"Pockets of Resistance" wrote in message
...
On 23 Jun 2003 08:49:31 -0700, Banty wrote:

Come back with another "Aint it Awful" about something else "for the
chiiiillldren" - the OP really blew it and picked the wrong subject for
this
one!

No, I didn't.

The law was specifically passed to keep the very *sight* of people
smoking away from The Children. It explains why smoking is allowed in
parts of the park where The Children are not encouraged to congregate.

a local anti-smoking lobby released last week the scintillating fact that,
in the year prior to taking up smoking, x percent of teenagers had seen a
character in a film smoking - therefore characters in films shouldn't smoke
because it clearly leads to children commencing the habit. it's hard to know
whether to laugh or cry, sometimes.

I guess today's parents are so gutless and uninfluential in their
children's lives that such protection is needed.

no - you're just trying to have a dig at parents which is unwarranted. by
the time children commence smoking their parent's influence is, by nature,
greatly lessened, because it is the nature of humans to break free of
parental bonds at that age.

if you want to have a dig at someone, put it at the feet of people who
propose dubious laws. it sounds to me like *they* wish to have control out
of all proportion to their entitlement to do so.
kylie
--
First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not
speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I
was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was
not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no
one left to speak out for me.
~ Martin Niemoeller