politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Why are people all of sudden so concerned about other people’s health? I should be able to do just about anything I want to my body, as long as it has minimal impact on those around me. I can understand second hand smoke being a problem indoors, what impacts does exhaling vapor have on others?
This has been going on for a while, at least since the 80s/90s. I still remember the TV commercials from when I was a kid likening smokers to cartoon villains.
It's social engineering. Those advert programs of the 90s made it to where people felt comfortable publicly shaming smokers (walking by fake coughing, or flat telling people they're gross).
I'm with you in that as long as I'm not puffing away on a busy sidewalk or inside a shared space, as an adult I should be free to indulge as I see fit (nevermind that I won't smoke inside aside from weed, shits nasty). Point is, most of the time it doesn't do diddly squat to anyone, it's just people sticking their fingers into your private life where they don't belong, just because they can and an authority gave them permission to. It gives them something to do and something to feel superior about.
Second and third-hand smoke and vaping aerosols contain harmful, toxic and cancer-causing chemicals that can be breathed in. Also not as much a problem with vapes, but the smell of smoke is truly disgusting and makes a lot of us feel sick to be around. I have had a conversation with someone who was smoking, and immediately gone inside and thrown up. I don't care what you put in your body on your property, but in public spaces it very much is of public concern.
I'll agree that smokers need to be more cognizant of their actions while recognizing how it affects others, and take steps to mitigate it (ie smoking away from other nonsmokers, disposing of their trash, washing their hands, etc). You could've just as easily removed yourself from the conversation while the other person was smoking. No one is denying that cigarette smoke is nasty, and the onus is on the smoker to prevent ill effect to those around them, and the absolute easiest for a smoker is smoke away from others.
It's also more harmful to be walking through an alleyway surrounded by tall buildings with trucks idling, not to mention there are more harmful things in city air or home cleaning products that directly affect you more than someone with cigarette funk on their clothes. Sure it smells rank and can make you feel queasy, yet I get the same effect when someone lathers up in excessive amount of perfume/cologne, or is eating certain foods around me. But that's on me, it's my problem, and it's the tradeoff of going out in public. We don't have control of the environment around us.
its a republican psyop to pin workers against each other
I dunno about Republican, the Clinton admin was pretty vehement on the anti-smoking train back in the 90s
Yeah he was also impeached
So maybe he's not the best judge of character
He also left office with the government budget in surplus, so perhaps a single act of indiscretion shouldn't be the basis for negating an individual's entire presidency? Don't get me wrong, there were a lot of things his administration did that I don't agree with, but to stake the guy for a blowjob is a bit childish.
He was also a rapist, but yeah ok, lets defend the rapist