A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » General
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Gotta keep it from The Children



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 23rd 03, 05:25 AM
Bob O`Bob
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

CBI wrote:

A comedian (whose name is on the tip of my tongue) said it best. When
asked, "mind if I smoke?" he replied, "no, mind if I fart."


Steve Martin, in the mid/late 1970s



Bob
  #2  
Old June 23rd 03, 06:14 AM
Steve Daniels, Seek of Spam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

On Mon, 23 Jun 2003 00:34:40 -0400, something compelled "CBI"
, to say:


O`Bob" wrote in message
...
CBI wrote:

A comedian (whose name is on the tip of my tongue) said it best. When
asked, "mind if I smoke?" he replied, "no, mind if I fart."


Steve Martin, in the mid/late 1970s


I don't think so. It was the Jewish guy - something Brenner?


Nope.

Put "no, mind if I fart" into Google and see what comes up.
  #3  
Old June 23rd 03, 09:47 AM
Julian Macassey
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 21:25:56 -0700, Bob O`Bob wrote:
CBI wrote:

A comedian (whose name is on the tip of my tongue) said it best. When
asked, "mind if I smoke?" he replied, "no, mind if I fart."


Steve Martin, in the mid/late 1970s


It wasn't funny then. It isn't funny now.

The only funny thing about Steve Martin is that his live in
****piece left him to become a lesbian.

--
If you're not entertaining, you will be flamed. Even if you are entertaining,
you well may be flamed anyway by someone who's just tearing your belly open
to see what sort of guts are inside it. -- Lenore Levine in a.t
  #4  
Old June 23rd 03, 02:16 PM
0tterbot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

"==Daye==" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 22 Jun 2003 22:19:02 -0400, "CBI"
wrote:

Another good point: Why do smokers think their butts are not litter? At

the
very least we should be fining them for this.


Do not put all smokers in the same basket. When my DH and I
smoked, we always, always, always threw out butts in a bin. It
is rubbish and belongs in a bin.


as i do & many smokers also do (although at this point i feel like i'm
talking to the walls. sigh. people just *want* to believe all smokers smoke
all over everyone & throw butts everywhere.)

anyway, in australia butts *are* litter & you can be fined for dropping
them, same as all litter (althought it operates on a sliding scale.). you
get a special special fine for throwing them out your car window. (well, you
don't, because the police & litter regulation are rarely acquainted, but it
*is* possible.)
kylie


  #5  
Old June 23rd 03, 03:06 PM
Tom Enright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

"0tterbot" wrote in message . ..

he's cranky, not offended. i vote it's not just him.
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


Considering Communists have long employed the "knock in the middle of the
night" I've always felt this quote a bit out of date.
  #6  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:02 PM
Tom Enright
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

0tterbot wrote:

"Tom Enright" wrote in message
om...
"0tterbot" wrote in message

. ..

he's cranky, not offended. i vote it's not just him.
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


Considering Communists have long employed the "knock in the middle of the
night" I've always felt this quote a bit out of date.


what?


Because communist governments have killed around 100,000,000 people and
have no problem denying simple rights to the people it is somewhat
hyprocritcal for them to be viewed as an oppressed group. Most especially
when you consider the time in which the quote was made.

are you mccarthy's grandson-in-a-jar or something?


What? Are you suggesting that communists have not come for
for "Trade Unionists" and others?

kylie

  #7  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:06 PM
abacus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

Banty wrote in message ...
In article ,
says...

Banty wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...


Non-smokers didn't *choose* to breathe in cigarette smoke. Many directly
*chose* NOT to breathe in cigarette smoke. It's harmful in a way that goes
beyond momentary irritation, and it *is* irritating besides. One *has* to
breathe. On the other hand, smokers can leave the ciggies as home for awhile.

Sure, that's one solution. But is it really the best compromise that
our society can come up with to resolve the conflict between those who
wish to smoke in an public outdoor setting and those who wish to avoid
all exposure to their smoke? I don't think so.

My preference also would be that smokers would be considerate, such that
non-smokers don't have to resort to the broad hammer of the law, and everyone
would come out ahead.


Sounds ideal to me too. But even given inconsiderate smokers, the
broad hammer of law seems just too big a weapon to wield for such a
minor matter. Does more harm than good.


Well, the law being that certain folks will have to leave a nasty, destructive
habit at home, the only harm would be that there's a law. Unecessary laws are
bad.


Yes, unnecessary laws are, IMO, VERY bad. I don't like restricting
anyone's freedom unnecessary.

But, in tha face of "**** you", "what's your problem", butts and ashes flicked
everywhere, folks have not much option but to put up with the crap, not use the
park, or take public spaces back via laws. Folks are tired of it. I put the
blame for the laws square at the feet of a lot of the smokers.


I put the blame for the laws square at the feet of those who propose
them and lobby for them. Why are they seeking a solution through the
law and why are they insisting on banning smoking whether they are
around to be bothered or not?

Unfortunately, we ban smoking because we don't have considerate smokers, just
like we ban music from the parks often because of those who think they have a
"right" to blast it, and many places ban or restrict dogs because so many owners
can't seem to keep the dogs under control and clean up after them.


I wasn't aware that either had been banned. Not in my vicinity
anyway. Loud music bothers me a great deal more than smoke
personally.


Both are banned to one extent or another in parks around here.





If I heard from folks like you more noise about inconsideration, instead of
whining only about the laws people turn to as a last resort, I'd give you more
credibility. So let's hear it - what are the responsibilities of smokers in an
ideal no-law situation?


I think that smokers should always be considerate and never smoke
around those who object. I don't complain about inconsiderate smokers
because I don't know any personally, nor do I see any posts
proclaiming their right to smoke whenever and wherever, so I don't
address that issue.


We've seen at least one person here say something on the order of "what's your
problem lady, it isn't like someone is shooting your cat", and we haven't
exactly seen smoking apologists come out of the woodwork to say they try to do
differently.

So there you have it.


Actually, the person I think you're referring to has stated that he
would, if requested, stop or move. He's also talked about how rudely
he has seen non-smokers behave when asking smokers to quit. I think he
has a point. I've never had a smoker be rude to me and insist on
continuing to blow smoke into my face. I suspect that those who
regularly encounter rude smokers are, to some extent, creating the
situation by being rude in way they phrase their request to stop. Not
always, but I'm certain it happens sometimes. I don't think that the
smokers are entirely to blame for the problem.
  #8  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:14 PM
abacus
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

"CBI" wrote in message ...
"abacus" wrote in message
om...

Sounds ideal to me too. But even given inconsiderate smokers, the
broad hammer of law seems just too big a weapon to wield for such a
minor matter. Does more harm than good.


What harm?


Restricts individuals freedom unnecessary. A bad thing IMO. In
addition, such laws breeds contempt for the law.

I think that smokers should always be considerate and never smoke
around those who object.


How do you know whether the person objects? Wouldn't the only truly
considerate thing be to not smoke around others unless you have determined
that they don't object?


I don't think it's asking too much of non-smokers to make their
objections known. I do think it's asking too much of smokers to never
smoke in an outdoor public place just become someone *might* object.

Frankly, I was glad to see smoking banned from the place I worked at
15 years ago. I didn't bother me too much, but it was more pleasant
without the smoke.
I'm undecided about whether or not blanket bans for restaurants and
bars are appropriate. But I definitely think that banning smoking in
outdoor public places is going too far. It's reasonable to expect
smokers to quit if asked, but unreasonable to expect them to refrain
completely.
  #9  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:24 PM
0tterbot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

"Banty" wrote in message
...

Do not put all smokers in the same basket. When my DH and I
smoked, we always, always, always threw out butts in a bin. It
is rubbish and belongs in a bin.


as i do & many smokers also do (although at this point i feel like i'm
talking to the walls. sigh. people just *want* to believe all smokers

smoke
all over everyone & throw butts everywhere.)


Hello, walls :-)


EGADS!
;-)

The problem is, *enough* smokers are rude and sloppy about it such that

it's a
problem. No one's saying all smokers should be deemed rude.


yeah, but read this thread, & observe that *enough* anti-smokers are rude &
obnoxious to smokers - people making grand statements about what smokers do,
& getting frightfully in a flap at the same time (& never noticing the
smokers who don't **** them off.) i'm certain it's quite identical to the
militantly whatever who simply never *notice* how many of the subject/s of
their disapproval are being perfectly polite about it, they only see what
they want to see & extrapolate it to a ridiculous degree.

but at any rate, pardon my momentary exasperation on that matter. :-)

(snippage)
I'm really, really down deep disgusted with the whole tobacco thing. It's

a
really stupid, addictive, expensive (personally and to society),

destructive,
valueless thing to be defending, to be calling on others' tolerance

continually
for.


it is - you'd be hard pressed to find anyone, smoker or not, who would
disagree with this. it's not rocket science, & precious few smokers "defend"
their habit. it just IS - going on about it's not going to change anything.

my point is that many smokers are polite people who go out of their way to
avoid littering, offending people, exposing people (unless by explicit or
implied consent) bla de bla, & only ever get lumped in with rude litterbug
smokers for our trouble.

i also concur that before various laws changed, people (including me - but
then again i had heedless youth on my side in those days) would & did smoke
in the most amazing locations & never really think about it, & possibly
affronted one or two people in the process... but - the way things are now,
non-smokers are given carte blanche to be gaspingly rude to smokers, &
smokers are considered to be right down there with used car salesmen,
paedophiles & junkies, & it's simply ridiculous. it's become a taboo out of
all proportion. it's been MY experience, (as a general person, not as a
smoker) that the rudeness (round here, god only knows what your laws are
like) is quite the reverse. people who wouldn't dream of criticising the
overweight, the junk-food addicted, the terminally miserable, the abjectly
lazy (etc) about their health matters start on at smokers as though
something they have to say is actually *news* - & it's often not polite,
either. we smokers are well appraised of the fact that we are killing
ourselves, & don't need to know. we know some smokers are rude, we don't
need to hear that either. it's my experience that anti-smokers need to be
watching their manners more carefully than the smokers do.

i barely know 3 people who will smoke in their own house these days. i think
the militants need to find a new category of person to oppress, quite
frankly. they made their point about 15 years ago.

& if people want to be worried about what they breathe, they need to get
more information on the substances that are actually killing them, & not
worry so much about some poor dweeb having a fag in the park.

pardon my exasperation. :-(
kylie


  #10  
Old June 23rd 03, 04:24 PM
Banty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Gotta keep it from The Children

In article ,
says...


Well, the law being that certain folks will have to leave a nasty, destructive
habit at home, the only harm would be that there's a law. Unecessary laws are
bad.


Yes, unnecessary laws are, IMO, VERY bad. I don't like restricting
anyone's freedom unnecessary.

But, in tha face of "**** you", "what's your problem", butts and ashes flicked
everywhere, folks have not much option but to put up with the crap, not use the
park, or take public spaces back via laws. Folks are tired of it. I put the
blame for the laws square at the feet of a lot of the smokers.


I put the blame for the laws square at the feet of those who propose
them and lobby for them. Why are they seeking a solution through the
law and why are they insisting on banning smoking whether they are
around to be bothered or not?


Oh - I dunno - mebbe it's "**** You", keyed cars, and other general intimidation
that people meet up with nowdays when asking for consideration. It's the only
real answser to pervasive social intimidation - the force of law.


You should pretty much assume that there are *always* people around to be
bothered. It fits reality much better (in fact, pusing this notion in itself is
a form of social intimidation) than assuming that folks who are bothered by
smoking are a small group of curmugeons.



Actually, the person I think you're referring to has stated that he
would, if requested, stop or move. He's also talked about how rudely
he has seen non-smokers behave when asking smokers to quit. I think he
has a point. I've never had a smoker be rude to me and insist on
continuing to blow smoke into my face. I suspect that those who
regularly encounter rude smokers are, to some extent, creating the
situation by being rude in way they phrase their request to stop. Not
always, but I'm certain it happens sometimes. I don't think that the
smokers are entirely to blame for the problem.


I *have* seen smokers be rude in response to reasonable, quiet requests. And,
like I've said elsewhere, smoking being so inherently intrusive and
trash-producing, it doens't take much inconsideration to make a huge impact.

And, as has been pointed out, as with other innately smelly and bothersome and
intrusive things, the burden is on the SMOKER to be discreet and polite.

"Mind if I fart?"

Banty

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2017 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.