to a GGG I am going home, I am not heading for the airport.

Thailand bans gambling, is that then freedom?

When your will is strong enough, apply it to stopping smoking, you will benefit for it! Your weakness and addiction and devotion to a dried leaf is hardly freedom.

 

But your home country (notice the word after home?) is the one you can't be deported from. I Agree that home (without the word country appended) is where ever you want to call it.

 

No, banning gambling is not freedom. I also saw people gambling almost every day of my last trip. They chose to in spite of the ban. Choice = freedom.

 

I have quit before, and I expect I'll quit again someday. Right now I enjoy it, so I choose to do it. That's freedom.

[jacko 8,822]

 

I have quit before, and I expect I'll quit again someday. Right now I enjoy it, so I choose to do it. That's freedom.

You are deluding yourself.... being desperate to put a smouldering leaf in your mouth and pull the fumes into your soon to be cancerous lungs is not freedom.

You quit before, but had to smoke again.... freedom of choice? You are a slave to it.

You do not enjoy it, you need it, like that pathetic addict begging for coins with the cute dog.

Wise up.

 

Good night, I will retire now, to my bed, in my home, in Thailand.

Sadly, what has happened in my country of birth since I left, makes it far removed from a desirable home.

[tko 219]

Sadly, what has happened in my country of birth since I left, makes it far removed from a desirable home.

 

Yet you want to bring that mindset to Thailand. Please don't. It will be my home as well, though not my home country, in a couple more years and I would like it to remain free.

[Bazle 1,500]

I've never figured out why people travel around the world to visit a country that doesn't enforce their nanny state laws so we can experience a little freedom, like not enforcing the laws against prostitution, nudity in bars, etc, but then are offended when they also don't enforce the law against smoking in the bars.

So you'd be happy if the Thais did not enforce laws against harrassment and murder in the name of freedom? What you call "freedom", I call anarchy.

[tko 219]

So you'd be happy if the Thais did not enforce laws against harrassment and murder in the name of freedom? What you call "freedom", I call anarchy.

 

Of course not, don't be rediculous. Laws protecting people from intentional attacks are necessary.

 

So you'd be happy if the Thais enforced the laws against nudity in bars and prostitution in the name of avoiding anarchy? See, I can be rediculously over the top as well.

Edited April 15, 2012 by tko

[Bazle 1,500]

Of course not, don't be rediculous. Laws protecting people from intentional attacks are necessary.

 

So you'd be happy if the Thais enforced the laws against nudity in bars and prostitution in the name of avoiding anarchy? See, I can be rediculously over the top as well.

Nudity and prostitution do not constitute a danger to personal safety. You are the one who is ridiculous if you cannot recognise that simple difference.

[tko 219]

Nudity and prostitution do not constitute a danger to personal safety. You are the one who is ridiculous if you cannot recognise that simple difference.

 

Many disagree that it is not a danger to personal safety and health (mental and physical), especially for the girls. You ignore that because that freedom is one you wish to enjoy.

 

I don't think the bans should be enforced because it is a free choice made by adults without the intent to attack others.

[Bazle 1,500]

Nudity and prostitution do not constitute a danger to personal safety. You are the one who is ridiculous if you cannot recognise that simple difference.

Many disagree that it is not a danger to personal safety and health (mental and physical), especially for the girls. You ignore that because that freedom is one you wish to enjoy.

And who are these "many". Reference, please.

 

I don't think the bans should be enforced because it is a free choice made by adults without the intent to attack others.

Where is the free choice? In Patts, my choice is to have nudity and smoke, or no nudity.

[Big_Brian 179]

Has anyone given any thought to the girls? We can walk if we hate smoke that much, but the girls have to stay in it all night - and while exercising at that. Can't be healthy.

[tko 219]

And who are these "many". Reference, please.

 

Here's one: http://archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/65/3/337

 

This is an excerpt from another one:

The sex of prostitution is physically harmful to women in prostitution. STDs (including HIV/AIDS, chlamydia, gonorrhea, herpes, human papilloma virus, and syphilis) are alarmingly high among women in prostitution. Only 15 % of the women in the study had never contracted one of the STDs, not including AIDS, most injurious to health (chlamydia, syphilis, gonorrheal, herpes). General gynecological problems, but in particular chronic pelvic pain and pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), plague women in prostitution.. The study reported that 31% of the women interviewed had experienced at least one episode of PID which accounts for most of the serious illness associated with STD infection. Among these women, there was also a high incidence of positive pap smears. More STD episodes can increase the risk of cervical cancer.

 

Another physical effect of prostitution is unwanted pregnancy and miscarriage. Over two-thirds of the women in the study had an average of three pregnancies during their time in prostitution, which they attempted to bring to term. Other health effects include irritable bowel syndrome, as well as partial and permanent disability.

 

The emotional health consequences of prostitution include severe trauma, stress, depression, anxiety, self-medication through alcohol and drug abuse; and eating disorders.

 

A web search came up with over 6 million hits. You can find the rest of the references yourself, it's really not a secret.

 

Where is the free choice? In Patts, my choice is to have nudity and smoke, or no nudity.

 

That's correct, that's your choice in Patts. You also have the choice to not go to Patts, but rather some other place that has nudity but restricts smoking. I have no complaint if the owner of a business restricts smoking or anything else in his own business, I can choose not to patronize the business if it doesn't suit my needs or tastes.

 

In Pattaya the owners of the bars (they're theirs, not yours) looked at what made sense to them and chose to allow smoking in their businesses. In less free societies they aren't allowed to make the choice of what to do with their own business. I still can't understand how some people believe forcing others to conform to what they want through the armed power of the state creates more choice or freedom?

 

Want non-smoking and nudity in Patts? Choose to open your own non-smoking nude bar.

[jacko 8,822]

Yet you want to bring that mindset to Thailand. Please don't. It will be my home as well, though not my home country, in a couple more years and I would like it to remain free.

Not at all....

Firstly my mindset is already here.... not to be brought in the future.

You keep harping on about 'freedom' when actually you mean only YOUR freedom....... to smoke in a bar without any consideration for those around you.

That is just selfishness.

 

Sad to hear you may retire in my country here..... we don't need any more smokers affecting the health of others.

 

Are you running away from the lack of your freedom in your home country?

Edited April 16, 2012 by jacko

[jacko 8,822]

My friend, if you are stupid enough to believe banning something is freedom, you are stupid enough to believe your home country is Thailand. You live in Thailand. Your home country (and your mindset) is western.

 

Banning = restricting = NOT freedom.

I think the banning of apartheid and segregation brought about freedom. Is that stupid enough for you?

I think the banning of the slave trade, brought about freedom, is that stupid enough for you.

 

I feel strictly banning smoking will give me, a non smoker, more freedom to go where I please, is that stupid enough for you?

 

But seriously, these rules can bring freedom to a particular section of society, and remove it from others. Stop smoking, you will benefit health-wise and financially.

 

I have added to the 'home country' statement to appease you.

(Posted from my home in Thailand, a non smoking environment)

Edited April 16, 2012 by jacko

[tko 219]

Not at all....

Firstly my mindset is already here.... not to be brought in the future.

 

Yes. That's sad. Free your mind, you'll be mentally healthier.

 

You keep harping on about 'freedom' when actually you mean only YOUR freedom....... to smoke in a bar without any consideration for those around you.

That is just selfishness.

 

You want to remove the freedom of others, including the owners of the bars without any consideration of how they want to run their bars.

That is beyond selfishness.

 

Sad to hear you may retire in my country here..... we don't need any more smokers affecting the health of others.

 

It's not your country. You are a guest, as I will be.

 

Are you running away from the lack of your freedom in your home country?

 

In part, yes, though if I couldn't live in Thailand I would live in my area of my home country over all the places I've lived in (N.America, Europe, Mid East, Asia) or visited (most of the globe).

I am also running to something, though. I've been coming to Thailand since 1982, I speak the language, I have adopted Buddhism, and I have a Thai family. I promised them when I felt I no longer needed to work money, we would return to Thailand. I'm almost there.

[tko 219]

I think the banning of apartheid and segregation brought about freedom. Is that stupid enough for you?

 

Apartheid and segragation were laws banning freedom based on race. They were over turned. So yes, your formulation was stupid.

 

I think the banning of the slave trade, brought about freedom, is that stupid enough for you.

 

You got that one right. Laws banning freedom for slaves were banned. That brought about more freedom. Theft is also banned. That also brings about more freedom, such as freedom to keep and control your own property, unless that property happens to be a bar you want to go to that the owner wants to allow smoking in.

 

I feel strictly banning smoking will give me, a non smoker, more freedom to go where I please, is that stupid enough for you?

 

By banning bar owners right to run their establishment as they see fit, and by banning some customers ability to do what the bar owners are happy to let them do. Not so much stupid as incredibly selfish.

 

But seriously, these rules can bring freedom to a particular section of society, and remove it from others.

 

No, when you deny some their freedoms for your own convenience you are just on the slippery slope to when they deny freedoms you enjoy for their convenience.

 

You always had the freedom to be in a smoke free environment. Don't go where there is smoking. I seriously dislike Songkran in Pattaya. I don't want it banned. I just don't go when it's on.

 

Stop smoking, you will benefit health-wise and financially.

 

At the moment, though, it's still my choice. Until more like you have their way at least.

 

I have added to the 'home country' statement to appease you.

(Posted from my home in Thailand, a non smoking environment)

 

An environment that you are free to have, as it's yours.

[jacko 8,822]

Yes. That's sad. Free your mind, you'll be mentally healthier.

 

 

 

You want to remove the freedom of others, including the owners of the bars without any consideration of how they want to run their bars.

That is beyond selfishness.

 

 

 

It's not your country. You are a guest, as I will be.

 

 

 

In part, yes, though if I couldn't live in Thailand I would live in my area of my home country over all the places I've lived in (N.America, Europe, Mid East, Asia) or visited (most of the globe).

I am also running to something, though. I've been coming to Thailand since 1982, I speak the language, I have adopted Buddhism, and I have a Thai family. I promised them when I felt I no longer needed to work money, we would return to Thailand. I'm almost there.

I put that 'my country' there just to yank your chain, you are a bit easy.

Good luck on the move to Thailand, you sound like you have yourself organised and are nearly there.

Adopted Buddhism, what does that mean, adopted? You are a parental guardian of Buddhism?

I don't think any religion promotes freedom.

I don't actually want to ban smoking, I wish people to be considerate when they do, and more sensibly, give up the bad habit.

Have some consideration for your 'Thai family', be around longer for them, stop jeopardising their health by smoking around them.

[jacko 8,822]

Apartheid and segragation were laws banning freedom based on race. They were over turned. So yes, your formulation was stupid.

 

They were rules and it was a regime implemented by the ruling class, laws were created which make such restrictions illegal now. If you can't spell it al least get it right

 

You got that one right. Laws banning freedom for slaves were banned. That brought about more freedom. Theft is also banned. That also brings about more freedom, such as freedom to keep and control your own property, unless that property happens to be a bar you want to go to that the owner wants to allow smoking in.

 

How about a bar that does not want to let black people in?

 

By banning bar owners right to run their establishment as they see fit, and by banning some customers ability to do what the bar owners are happy to let them do. Not so much stupid as incredibly selfish.

 

I think that approach has little mileage. A bar owner is a simple person, he needs rules to govern his business if he is to be permitted to operate, so no. He must adhere to safety, fire and health laws. Health laws means providing a healthy environment...see where I am going here?

 

No, when you deny some their freedoms for your own convenience you are just on the slippery slope to when they deny freedoms you enjoy for their convenience.

 

You always had the freedom to be in a smoke free environment. Don't go where there is smoking. I seriously dislike Songkran in Pattaya. I don't want it banned. I just don't go when it's on.

 

I do not, smokers will light up any-place, out in the street adjacent to me, they are a selfish breed.

 

And you have the freedom to be in a smoking environment, your home.

 

At the moment, though, it's still my choice. Until more like you have their way at least.

 

It is not your choice, you tried to give up but failed, you are an addict without the willpower to quit, and hence hide behind silliness like 'I choose to smoke'...

 

An environment that you are free to have, as it's yours.

[tko 219]

I put that 'my country' there just to yank your chain, you are a bit easy.

Good luck on the move to Thailand, you sound like you have yourself organised and are nearly there.

 

Thanks for the good wishes. We're looking forward to it.

 

Adopted Buddhism, what does that mean, adopted? You are a parental guardian of Buddhism?

 

Definitions 2 and 3 for "Adopt" from an online dictionary:

 

2. choose and decide to use something: to take up something such as a plan, idea, cause, or practice and use or follow it

3. assume way of acting: to assume an attitude or way of behaving

 

I don't think any religion promotes freedom.

 

Unlike the western religions, Buddhism doesn't ban things for laymen, though it recommends against certain behaviours. Definately my cup of tea, don't you think

 

I don't actually want to ban smoking, I wish people to be considerate when they do, and more sensibly, give up the bad habit.

Have some consideration for your 'Thai family', be around longer for them, stop jeopardising their health by smoking around them.

 

For what it's worth, I don't smoke inside my own home or vehicles. If I join a group of guys in a bar I ask before I light up. If I'm in a bar where smoking is allowed, and I'm not with someone who objects, then up to me.

[gaijin 146]

Funny I smoke a lot more when I'm in pattaya than I do at home. Like nearly a pack day vs just one or two cigs or none at all. I like to do what I normally cannot do in CA, like smoke in bars and fucking as many girls as my dick can handle.

[simon_cook 22]

Then don't go there. That's what freedom is about.

No ,the smokers dont go there.They are the ones polluting the air ,not me.

[tko 219]

 

The way you responded doesn't allow me to easily respond to your post, and I'm getting bored with it anyway, so I'll leave it at this:

 

Please feel free to consider me "weak willed" because I enjoy something you don't like.

 

I'll feel free to consider you a fascist because you feel that business owners and customers should be forced to conform to what you want.

 

We can both consider each other selfish for the reasons outlined above.

[jacko 8,822]

Definitions 2 and 3 for "Adopt" from an online dictionary:

 

For what it's worth, I don't smoke inside my own home or vehicles. If I join a group of guys in a bar I ask before I light up. If I'm in a bar where smoking is allowed, and I'm not with someone who objects, then up to me.

And I have adopted Thailand as my home country!

 

Aha so you have more consideration for your family than strangers and admit it is bad for the people around you?

And the objection of another customer nearby, who is not from your clique, doesn't matter to you?

 

I don't think this argument will ever result. People think it is their right to smoke, but I don't see it in your constitution. Unlike that to bear arms, which is banned in many places. I will still be attending GGBs, where people will always light up. I have the option to tolerate it, move away a little, or go to another place. That is what I do, hoping that given time people will realise they are doing themselves harm.

Edited April 16, 2012 by jacko

[tko 219]

No ,the smokers dont go there.They are the ones polluting the air ,not me.

 

The owner of the establishment allows smoking. It's not your establishment.

 

No point, there is no way to get through to a closed mind.