Drop the Entitled Attitude

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ansah

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 27, 2012
393
438
USA
Anti-smokers are used to trampling all over smokers rights because society has conditioned people that its a bad thing .I think that by now even most smokers would agree and that's why they don't offer much opposition to people crossing that line.

As vapers and ex-smokers its hard for some to fight that conditioning or to even know where the line is anymore. The difference here is that we're not doing anything wrong. We're doing something positive and healthy in our lives...

Historically, tyrannical oppression is implemented incrementally. The next hammer falls after the populace has more or less already become inured to the effects of the last hammer and come to see it as status quo.

When the antismoking indoor clean air movement began, it was with the entirely understandable intention of enabling people who disliked cigarette the right to go to work, shop and use public transportation without having to navigate through a haze of tobacco-saturated air. Nothing wrong with that. Where I live at least, these objectives were largely achieved by the early 1990s, with smoking successfully compartmentalized in such a way so that no one who disliked it had to deal with it at all. This movement coincided with a growing sense that tobacco is "bad for you" (Surgeon General reports et al), and more and more people were motivated to quit. Nothing wrong with that either.

But somewhere along the way this movement morphed into something else, becoming socially coercive and morally dictatorial. Many people, such as my father, in that generation, would say: "I need to quit these bloody things", and many did. But it would never have even occured to my father that either smoking or quitting smoking would be anything but voluntary... At the time, the universal sentiment was that freedom on those levels was what separated the USA from the USSR, and it wasn't even talked about in those terms; it was just taken for granted...

... Fast forward to 2013: We have vapers trying to convey that vaping is not "wrong", or at least not "as wrong" as cigarette smoking, because it's just assumed that we don't have the right to do something unless we can prove that it's not as wrong as the many other things we're already not allowed to do. Alas, most people, even on these forums, have succumbed to the propaganda that casts this as a public health issue. But it's not; it merely masquerades as one. It's a human rights issue, plain and simple. Just as the old religious puritanism used God and Jesus to impose dominance over the peasantry, effectively justifying submissive codes of conduct, indentured servitude & slavery etc., the new secular puritanism uses the gods of health science, public safety and insurance liability to justify the same ends. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
 

Uncle Willie

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2011
2,395
102,506
Meet Me in St Louie Louie
... Fast forward to 2013: We have vapers trying to convey that vaping is not "wrong", or at least not "as wrong" as cigarette smoking, because it's just assumed that we don't have the right to do something unless we can prove that it's not as wrong as the many other things we're already not allowed to do. Alas, most people, even on these forums, have succumbed to the propaganda that casts this as a public health issue. But it's not; it merely masquerades as one. It's a human rights issue, plain and simple. Just as the old religious puritanism used God and Jesus to impose dominance over the peasantry, effectively justifying submissive codes of conduct, indentured servitude & slavery etc., the new secular puritanism uses the gods of health science, public safety and insurance liability to justify the same ends. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

What, exactly, are the other things we are not allowed to do as it relates to doing them in public .. ?? That you feel we should be able to do .. ??
 

_more_

Moved On
ECF Veteran
May 22, 2012
1,868
4,521
Is it wrong to either respect a place of business as having their rights to enforce no vaping rules. So then a store or restaurant has no rights to have a sign on their door stating shirts are required or a place that has a sign stating no food or beverages allowed inside. I think if i got that upset at rules in another persons place then i just wouldn't go there...

It is different than being on public property where you can take off your shirt and shoes also and vape openly. I don't get the way some people are saying they have the right to vape anywhere and include offices, stores etc then get mad when told not to. Those people are renting or own the building so what if they have crappy rules just don't go there like your entitled to vape no matter where you go.
 

Ansah

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 27, 2012
393
438
USA
What, exactly, are the other things we are not allowed to do as it relates to doing them in public .. ?? That you feel we should be able to do .. ??

LOL! There is a broad swath of activity that is not allowed to be even alluded to on ECF, areas that are taboo. So I won't talk about that. But, just for example, the 1st Amendment right to freedom of assembly has been eviscerated to the point of non-existence. Where I live, the Occupy movement felt compelled to "apply for a permit" to gather in the park, a permit which was granted during the cold winter months but rescinded when the weather became nice enough to hang outside... If you really don't see the radical extent to which human rights are violated on a daily basis, it can only be because you've gotten used to it...
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
Historically, tyrannical oppression is implemented incrementally. The next hammer falls after the populace has more or less already become inured to the effects of the last hammer and come to see it as status quo.

When the antismoking indoor clean air movement began, it was with the entirely understandable intention of enabling people who disliked cigarette the right to go to work, shop and use public transportation without having to navigate through a haze of tobacco-saturated air. Nothing wrong with that. Where I live at least, these objectives were largely achieved by the early 1990s, with smoking successfully compartmentalized in such a way so that no one who disliked it had to deal with it at all. This movement coincided with a growing sense that tobacco is "bad for you" (Surgeon General reports et al), and more and more people were motivated to quit. Nothing wrong with that either.

But somewhere along the way this movement morphed into something else, becoming socially coercive and morally dictatorial. Many people, such as my father, in that generation, would say: "I need to quit these bloody things", and many did. But it would never have even occured to my father that either smoking or quitting smoking would be anything but voluntary... At the time, the universal sentiment was that freedom on those levels was what separated the USA from the USSR, and it wasn't even talked about in those terms; it was just taken for granted...

... Fast forward to 2013: We have vapers trying to convey that vaping is not "wrong", or at least not "as wrong" as cigarette smoking, because it's just assumed that we don't have the right to do something unless we can prove that it's not as wrong as the many other things we're already not allowed to do. Alas, most people, even on these forums, have succumbed to the propaganda that casts this as a public health issue. But it's not; it merely masquerades as one. It's a human rights issue, plain and simple. Just as the old religious puritanism used God and Jesus to impose dominance over the peasantry, effectively justifying submissive codes of conduct, indentured servitude & slavery etc., the new secular puritanism uses the gods of health science, public safety and insurance liability to justify the same ends. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

EXACTLY! Fortunately I was raised in a generation that still valued independence and thinking for ones self.It was okay to express those opinions, right or wrong and people defended that right.They may not have agreed with the content of the message but they would have died defending your right to say it.

Now, people are so used to hearing terms like "politically correct", "dont hate" and 'dont judge" that they fail to see them for what they really are and thats a way to oppress people by not valuing any opinion or thought except the "right" one. If were conditioned not to ever think for ourselves then it becomes that much easier to pull the wool over our eyes and to take away our rights.

The same principles are operating here, people hide their vaping because they think its the politically correct thing to do. They refuse to become incensed at ANTz and anti-smokers intent on taking away their rights because they arent 'haters". Some cant even see the real issues or whats happening because they lack the "judgement" to do so.

If you accept everything unconditionally then even atrocities seem reasonable by comparison.
 

Uncle Willie

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2011
2,395
102,506
Meet Me in St Louie Louie
LOL! There is a broad swath of activity that is not allowed to be even alluded to on ECF, areas that are taboo. So I won't talk about that. But, just for example, the 1st Amendment right to freedom of assembly has been eviscerated to the point of non-existence. Where I live, the Occupy movement felt compelled to "apply for a permit" to gather in the park, a permit which was granted during the cold winter months but rescinded when the weather became nice enough to hang outside... If you really don't see the radical extent to which human rights are violated on a daily basis, it can only be because you've gotten used to it...

I'm not asking about illegal activity .. that's a given .. and perhaps I am not interested in personally seeing and dealing with the Occupy folks when I walk my dog in the designated permit area when the weather is nice .. are my rights not just as important .. ??

Waiting for some better examples ..
 

spaceballsrules

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 6, 2011
2,858
3,261
North Carolina, USA
Or better yet? If you can't poot, you can't toot.

Don--t-Try-To-Stop-Me-Because-I--m-In-A-Roll.jpg
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
I'm not asking about illegal activity .. that's a given .. and perhaps I am not interested in personally seeing and dealing with the Occupy folks when I walk my dog in the designated permit area when the weather is nice .. are my rights not just as important .. ??

Waiting for some better examples ..

You have the option of taking another route or going to another designated permit area.No one is forcing you to walk by them.
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
You have the option of taking another route or going to another designated permit area.No one is forcing you to walk by them.

By your reasoning, your choice to limit your options should limit mine? Thats not how its supposed to work.
 

Uncle Willie

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2011
2,395
102,506
Meet Me in St Louie Louie
Now, people are so used to hearing terms like "politically correct", "dont hate" and 'dont judge" that they fail to see them for what they really are and thats a way to oppress people by not valuing any opinion or thought except the "right" one. If were conditioned not to ever think for ourselves then it becomes that much easier to pull the wool over our eyes and to take away our rights.

If you accept everything unconditionally then even atrocities seem reasonable by comparison.

So you're saying that the terms "PC", don't hate, don't judge are actually not what they appear to be yet some sort of mind control mantra coined by The Man .. ?? And that a private business has no right to limit the use of a PV in their space .. ?? Movie theaters, restaurants, concert venues, Opera houses, malls, shops, airplanes .. ??
 

Uncle Willie

Ultra Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
May 27, 2011
2,395
102,506
Meet Me in St Louie Louie
You have the option of taking another route or going to another designated permit area.No one is forcing you to walk by them.

So then it's OK to inconvienience others that don't want to deal with it .. ?? This speaks exactly to the point of the thread .. entitlement mentality
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
So you're saying that the terms "PC", don't hate, don't judge are actually not what they appear to be yet some sort of mind control mantra coined by The Man .. ?? And that a private business has no right to limit the use of a PV in their space .. ?? Movie theaters, restaurants, concert venues, Opera houses, malls, shops, airplanes .. ??

I dont recall ever mentioning The Man or tinfoil hats. It is what it is and I would daresay that many older adults would agree with that assessment. If you dont stand for something you'll fall for anything and thats what terms like that encourage. I think its more by accident than by design, it wouldnt be the first time that something meant as a positive has been twisted from its original meaning

I could point to words like villain, funky, sick, etc etc ad nauseum.

I have a letter signed by Ken Cucinelli, Commonwealth Attorney of the state of Virginia that says that vaping is not smoking and shouldnt be regulated as such. Ive found it very handy in educating restaurant owners but I dont push the issue either. If they decide to exercise their rights as private business owners and not allow vaping even after seeing that letter then I exercise my right to not support them either.

Thats where the statement "Your rights end where mine begin" comes into play.
 

zapped

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 30, 2009
6,056
10,545
55
Richmond, Va...Right in Altria's back yard.
So then it's OK to inconvienience others that don't want to deal with it .. ?? This speaks exactly to the point of the thread .. entitlement mentality

Your inconveniencing yourself, not the other way around. Youre the one with the issue...you deal with it. Otherwise youre inconveniencing me and then we have a problem.

I dont particularly like people with large foreheads....In fact the creep me the hell out but I dont walk up to them with a hat or a comb and tell them they need to fix it either.
 

Ansah

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Nov 27, 2012
393
438
USA
I'm not asking about illegal activity .. that's a given .. and perhaps I am not interested in personally seeing and dealing with the Occupy folks when I walk my dog in the designated permit area when the weather is nice .. are my rights not just as important .. ??

Waiting for some better examples ..

And if vaping is made illegal, that will become a "given" too... That's how oligarchic oppression mechanisms work.

Regarding the use of the park, there will always be an inherent tension between individual liberty and social order that is intrinsic to complex societies containing various peoples and groups pursuing disparate interests, and seeking the right balance is never easy and always ongoing. This is why Western societies have traditionally valued the quality of wisdom in their judges and legislators. There's no simple program guide or matrix for doing it right. The world is a complicated place.

But it's clear that in terms of Occupy, the problem was that to whatever extent it had the potential to evolve into another '60s anti-Vietnam War type movement, this couldn't be tolerated. Though the 1st Amendment was specifically designed to protect exactly this sort of expression of public grievance, I am very hard-pressed to believe that the Empire will ever allow such public, spontaneous outpouring of sentiment again. But they don't say that you don't have the right to express your opinion. What they say is that we can't afford to cover the insurance liability of the property if you express your opinion, or we don't have the police manpower to keep the protestors safe if you express your opinion, or that Uncle Willy can't walk his dog if you express your opinion. At any rate, however you frame it, the 1st Amendment has been effectively gutted.

So this is where we are. If you don't choose to believe that this is where we are, then don't. One of the redeeming aspects of this existence is that we can quietly believe anything we want.
 

tj99959

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
  • Aug 13, 2011
    15,116
    39,600
    utah
    Your inconveniencing yourself, not the other way around. Youre the one with the issue...you deal with it. Otherwise youre inconveniencing me and then we have a problem.

    I dont particularly like people with large foreheads....In fact the creep me the hell out but I dont walk up to them with a hat or a comb and tell them they need to fix it either.

    Hay! Wait a damn minute now, it's taken me 72 years to grow this forehead!
     
    Last edited:
    Your inconveniencing yourself, not the other way around. Youre the one with the issue...you deal with it. Otherwise youre inconveniencing me and then we have a problem.

    I dont particularly like people with large foreheads....In fact the creep me the hell out but I dont walk up to them with a hat or a comb and tell them they need to fix it either.

    I really like the Occupy analogy, there, and I feel like your response doesn't speak to that specific context, Zapped. The various Occupy camps, at best, frequently abused the letter of the law, out of a sense of entitlement. Some outright broke the law, refusing to disperse when their permits expired, harassing passers by, 'occupying' local businesses and, through intimidation, preventing people from entering those businesses. There were violent conflicts, both with police and civilians, crime inside the camps- drugs, persons contributing to the delinquency of minors, theft.

    Nearly all of those protesters were there to stand up for what they believed in. Most were respectful, acting in the spirit of the law and within the bounds of the permits they were granted. Quite a few protesters opened intelligent dialogues, educated the uninformed, and made a small difference. And everything those good people accomplished was defiled by the violent, the criminal, or the disrespectful.

    It is my view that our illustrative dog walker has the right not to be jeered at, not to be accosted, and not to have rocks thrown at him, that in perpetrating these acts, the Occupy protesters defeated their own contentions and drowned out their own voices. I would fear the same thing happening to the vaping community that happened to the 'Occupy' movement- that, because some of us refuse to behave in an acceptable manner, all of us are colored as disrespectful and entitled. We may, one day, end up fighting a public opinion battle, and we should strive to be viewed the way we view vaping itself: the healthy alternative to smokers, and ultimately better to have around.
     
    So many interesting arguments, rebuttals, and responses, and I can't realistically quote everything I want to, so I'm just going to leave a big, rambling post.

    When it comes to terminology, each one of us has to decide what works for our area. I can't stand the association of APVs with cigarettes, and think that that association is one of the problems our community faces, but I live in the boonies, and most of my vaping evangelism starts with, "Is that one o' those ee-leck-trawnic cigarettes?" The only answer that will keep that conversation going is 'yes.' When you say 'no' and contend that it's a PV for vaporizing nicotine, anyone with two brain cells to rub together is going to be thinking, 'so it IS an e-cig, and this guy's a pretentious ...... Moving on.' Rather, I prefer to conclude with, "Most of us who use these prefer not to call them e-cigarettes, as the only thing they have in common with cigarettes is nicotine; we don't call them vapor patches or inhaling gum, either, you know?"

    As to the notion that being respectful is only relegating ourselves to 'some dark corner,' please stop trying to polarize. There are several establishments in my area, which are not tobacco friendly, that allow me to vape indoors. I vape publicly everywhere I can, everywhere I have permission, and I talk ad nauseum about what this thing is, what's in the e-liquid, how I feel using it compared to when I smoked. I ask smokers, "Have you ever tried a nicotine vaporizer?" and carry spare, clean drip tips to demo my own PV. I am an active proselytizer for the vaping community- I'm just also courteous and polite about it.

    As to those who contend that the burden rests on non-vapers to prove that secondhand vapor is harmful; I'm sorry, but outside of this forum is the Real World, and out there, your philosophy and ideals simply don't matter. If you want to make a difference for the vaping community, if you want to make progress for our lifestyle, then you must start by approaching our obstacles realistically, and telling someone, 'If you don't like it, that's YOUR problem' is only going to elicit one reaction; 'So, it looks like the vapers are going to cause me problems.' And THAT is precisely from where widespread public bans will come. Nobody likes a troublemaker.
     
    Last edited:
    Status
    Not open for further replies.

    Users who are viewing this thread