Smokers of NationStates?

[Ardoki]

I just turned 18, and I still live at home. I was not allowed sugary drinks when I was a young child, so I have no desire to have them now or ever. Sugar/chemical-free lemonade mixed with organic orange juice tastes nicer than Fanta, so why would I want to have sugary soft drinks?

We can't let you damage your own health on purpose. If you do, you should be denied access to public healthcare.

Or you could saunter back to the land of denial that you came from and realize that based on your logic, people CHOOSE to get in cars, therefore if they get in accidents they should be left to die on the street.

Cars do not kill people. Being in a car accident could kill you, however the car does not kill you.

Smoking is known to kill, and it kills in every case. It is a scientific fact that people who smoke are going to live shorter lives than they would otherwise.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

We can't let you damage your own health on purpose.

Just because you've been indoctrinated with a strict, no-fun-allowed, over-protective attitude since birth by your parents, doesn't mean you get to enforce that lifestyle onto other people.

[Washington Resistance Army]

It's their body, they should be able to do whatever the fuck they want with it.

We don't let people sell themselves as slaves.

You can't willingly be a slave by definition.

[Ardoki]

We don't let people sell themselves as slaves.

You can't willingly be a slave.

You could sign yourself into slavery, technically.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Or you could saunter back to the land of denial that you came from and realize that based on your logic, people CHOOSE to get in cars, therefore if they get in accidents they should be left to die on the street.

Cars do not kill people. Being in a car accident could kill you, however the car does not kill you.

Smoking is known to kill, and it kills in every case. It is a scientific fact that people who smoke are going to live shorter lives than they would otherwise.

No, it's not. 2/3rds of all life-time smokers do not die of anything relating to smoking.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

You can't willingly be a slave.

You could sign yourself into slavery, technically.

Slavery doesn't come with a fucking contract.

[Ardoki]

We can't let you damage your own health on purpose.

Just because you've been indoctrinated with a strict, no-fun-allowed, over-protective attitude since birth by your parents, doesn't mean you get to enforce that lifestyle onto other people.

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

[Ardoki]

Cars do not kill people. Being in a car accident could kill you, however the car does not kill you.

Smoking is known to kill, and it kills in every case. It is a scientific fact that people who smoke are going to live shorter lives than they would otherwise.

No, it's not. 2/3rds of all life-time smokers do not die of anything relating to smoking.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/smoking-shortens-life-ten-years-quitting-early-can-help-live-longer-243287

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/23/smoking-cessation-life-expectancy/1858913/

[Washington Resistance Army]

Just because you've been indoctrinated with a strict, no-fun-allowed, over-protective attitude since birth by your parents, doesn't mean you get to enforce that lifestyle onto other people.

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

Bullshit, my mom would be a very unhappy person if you took away her smokes.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

Bullshit. You don't get to tell me what makes me happy.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

No, it's not. 2/3rds of all life-time smokers do not die of anything relating to smoking.

http://www.medicaldaily.com/smoking-shortens-life-ten-years-quitting-early-can-help-live-longer-243287

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/23/smoking-cessation-life-expectancy/1858913/

You clearly don't understand simple statistics. Smoking does not kill in every case, nor even the majority of cases.

[Ardoki]

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

Bullshit, my mom would be a very unhappy person if you took away her smokes.

She would be happy, that she can live a healthier and more pleasant life. She might not realise it at first, but eventually she will.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Just because you've been indoctrinated with a strict, no-fun-allowed, over-protective attitude since birth by your parents, doesn't mean you get to enforce that lifestyle onto other people.

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

You don't improve happiness by banning cigarettes.Also, did you not learn about prohibition?

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Bullshit, my mom would be a very unhappy person if you took away her smokes.

She would be happy, that she can live a healthier and more pleasant life. She might not realise it at first, but eventually she will.

No.

[The Orson Empire]

Just because you've been indoctrinated with a strict, no-fun-allowed, over-protective attitude since birth by your parents, doesn't mean you get to enforce that lifestyle onto other people.

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

As much as I despite cigarettes, this argument is bullshit. The state is not responsible for baby-sitting its citizens, and the state should never have the authority to dictate what is and isn't "happiness".

[Prussia-Steinbach]

She would be happy, that she can live a healthier and more pleasant life. She might not realise it at first, but eventually she will.

Source she'll overall be happier. You can literally know this woman will be happier not smoking. You know this?

[Ardoki]

The state's responsibility is to ensure the well-being and happiness of the citizenry. Smoking harms the well-being and happiness (long term) of a smoker, so the state should take away their smoking.

Bullshit. You don't get to tell me what makes me happy.

Second hand smoke! You put others in danger! The traces on your clothes and in your breath can kill (especially young children)!

It is a public health and safety issue.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Bullshit, my mom would be a very unhappy person if you took away her smokes.

She would be happy, that she can live a healthier and more pleasant life. She might not realise it at first, but eventually she will.

Oh no, she likes to smoke and she would be very angry if someone tried to take that away. You don't get what to decide what makes other people happy, that's a retarded idea.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Bullshit. You don't get to tell me what makes me happy.

Second hand smoke! You put others in danger! The traces on your clothes and in your breath can kill (especially young children)!

It is a public health and safety issue.

No, it's actually not.

[Prussia-Steinbach]

Bullshit. You don't get to tell me what makes me happy.

Second hand smoke! You put others in danger! The traces on your clothes and in your breath can kill (especially young children)!

It is a public health and safety issue.

Third hand smoke is nonexistent bullshit. I do not smoke around people who don't want to be smoked around.

[Ardoki]

She would be happy, that she can live a healthier and more pleasant life. She might not realise it at first, but eventually she will.

Oh no, she likes to smoke and she would be very angry if someone tried to take that away. You don't get what to decide what makes other people happy, that's a retarded idea.

Why would she be angry at her life being improved.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Second hand smoke! You put others in danger! The traces on your clothes and in your breath can kill (especially young children)!

It is a public health and safety issue.

Third hand smoke is nonexistent bullshit. I do not smoke around people who don't want to be smoked around.

Same. I don't know any smoker at all, except for my mother, who is an abusive witch anyway, that smokes around people that hate it.

[Stagnant Axon Terminal]

Oh no, she likes to smoke and she would be very angry if someone tried to take that away. You don't get what to decide what makes other people happy, that's a retarded idea.

Why would she be angry at her life being improved.

I love how you claim to know the life and psychology of every smoker ever.
Fact: You don't.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Oh no, she likes to smoke and she would be very angry if someone tried to take that away. You don't get what to decide what makes other people happy, that's a retarded idea.

Why would she be angry at her life being improved.

Because in her eyes it wouldn't be an improvement and people don't like nanny states. That shit is retarded, people should be able to make their own choices.

[The Orson Empire]

Oh no, she likes to smoke and she would be very angry if someone tried to take that away. You don't get what to decide what makes other people happy, that's a retarded idea.

Why would she be angry at her life being improved.

She would be angry because your infringing on her right to do what she wants with her own body. Despite the fact that I despise cigarettes, you can't just ban smoking. It won't work.