I am an alumnus of St. Columba's High School, New Delhi, run by the Christian Brothers, a teaching order from Ireland. My principal was Brother J N Foley, who was also my class teacher in Class XI. We in XI- C were an exceptional class: all 45 of us passed the ISC examinations in the First Division. Three got the coveted 5 points. We all have Brother Foley to thank for that.
(And Brother Fitzpatrick too – but that's another story.)
One day, we were taken on an outing from school to see a film in Odeon theatre in Connaught Place. However, Brother Foley did not show up. It was a great film, "Where Eagles Dare," and we all loved it.
The next day I ran into Brother Foley in the hallway and politely inquired as to why he had opted out of seeing such a fantastic movie.
His reply, which I will never forget:
"I stopped seeing films after they banned smoking in cinema halls."
Yes. My beloved teacher and principal was a chain smoker. His fingers were yellow, as were his teeth, and he was always to be seen (outside the classroom) puffing away at his little roll-your-owns.
Take that, pmk ramadoss!
Now see why I stand up for the rights of smokers.
And why I myself am a teacher of the youth just like my own teacher was.
And why I never frequent movie halls.
I often wonder if the "war" on smoking is really being waged because the State is concerned for our health ( which I seriously doubt) or if it is just another attempt to turn us into compliant and obedient citizens.
ReplyDeleteWhat do you say we do about it?
ReplyDelete(I mean blogging apart!)
Just a question....everybody must be knowing of the Right To Education (RTE) becoming a Fundamental Right (FR)...isn't there a Fundamental Flaw (FF) in making this as an FR...the whole definition of an FR is that a person has a right, which is derived from a liberty (inalienable right), as long as it does not affect another person's FR (and this includes Property)...the only way the government can make RTE successful is by taxing us...isn't that violation of my FR and thus, a violation of the definition of FR...what if I don't want to shell out my wealth (i.e. my property) for RTE...isn't that opression, by taxing me and making me compulsorily pay for RTE....
ReplyDeleteTony is right, Hushang is right too. And to answer Arnold's question: We must disobey this law in public and encourage others to do so too. If anyone has a better idea let me know.
ReplyDeletei agree with your demands of wanting to smoke where ever you want. But you are not convincing about the right of the non-smoker.
ReplyDeleteFor all means, smoke and get cancer. We non-smokers dont care weather you live or die. But why spoil our health with your smoke? Its precisely why i support this ban on smoking in public places.
Liberty and democracy be damned.
@philip9876 - I think the point that is being made here is this -- restaurants, offices (of private companies), etc are not "public" places. They are privately owned. The owner should get to decide whether to condone smoking or not within. You are free to choose not to patronize or work at such places if you are concerned about your health. If this has a significant enough impact on the business of place concerned, they will automatically change their rules.
ReplyDeleteIn fact, look at the current situation. You cannot smoke in a restaurant, but you CAN smoke on the street or in a public park. What if I come up to you on the street and constantly blow smoke in your face?
@Arnold, that's exactly my point. Why should the majority non-smokers be made to take a decision just because a small minority of people want to smoke in a restaurant (or any public/private place for that matter).
ReplyDeleteIts exactly what people like Raj Thackeray and his small band of thugs say that you stay in Bombay only if you agree to be ruled by my rules.
I was a smoker and quit more than 10 years ago. Today the smoke makes me restless and makes my breathing difficult. So why should i allow any smoker to dictate that he has the right to pollute the air in a restaurant (or any public/private place) and that i should keep away from that place just because i cant take smoke. Its like saying that i drive the car and i dont care for any pedestrians crossing the road. If you want to cross the road, then be prepared to be run over by me.
I rather like the smoker to go outside and smoke and keep the air cleaner for other patrons.
@philip9876: The comparisons you make in your argument are wrong. Raj Thackeray does NOT "own" Bombay (or Maharashtra) and neither do you "own" the streets. Hence neither of you'll can make your own rule of law over either of those two places. However, the restaurant owner DOES "own" the restaurant. I own a restaurant, I should be allowed to conduct business the way I want within. For example, I can reserve rights of entry to only those I desire. You've seen that sign everywhere -- "Rights of admission reserved!" So theoretically, I could allow only people to smoke to come in. To you, that may once again seem like being "unfair". But it is my right.
ReplyDeleteWhy should a restaurant be any different from a house? Just because some people come in to eat and pay me money in return?
What if my maid smokes in my house? That is her "place of work" after all. Even if I am okay with it, should the goverment fine me?
@Arnold, hmmm...that's an interesting though. :D
ReplyDeleteThe awareness related to cigarette smoking is very low when it comes to erectile dysfunction. Do you know that smoking is tremendously disruptive for health in many aspects along with your sexual life? Nicotine and intake of cigarette smoke can be the cause for erectile dysfunction. In addition, Women do not like smokers. Take care of your health and give up smoking today to save your sexuality and your money for a better life ahead. http://www.chantixhome.com/
ReplyDelete