The controversy over e-cigarettes | T...

The controversy over e-cigarettes | The Columbus Dispatch

There are 28 comments on the Columbus Dispatch story from Jun 13, 2009, titled The controversy over e-cigarettes | The Columbus Dispatch. In it, Columbus Dispatch reports that:

Sara Jacobs, a clothing buyer, can use her electronic cigarette in her office while working.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Columbus Dispatch.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#25 Apr 3, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a statement of fact, not a statement of approval.
you need approval to change the fact first.

and you have mine as long as you are consistent.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#26 Apr 3, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a statement of fact, not a statement of approval.
and you are asking the courts for approval to change fact.

the majority has already made ruling by vote, and your asking for approval to change fact is appropriate if it is consistent with all laws.

do you yes or no understand?

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#27 Apr 3, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
and you are asking the courts for approval to change fact.
the majority has already made ruling by vote, and your asking for approval to change fact is appropriate if it is consistent with all laws.
do you yes or no understand?
As the majority is forced to pay for more and more consequences, don't be surprised if the majority demands a say in how those consequences come into being, and to control how their money is being spent (for example, if the public is being forced to pay for someone's heat bill, they should have a say in how high the thermostat is set, to prevent waste). I am not saying that the public should be in control of these things, only that if they are paying for the consequences, they logically should have a say. For maximum liberty the alternative is preferable, no control, and no responsibility for consequences.

As far as gay marriage goes, I am not being inconsistent. The majority are not paying for gays' marriages, and have no logical say in their existence.
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#28 Apr 3, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
As the majority is forced to pay for more and more consequences, don't be surprised if the majority demands a say in how those consequences come into being, and to control how their money is being spent (for example, if the public is being forced to pay for someone's heat bill, they should have a say in how high the thermostat is set, to prevent waste). I am not saying that the public should be in control of these things, only that if they are paying for the consequences, they logically should have a say. For maximum liberty the alternative is preferable, no control, and no responsibility for consequences.
As far as gay marriage goes, I am not being inconsistent. The majority are not paying for gays' marriages, and have no logical say in their existence.
and you define hypocrisy perfectly.

cheers.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#29 Apr 3, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
and you define hypocrisy perfectly.
cheers.
How so?
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#30 Apr 3, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
How so?
Tony... I am not an enemy of yours at all.

I would love to answer your question in person so I can explain it best, and you have opportunity to study body language and sincerity.

You and I are in the same book, same page, but have difficulty understanding a few words.

A drink together in a relaxed atmosphere discussing your question would be educational for us both.

Since I invited, yes I am buying.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#31 Apr 3, 2014
Reality Speaks wrote:
<quoted text>
Tony... I am not an enemy of yours at all.
I know.
I would love to answer your question in person so I can explain it best, and you have opportunity to study body language and sincerity.
You and I are in the same book, same page, but have difficulty understanding a few words.
All my words should be read with an eye toward liberty first and foremost. Absent demonstrable harm (proven to the "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard), it should not be restricted in my opinion.
A drink together in a relaxed atmosphere discussing your question would be educational for us both.
Since I invited, yes I am buying.
I appreciate the offer, and look forward to setting something up.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#32 Apr 3, 2014
Oh, it'll be coffee for me, as I do not consume alcohol.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Big Johnson 4 min UTrashy 44
Should the GOP cut its loses? 13 min Big Johnson 946
News 6110 Holiday Lane, Dublin. 19 min Posting as myself 2
Hillary praises KKK head, Byrd. 33 min Duke for Mayor 43
Xenos Christian Fellowship is a CULT! (Jul '12) 1 hr 3Dliez 1,359
Dying Veteran records Dr's comment about care.. 1 hr d pants 21
Please help me find the love of my life 1 hr 404 not found 129

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages