Smoking ban to go before Ohio Supreme...

Smoking ban to go before Ohio Supreme Court

There are 21275 comments on the Business First of Columbus story from Apr 8, 2011, titled Smoking ban to go before Ohio Supreme Court. In it, Business First of Columbus reports that:

The Ohio Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear a Columbus-based case that challenges the constitutionality of the state's indoor smoking ban, the Dayton Daily News reports .

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Business First of Columbus.

“POOR BRAINWASHED ANTISMOKER”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#7810 Jul 22, 2011
dpx55 wrote:
<quoted text>

We get a kick out of
How many people do you have that you are? Sane people know that one person is just that, ONE person. You must think awfully little of yourself as just you
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#7811 Jul 22, 2011
Its me Linda B wrote:
<quoted text> Actually its a deceitful Press release by whoever only mentions a gallop poll 10 years ago
Actually, it is a Reuters news-wire story. It is dated July 18, 2011 and says (among other things):

"Most Americans want smoking banned in all public places but only 19 per cent believe that cigarette smoking should be illegal in the United States, a Gallup poll published on Friday said"

So you assume, what, that the author is referring to Friday, ten years ago, and assuming everyone will know WHICH Friday it was?
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7812 Jul 22, 2011
huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody knows? Yes, we do. Smoking does cause cancer. It's the leading cause to lung cancer. Are you really this blind? I enjoy my life. That's why I have a problem with people like you who beleive you're not causing harm to others around you. You are the reason we put up a smoking and the reason why we need to now work towards a national smoking ban. You are a very dangerous person to society. You should be ashamed of your clear sense of denial.
Non-bias research shows that 1% of smokers get lung cancer. to take the research findings further, research also shows that ALL lung tumors have fabric fibers in them. That would be dyes and various chemicals variant with natural land synthetic fibers.

With what I have listed to this list in my few posts, I have pointed out that there is a lot of directions concerning cancer, those being with fact, theory and otherwise (deliberate paid for deceits).

Here's the bottom line: There is a lot of (1)'to fit the agenda' research to push sales to specific areas,(2) past cures and stated causes now hidden,(3) a lot of speculation and false facts running rampant concerning cancer,(4) non-bias research being done that does not hit the mass media as big business (money interests - business profits) are not behind the research and (5) it IS a money maker, a 'product' that funds paychecks and all of us are the lab rat.

The money (business interests) behind the negatives widely promoted (money to do it) are done so using firms that advise them how to cause mass hysteria (sales). Nothing just pops up in mass without manipulation.

“POOR BRAINWASHED ANTISMOKER”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#7813 Jul 22, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it is a Reuters news-wire story. It is dated July 18, 2011 and says (among other things):
"Most Americans want smoking banned in all public places but only 19 per cent believe that cigarette smoking should be illegal in the United States, a Gallup poll published on Friday said"
So you assume, what, that the author is referring to Friday, ten years ago, and assuming everyone will know WHICH Friday it was?
Who are you trying to deceive, its a press release about a new Jersey based pollster and you left out this part on purpose

Ten years ago, 39 per cent were in favor, a percentage that was about the same when Gallup did a similar poll on the subject in 2007, according to the survey published on the website gallup.com .
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7814 Jul 22, 2011
dpx55 wrote:
<quoted text>
And I will tell you; IT IS A HEALTH ISSUE. A public vote is far more representative of the wishes of the people than a legislative bill. We all voted. You kind lost - big.....
In Ohio the smoking issue 5 went to vote illegally. I assume you have read why.'We all' is not fact. All registered voters did not vote and if I remember right, it was 38% of the registered voters that did vote on a horribly cold and rainy day. Further, media statements and ballot language is not what Ohio got, plus the rules were wrote AFTER the vote involving people tied to the RWJF funds. If you can remember, the state tried to remove candles from churches and authentic pizza ovens from restaurants too.
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7815 Jul 22, 2011
dpx55 wrote:
<quoted text>
linda has no choice but to deny that smoking is a direct cause of cancer and that SHS is dangerous to others for two main reasons:
1. she's addicted and could never quit,
2. her addiction has affected her ability to reason, and
2. admitting the truth means she'd lose her quest to get back to the bar stool with a cancer stick in hand.
What she doesn't realize is that it doesn't matter. she's never legally getting back inside with a cancer stick in her hand, and if the owner is at risk of losing their operating license, he's not letting her back in either. she's not worth that risk. she's doomed to a life beside the dumpster.
I just jumped in on this thread today and it is clear that finding the truth is not wanted by those who just do not like smoking and want to control others free choice. Keep in mind that the smoking issue is just a tip of what is to be controlled.

Meanwhile, many businesses have closed due to the lack of choice and many more will be following. They have people placed in high positions for law to make sure they rape in the profits (beyond the smoke issue). It's also fact that you can track the deep economic woes of areas around the country to a smoking ban.
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7816 Jul 22, 2011
azmac wrote:
<quoted text>
The information you just told come from those who profit off the bans and high taxes. Are you really so blind not see they are selling a product and making money off unconstitutional taxes.
Ex pharma sales rep Gwen Olsen says Big Pharma only interested in profits, not health
http://www.naturalnews.com/032971_Gwen_Olsen_...
ULM researchers discover fresh tobacco leaves can fight cancer
http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20110715/N...
Canadian Cure for Cancer Goes Unnoticed
http://jaybanks.ca/vancouverrealestatenews/20...
Did you know the FDA no longer does testing? They put things on the market per the pharmaceutical industry tests as if they are correct. To make it worse, the pharmaceutical industry FUNDS the FDA. What a racket on 'we the people'. Long ago I was told not to take any medication unless it has been on the market at least 15 years, and then research it first.
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7817 Jul 22, 2011
azmac wrote:
<quoted text>
...
ULM researchers discover fresh tobacco leaves can fight cancer
http://www.thenewsstar.com/article/20110715/N...
...
Tobacco is used for finding a cancer cure. Wish I had the link at hand. The pharmaceutical industry has plans on owning tobacco. Funny as nicotine is in varied foods. Maybe that's why so many people like tomato based foods.
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7818 Jul 22, 2011
Its me Linda B wrote:
<quoted text> what dumpster, more of yor delusions? Tell me about me and any dumpster..come on now, have you gone completely nuts..maybe you fell out of your chair and off your porch and hit your head too hard
'hit your head': Remember what that one researcher said!
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7819 Jul 22, 2011
Its me Linda B wrote:
<quoted text> you may as well keep you arse out of all my legal addictions, they are mine and you damn well can't have them no matter how stupid you are
Yeah, he/she should keep their nose out of your fried cauliflower (nicotine) with spaghetti sauce (nicotine) and his/her 'arse' out of your chili (nicotine).
History Buff

Ft Mitchell, KY

#7820 Jul 22, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it is a Reuters news-wire story. It is dated July 18, 2011 and says (among other things):
"Most Americans want smoking banned in all public places but only 19 per cent believe that cigarette smoking should be illegal in the United States, a Gallup poll published on Friday said"
So you assume, what, that the author is referring to Friday, ten years ago, and assuming everyone will know WHICH Friday it was?
It's a bought and paid for press release. You really don't know how it all works do you!?!!

Since: Nov 08

Small Town

#7821 Jul 22, 2011
dpx55 wrote:
<quoted text>
I love this. LFW apparently believes that it's GOOD for people to be around smoke because it stimulates your immune system. That flies in the face of all medical science; even that supported by the tobacco companies.
Your credibility just took a big hit.
Actually, the revelation that tobacco IS good for you HAS been reported in non-mainstream media. HEADLINES: An Owensboro bioprocessing group is working on a vaccine for the human papillomavirus that’s made with tobacco protein. Smoking lowers Parkinson’s disease risk associated with non-smoking, protects against Alzheimer’s Disease and ulcerative Colitis. Children of mothers who smoke 15 cigarettes a day tend to have lower odds for suffering from allergic rhino-conjunctivitis, allergic asthma, atopic eczema, food allergy, compared to children of mothers who never smoked. Kids of smokers have LOWER asthma!‘Villain’ nicotine slays TB. Carbon Monoxide May Alleviate Heart Attacks And Stroke, carbon monoxide's a by-product of tobacco smoke. Smoking Prevents Rare Skin Cancer, reduces The Risk Of Breast Cancer. Tourette’s Syndrome, schizophrenia and cocaine addiction are disorders that are alleviated by tobacco. Big pharma knows all of this, it’s all about wiping out the competition and money! And they depend on people like you to drink the Kool Aid.

Since: Nov 08

Small Town

#7822 Jul 22, 2011
Hugh Jass wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, it is a Reuters news-wire story. It is dated July 18, 2011 and says (among other things):
"Most Americans want smoking banned in all public places but only 19 per cent believe that cigarette smoking should be illegal in the United States, a Gallup poll published on Friday said"
So you assume, what, that the author is referring to Friday, ten years ago, and assuming everyone will know WHICH Friday it was?
Isn't it funny? I've never heard of a smoker being asked anything like this!. If 51% of the people decided they wanted to kill the other 49%, would we allow this takeover government to make it law? Then why do we allow a poll to usurp the U.S. Constitution! The founding of this nation was funded by tobacco!

Since: Nov 08

Small Town

#7823 Jul 22, 2011
huh wrote:
<quoted text>
Nobody knows? Yes, we do. Smoking does cause cancer. It's the leading cause to lung cancer. Are you really this blind? I enjoy my life. That's why I have a problem with people like you who beleive you're not causing harm to others around you. You are the reason we put up a smoking and the reason why we need to now work towards a national smoking ban. You are a very dangerous person to society. You should be ashamed of your clear sense of denial.
Say a state has two million people with 20% smokers, that's around 400,000 and you demonize them with anti-smoker laws and get perhaps half of them to try and quit, that's 200,000 buying nicoderm or nicoret at about $200 a try, that's $40,000,000.00, for big pharma. Hospitals are complicit. IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A MARKETING SCAM!

http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/12463.cfm
This prediction tool can assess a long-term smoker’s risk of developing lung cancer in the next 10 years based on the person’s age, sex, smoking history, and asbestos exposure. I used a 51 yr old female who smoked for 39 years at 15 cigarettes per day. Results: Over the next 10 years if she does not smoke the risk of developing lung cancer is 2%. If she continues to smoke her risk of developing lung cancer is 3%. For a smoker? A 3% chance after smoking for 39 years? These nuts would trample private property rights for that? If that smoker has only a 3% chance, and bans are to protect people who don’t even smoke, does banning even make ANY sense?

Since: Nov 08

Small Town

#7824 Jul 22, 2011
dpx55 wrote:
<quoted text>
linda has no choice but to deny that smoking is a direct cause of cancer and that SHS is dangerous to others for two main reasons:
1. she's addicted and could never quit,
2. her addiction has affected her ability to reason, and
2. admitting the truth means she'd lose her quest to get back to the bar stool with a cancer stick in hand.
What she doesn't realize is that it doesn't matter. she's never legally getting back inside with a cancer stick in her hand, and if the owner is at risk of losing their operating license, he's not letting her back in either. she's not worth that risk. she's doomed to a life beside the dumpster.
Governments job is NOT to protect the people from themselves. You can get a copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights online.
The surgeon general based it’s ideology of toxic smoke on an EPA report that was ruled on as fraudulent by a federal judge. The surgeon generals report is then also fraudulent. The surgeon general did not have to testify under oath to the validity of his claim. If you tell a lie enough, people will eventually fall for it. If you are so afraid of whiffs of cigarette smoke, you better start banning firefighters to protect them from their jobs!

From the well respected Cato Institute: The Second-Hand Smoke Charade http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php ... Quote: It now turns out that the influential 1993 EPA report “Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders” was as phony as a three-dollar bill. State officials and private businesses that believed that ETS was a public health danger (and not just a nuisance) were completely misled by the EPA. And, of course, so was main street American public opinion. YOU'VE BEEN HAD!

“POOR BRAINWASHED ANTISMOKER”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#7827 Jul 23, 2011
huh wrote:
<quoted text>
With all due respect, I have seen what smoking does with my own eyes. I lost my father because he smoked. You can take your worthless articles and shove them where the sun don't shine you insensitive prick.
Sorry for the loss of your father, its hard to lose our human being parents whether they smoke or not.

That said, I bet it really angers you when the anti smokers call your father poor uneducated trailer trash murderer among some of the names.

Those are really bad people who have no respect for themselves or anyone else

“POOR BRAINWASHED ANTISMOKER”

Since: Feb 10

Location hidden

#7828 Jul 23, 2011
marb wrote:
<quoted text> Governments job is NOT to protect the people from themselves. You can get a copy of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights online.
The surgeon general based it’s ideology of toxic smoke on an EPA report that was ruled on as fraudulent by a federal judge. The surgeon generals report is then also fraudulent. The surgeon general did not have to testify under oath to the validity of his claim. If you tell a lie enough, people will eventually fall for it. If you are so afraid of whiffs of cigarette smoke, you better start banning firefighters to protect them from their jobs!
From the well respected Cato Institute: The Second-Hand Smoke Charade http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php ... Quote: It now turns out that the influential 1993 EPA report “Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders” was as phony as a three-dollar bill. State officials and private businesses that believed that ETS was a public health danger (and not just a nuisance) were completely misled by the EPA. And, of course, so was main street American public opinion. YOU'VE BEEN HAD!
Thanks t Richard Carmona, the SG that brainwashed a nation and then was let go

Also an ongoing issue between Carmona and the hospital was the status of his board certification for general surgery, which he did not receive until May 1993, eight years after he had finished his residency. Typically, physicians pass the examinations within a year or two.

Individuals who have reviewed Carmona's records say he failed the exam twice before passing it. Carmona responded through administration officials that he passed within the window allowed by board rules.

At one point, legal documents show Carmona sought certification in another field -- emergency medicine -- but his application failed because of a dispute concerning board guidelines.

In a sworn statement, Carmona said he had worked 5,000 hours as an emergency physician. When the American Board of Emergency Medicine sought to verify those hours with Keith Kaback, the hospital's medical director of emergency services, Kaback replied that Carmona had worked virtually no hours as an emergency physician.
http://www.ph.ucla.edu/epi/bioter/squaringoff...
azmac

Bullhead City, AZ

#7829 Jul 23, 2011
History Buff wrote:
<quoted text>
Tobacco is used for finding a cancer cure. Wish I had the link at hand. The pharmaceutical industry has plans on owning tobacco. Funny as nicotine is in varied foods. Maybe that's why so many people like tomato based foods.
Codex Alimentarius will let the FDA control all food, vitamins and any thing else you put in your mouth to eat. The FDA says you have no right to eat what you want. They will tell you what you can eat. They are slowly working at it.
Hugh Jass

Nashville, TN

#7830 Jul 23, 2011
History Buff wrote:
<quoted text>
Non-bias research shows that 1% of smokers get lung cancer. to take the research findings further, research also shows that ALL lung tumors have fabric fibers in them. That would be dyes and various chemicals variant with natural land synthetic fibers.
Given that my earlier response to you and the links I subsequent provided show that you have a marked tendency to lie through your teeth and make completely bogus and unsubstantiated claims, I will ask for proof of this newest set of assertions of yours.
History Buff wrote:
With what I have listed to this list in my few posts, I have pointed out that there is a lot of directions concerning cancer, those being with fact, theory and otherwise (deliberate paid for deceits).
And then there is the complete and utter baloney that you spew at us.

Actually, what you have "pointed out" is that a forum like topix permits you to tell any lie you choose and pretend that it has gospel-level authority. Your string of calumnies, lies, innuendo, and simply misinformation have cost you any semblance of credibility with any but the hopelessly addicted denialists that MUST believe the crap you post is genuine.
History Buff wrote:
Here's the bottom line: There is a lot of (1)'to fit the agenda' research to push sales to specific areas,(2) past cures and stated causes now hidden,(3) a lot of speculation and false facts running rampant concerning cancer,(4) non-bias research being done that does not hit the mass media as big business (money interests - business profits) are not behind the research and (5) it IS a money maker, a 'product' that funds paychecks and all of us are the lab rat.
Yes, we have probably all read or heard of the tobacco companies that were caught spending huge amounts of money to persuade scientists to crank out or even just sign their names to papers/"studies"/let ters to create an illusion of doubt regarding the connection between smoking, ETS, and cancer. You don't need to make that point for us, but thank you.
History Buff wrote:
The money (business interests) behind the negatives widely promoted (money to do it) are done so using firms that advise them how to cause mass hysteria (sales). Nothing just pops up in mass without manipulation.
While your alleged capacity to write intelligible sentences falls far short of acceptability, you seem once again to be describing the very behavior of the tobacco companies when confronted with the possible loss of smoking venues or even with the imminent increase in public awareness of the harm done by their products.

Train any group that can be persuaded to align itself with the tobacco industry to spread a panic over impending loss of money, or to create a furor over a supposed attack on civil rights, or to take up the bogus allegations of falsified science even while the industry's own internal communications condemn them of that exact crime.

Yup. That sure is what has gone on, alright. Too, the industry is STILL able to rely on its customer base for shock troops, addiction being what it is.

Again, thank you for pointing out the tobacco industry's complete lack of integrity and for warning us against believing the crap they spread.

However, we had already noticed all of that.
azmac

Bullhead City, AZ

#7831 Jul 23, 2011
huh wrote:
<quoted text>
With all due respect, I have seen what smoking does with my own eyes. I lost my father because he smoked. You can take your worthless articles and shove them where the sun don't shine you insensitive prick.
Most doctors blame a disease on smoking because they have been taught to and they do not know what caused the disease. Yes I have seen smokers die, but have seen many many more non smokers die of the very same things.
My wife has cirrhosis of the liver. She does not drink and never has. She has never been around Chemicals. But she does have a very high Barium count. Which the government sprays in the air all the time. Her doctor could have blamed it all on smoking but did not. He looked for the real cause. But now days every thing is blamed on smoking. When I grew up almost all smoked and you did not see all these so called smoking diseases around. Only knew one person with cancer. Knew no one that had a hard time breathing, allergies, diabetes. Today they are every where. The county I live in has less than half of the people of the town I grew up in. Yet I would say 1 in 3 people here are sick with something. Kids when I grew up most had no major diseases, today they are every where. 50% less smoking, 75% less SHS and the so called smoking diseases are still on the rise as much as 500%.
The new world order wants 80% of the world population gone. The elite who own the banks, the oil, the drugs, the media, the food and any thing else of importance are the ones pushing the NWO. Once you learn this then all that is going on today falls in place. This country is nothing like what was founded. It is no longer being run by the constitution. It is under attack and most people haven't a clue about it. About 100 years of brain washing has made us a country of sheep. You are told what to believe and what to think every time you turn on the TV.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

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.

Smoking Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Man Smoking Near Gas Pump Bursts Into Flames (Mar '07) 57 min Debi 21
News The spy who quit? Lovers keep 007 passive smoki... 8 hr Get a LIFE 2
How to get addicted to cigarettes? (Jun '11) 12 hr Smoker 26
A smokers ONLY dating site .... it's about tim... (May '06) Jan 10 Shannon 17
News Pot smokers to defy Trump, light up at his inau... Jan 6 Huh 1
Poll Do you want your kids to smoke? (Oct '07) Jan 6 Shannon 123
News Quitting smoking is the hardest resolution to keep Jan 5 Sandy feet 1
More from around the web