Re: IN DEFENSE OF SMOKERS
The fellow's opinion is based on nothing in particular and he even admitted to not bothering to read more then two paragraphs before declaring that he was "actually laughing at some of the crap this guy tries to question regarding the risk of cancer due to smoking". That demonstrated a willful disregard for any semblance of understanding the text and I replied in a manner such an attitude deserves. If that offends you that is your problem. If someone wants to condemn something without actually reading it I won't talk about how poster's erudition leaves just a little to be be desired or how I have some common ground with willful ignorance. An opinion should be valued to the extent that it can be supported and no more. That some find my lack of a willingness to accept equality of all opinions no matter how uninformed they may be distressing illustrates nothing more then an excessively fragile temperament.
As to second hand smoke, that is another topic that Colby and a great many others i've cited have discussed in depth with copious support for their positions. I suppose I could repost them but I lack the time to do so at the moment.
Last edited by Hajo Flettner; May 7th, 2010 at 03:33 PM.