Friday, June 01, 2007

The Worst Day for Privacy Rights and Property Rights

This has to be one of the worst days for our freedom and individual liberties.

A small group of government officials took the latest step in eroding our rights today--the smoking ban in the City of Ft. Wayne.

This isn't about anything less than the rights of our privacy and property being taken away. Whether you agree with smokers or not, it is about the weakening of our freedom.

First to catch many Allen County citizen's angst was Eminent Domain when it reared its head via the Harrison Square project (Belmont Liquors, etc..).."that won't ever happen. No one can make me give my property to someone else" THEN IT DID. And it was just the beginning.

A long list of crimes against us began...property taxes skyrocketing without checks or balances, people spending tax dollars for private gain, irresponsible fiscal management, and then TAKING OUR PRIVACY AND PROPERTY RIGHTS AWAY via the smoking ban.

If we consent to the government telling us what we can't do.. then we begin the fast and slippery slope of having them tell us what we HAVE to do.

My response to someone who I talked with at length about the smoking ban who was originally for the ban... It doesn't matter whether or not you smoke or even like smokers--if you let government say you CAN'T smoke, then you leave that door open to let them say you HAVE to let someone smoke in your restaurant or bar or home, etc..


A private business is just that. A private club is just that. PRIVATE. Government has NO PLACE telling us what we can do in PRIVACY.

As many of you know, my husband Jeremiah is in the military fighting for our rights overseas. Whether you agree or disagree with the current war, you have to admit the courage it takes to stand up for America. There is no reason we cannot have that courage RIGHT HERE. This year 2 of his brothers will join him AGAIN to fight for America. What will he have to come home to if we do not stand up for our rights RIGHT NOW?

What about the veterans who OWN their clubs right here? What about what they did for our country? I am appalled at how they are treated when it comes to this issue.

We have to work harder to get these politicians out of our wallets and lives. This will begin by electing people who represent the ideals of Americans to office--not elitist lifetime politicians who think they can run our lives better than we can. It is not and never will be up to them.

9 comments:

Parson said...

Great post, I agree with you. For or against Bush's war. The solders are fighting because they wanted to serve this country. It's sad so many of us just sit around and let our rights get taken away. It takes away from why they serve and makes us unworthy of thier sacrifices.

barranda said...

I'm curious, how do you feel about tax credits for businesses that are smoke-free?

Personally, I didn't agree with this particular legislation, but would have been fine with a credit.

Scott Greider said...

Government has NO PLACE telling us what we can do in PRIVACY.

Just curious, Jennifer, should the government be able to tell us we can't discriminate in our private businesses? In other words, is your line as absolute as it sounds?

Anonymous said...

Scott

I think what she meant, at least in this context, is that government has no right prohibiting legal activities.

Your analogy is flawed about 100 times over. If you kill somebody in your business, obviously it's a crime. Smoking is a legal activity which until a week ago was legal in bars and still is in a vast majority of the country.

david said...

Prior to the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, there were no strict laws against employment discrimination. It was legal, and then made illegal.

Robert Enders said...

Prior to the Civil Rights Movement, discrimination was manditory in many parts of the country. That was an example of state and local governments interfering with free enterprise.

The 1964 Civil Rights Act does prohibit discrimination based on race by private businesses. Technically this could have meant that the federal government was interfering with free enterprise when that law was passed as well. But it is far better for free enterprise and society at large that race-based discrimination is forbidden rather than manditory.

But businesses can and should be allowed to turn away patrons based on their behavior, even if that behavior is legal everywhere else. Businesses have always had the right to forbid smoking. Some restaurants have a dress code, and will turn you away if you are wearing t-shirt and jeans. You may have a constitutional right to use the f-word, but a grocery store has the right to prohibit the use of foul language on store property. Businesses have a right to impose rules so that paying customers feel comfortable there. They should have the right to forbid, allow, or require any legal activity they so choose.

Ever been to After Dark? If not, then what do you care if the place allows smoking or not? Many of After Dark's patrons have oral fixations and constantly put things in their mouths. They choose to smoke, and feel most comfortable in an enviroment where they are allowed to smoke.

Anonymous said...

I would respect Crawford if he went to Congress to try to outlaw smoking. That is a rationale, defensible position, although I disagree with it wholehearedly (motorcyles, fast food, and sky diving would have to soon follow).

A local politican, meeting for an hour or so every Tuesday night, should not have the right to put you out of business.

Jennifer Jeffrey said...

My posts keep getting deleted. I'd love to answer.

Mike Kole said...

This is a la Voltaire. I don't smoke, I don't think smoking is especially smart, but I'll defend the right of business owners to set their own policies regarding smoking within their private establishments.

(I'll ask those who take a contrary view to make the distinction that a 'place of public accommodation' such as a bar or restaurant is still private property.)