Just Breathe: An examination of the moral and legal justifications for
current smoking bans


   
    Florida.  Ten O’clock AM.  A middle aged man from the Northeast, not so much different than any of our parents, stands up in front of over two hundred people.  The light shines in from the stained glass windows and glistens against his tear stained face.  His thoughts divert from the task at hand and refocus on his father--leaning back in his chair, the smell of his cigar meandering down the hall to his son’s bedroom.  It is ironic to think that the smell he associated with comfort as a child is now one of hurt, pain, and death.  As he clears his throat to speak, embarrassed that he is crying in front of his children, he begins to give his father’s eulogy. 
    California.  Six O’clock AM.  An older man, someone’s father, someone’s grandfather, watches the sun rise with his wife.  He grabs her hand, unable to grasp it tightly like he used to.  He uses his free arm to pull himself up in his hospital bed.  She helps him and proceeds to hug him.  He tries to talk to her yet feels as though he is breathing out of the straws they place in the drinks he would go and have with his friends at the bar after work.  He knows he will never have the strength to grab his wife and lift her off her feet again.  He will never be able to hold her, to protect her.  He knows that those nights at the bar, those innocent puffs on his cigarettes to relieve a long day’s work, are killing him.         
    New York.  Eight O'clock PM.  A young boy lays with his girlfriend as they talk about their families.  His mind falls on the grandmother she will never meet.  The girlfriend sees his eyebrows become tighter and listens to his sighs.  He speaks with such sorrow, such love, yet such resentment.  He asks his girlfriend to explain to him how anyone could choose to die a slow and painful death--one that wrenches one’s body and one’s mind.  Over two years later, he continues to reach out for some answer, for some sense of closure yet finds none.  The girlfriend is speechless.  She says she doesn’t know.

    And in Boston it is 3:00 PM.  School is out.  A group of high school girls gather for their first opportunity to smoke after a day of biology and algebra.  They hold their cigarettes like they have been smoking for years.  The one that wants to be a doctor digs in her backpack for another lighter while her friend, who aspires to be a singer, tries to blow “O’s” in the air.  Two girls stand isolated from the others.  Although they do not smoke, they take deep inhales of smoke filled air, relieved to finally be out to enjoy the “fresh” spring afternoon.  One talks about how she thinks she is getting asthma.  The other comments as to how that is a strange thing for a teenager to develop.  Sit back and try to picture it: where will these girls be in sixty years?  Will they be doctors and singers?  Will they be asthmatics?   Bed ridden from emphysema?  Dead?  
    Our health teachers, parents, and school nurses beat into our brains that smoking is bad.  As a child I can remember my friends walking up to absolute strangers who were smoking and saying, “Pewwweee,” and shaking their fingers at them like their teachers and parents had taught them.  Yet, I don’t think I did.  With an extended family who smoked heavily and I did not understand it was bad.  One day, I was five, I pulled out a pretzel from the container for a snack and joined my parents in the living room.  It was one of those long ones that look almost like a big cigar. As my father smoked a cigarette, I mimicked him.  I inhaled on my bitten pretzel and tiny crumbs entered my small throat.  I coughed but quickly recovered and smiled at my parents holding my pretzel between my fingers like my father.  My mom had a panic stricken look across her face.  My parents were on a plane to Canyon Ranch within two weeks for a rapid program to quit smoking.  I have now recognized my mother and grandmother’s identical wheezing asthma, my grandfather’s pacemaker and pig valve, and have become one of those children advocating the end of smoking. 
    How could a simple cylindrical object we see on a daily basis could have such a grand effect on a person’s life?  As someone tries cigarettes as a teenager it baffles me as to why there is always someone else there saying, “It’s no big deal.  You’re just having one,” yet never anyone there to remind that novice that one could turn into two and two could turn into a smoke filled rest of your life.  There is never anyone there to rattle off the endless list of diseases acquired as a result of smoking or the exposure to smoke.  I wish there was someone there to say, “This is how many months and years of your life you are taking off with every inhale.” 
    Yet, with that all said, smoking has become far from a part of our daily lives.  To the great relief of many families of victims, health advocates, and others, smoking is not what it was during our parents childhood or even our own childhood.  New York has followed the examples of Boston and Connecticut and made progress in the regulation of smoking.  As individual victories are won, momentum grows for eventual state bans of smoking across the United States. In Nassau County, no longer are you asked if you prefer smoking or non-smoking in restaurants and now, in Nassau County as well as New York City smoking is prohibited in restaurants, public buildings, as well as directly in front of said buildings.  Bypassing the huddled smokers in front of offices or holding your breath as you pass through a smoke filled bar will grow to be a forgotten toil of our past.   
    Without a doubt, the primary justification of these bans on smoking is the health risk.  Finally, after years of denial, tobacco companies are admitting that their product does indeed cause cancer among many other illnesses.  Mouth and throat cancer, deterioration of the esophagus, gum decay, emphysema, lung cancer, asthma: these are all sickness which the average sixth grader could describe to you as a result of smoking.  Many argue that it is a person’s right to choose whether or not to smoke.  Yet this choice alone is questioned since many begin smoking when they are under eighteen.  How much validity is there to a choice, possibly uninformed, which is made by a minor?  Regardless, our country’s Republicans, tobacco companies, and smokers would say it is a person’s right to choose to smoke.  Yet what about the rights of an innocent bystander, one who is choosing, the same the way the cigarette smoker is choosing, to remain smoke free?  This person receives no rights in a bar where you can barely see the person next to you as a result of the smoke.  A person who does not use tobacco inhales the smoke wafting over from a smoking section in a restaurant.  Where are this person’s rights? 
    Many might further comment that the fraction of people truly affected by secondhand smoke is almost insignificant.  I would beg to differ.  As Boston prepared to institute their smoking bans, they, like New York, had, used the risk of secondhand smoke to support their proposal.  Their documentation, printed in Newsday, indicated that, over 1,000 deaths in Massachusetts each year result from exposure to secondhand smoke.  This caused immense public health costs as well as great Medicare and Medicaid expenditures.  This is in addition to the cost of those who suffer from illnesses related to smoking who actually smoke. When we hear of the terrible maladies acquired by smoke, we instantly think of the smokers who choose to do this to themselves.  What about those who do not?   
    I am sure that even the most coldhearted Cruella Deville is somewhat moved thinking of the heartache and grief of so many people across the United States due to smoke.  Therefore, it baffles me as to how anyone could say, “I support a person’s right to smoke.  I support a person’s right to infect our nation’s air and give someone else along with myself a terminal illness.”  When people are asked, “Are you in support of the bans?”  I have heard many respond saying, “No, they are an infraction on our civil liberties.” I must admit, upon hearing about the bans, I did get a sense of a violation of rights almost like a wakeup call to the nation to beware of George Orwell’s 1984 way of life.   I pondered this justification and was left with the following question:  Where does it say we, as Americans, have the right to smoke cigarettes?  I am not entirely familiar with each specific clause of the Constitution or the Bill of Rights but I certainly do not think that Jay or Madison had the legalization of free cigarette smoking in mind when they were drafting the Federalist papers. 
    Some might respond, “What about the right to privacy?”  A key clause in our nation’s founding documents and used to justify abortion rights, a citizen’s right to privacy and to smoke, if they wish, challenges the boundary lines of said privacy.  When I think of privacy, I instantly think of the phrase, “privacy of one’s own home.”  Smoking bans do not by any means restrict tobacco smoking on one’s own private property.  Although some might contend that that might be an eventual step, New York’s current restrictions are far from it.  There is a huge difference between smoking in your backyard and smoking in a restaurant.  That difference is the people you are affecting.  One cannot compare smoking on your back porch with no one around to over twenty people smoking in a crowded bar or club, all breathing the same air.  It reminds me of an airplane.  The same way the opposition believes that it is a person’s right to smoke if they want to and where they want to, no questions asked, what about the right to the maintenance of your health?  While there are obvious health risks associated from the exposure to smoke, as we examine how a person’s rights to their health are addressed in our legal documents the illnesses them self become almost a non-issue.  Although not specifically accounted for, one’s health is one of those inalienable rights focused on by philosophers such as John Locke, whose ideas inspired much of our Declaration of Independence.  As Thomas Jefferson wrote, “...the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,” I would not be surprised if somewhere he envisioned the right to remain healthy or at least not to pursue said happiness and life at the expense of others.  If we have the right to our health, there should be no question that the risks of smoking are sufficient enough to institute restrictions regarding it. 
    Another influential group who opposes the smoking bans are restaurant and club owners.  While some argue that it should be individual citizens fined rather than owners, others are more adamant and refuse to endorse the bans at all.  After having already faced a great downturn in business due to the economy, many customers are choosing not to attend many of New York’s hot spots because they cannot smoke.  Here lies another, almost moral, issue which the smoking bans challenge: where are our state’s and our nation’s priorities?  Do they lie in the success of our clubs and our restaurants or the safety of our children and our livelihood?  Yet, is our livelihood threatened by the growing decline of this sector of our economy?  Could it be threatened by any potential interferences within the Tobacco industry?  This is the controversy surrounding these bans.  This is precisely why nicotine is even legal in our 21st century society which has such great knowledge of addiction and disease.  Cigarettes remain legal and probably will not be deemed illegal until way past our life times due to two things: fear and money.  Often our fear of not achieving success and prosperity overpowers our apprehensions regarding diseases which we think do not affect us or our loved ones.  If only avoiding these diseases and exposure to cigarette smoke were as easy as that simple removal of the concern from our frame of mind.  If everyone acted this way towards every issue, where would our country be today?                 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1