Letter: Smoking ban threatens freedom of choice, she says
TO THE EDITOR:
I am a non-smoker, my husband is a non-smoker and smoking is not allowed in our home or any of our vehicles.
That is our choice. We also choose not to patronize smoking establishments. This also is our choice.
We do not, however, try to choose for others.
Everyone knows that smoking is a health hazard. It is a legal health hazard, but a health hazard nonetheless. If one chooses to smoke, he/she has the right to exercise that choice.
Proprietors should have the right to choose whether or not his or her establishment caters to smokers. If they choose to cater to smokers then a sign should be posted in a visible location stating this fact. Patrons then have a choice whether or not to patronize that particular establishment. By the same token, a sign should be posted outside non-smoking establishments stating that it is non-smoking so that smokers have the same choice.
I do believe that it should be all or nothing. No sections to separate the two.
Freedom of choice is what it's all about and I, personally, don't need big brother to make these decisions for me.
Betty C. Stine