March 19, 2004
Friday

Nice photo today on your home page of the place where I worked for over 7 years and where a few of the current managers don't give a hoot whether their tobacco smoke hurts anyone, including small children, so intent are they on defending their "right to choose." I didn't mention in my testimony last night that the g.m. who hurriedly pushed me out the door due to my opposition to secondhand smoke exposure also allowed her toddler in those smoke-filled meetings on occasion.

I am very curious as to whether all those who choose the "right to choose" slogan to defend their arguments against a smoking ban in public places in Ketchikan would also support the "right to choose" in the abortion debate. I'll just bet that when pressed for an answer to this question, they would find a way to say that the two issues are different. I don't see that one can arbitrarily pick the issues to which they apply this ideal.

I am disappointed by last night's council decision to not pass the ordinance. Marty West is likely the only candidate who would ever get my vote again for any position. The council bowed down to business owners in this town, which is something so typical of government entities. You know, as a "little guy" I contribute tax dollars too. To have largely overlooked some profound testimony on the part of those who espouse a ban on smoking in public places in favor of so many who came across (to my way of thinking) as sounding selfishly ignorant astounds me. I also have trouble with the idea that was expressed by some which boils down to the "if you give them an inch they will take a mile." Does anyone seriously believe that if such a smoking ban in public places were enacted that the next place to be targeted would be your homes? Get real! That is such a tired old argument!

Sign me disgusted,
Karen Ramsey
Ketchikan, AK - USA

 

Post a Comment -------View Comments

Submit an Opinion - Letter

Sitnews
Stories In The News
Ketchikan, Alaska