The same could be said about drinking at home versus drinking in a bar.

Yes, of course.

BTW you need to shorten your signature, it's wasting too much space. Get rid of Colbert and Stewart

Can we expect the same from you?
You'll be judging people by standards you don't have?
Or are you already employing tactic.



I've got a quota of 60% intelligence in my signature line.
If I do as you advise, that will leave me short by about 60%...

Based on your posts you will never achieve even 60% of an intelligence quota

Can you say Hypocrite!

"Don't judge others by your own standards". Did you really just say that, gary?

I am more than willing to defend any of my posts, or any of my statements and the intelligence that comes behind it.

Are you willing to defend the quote in question?
Or are you just trying to obfuscate the fact that it was truly a stupid thing for you to say...

Gary, for all your supposed intelligence; why can't you grasp the idea that it is these personal insults on others posts that are the reason that you are not taken seiously by others on this site?
Debate is all about stating your point or idea and the reasons for them. I think we all can accept that none of us do or will ever think exactly the same. Throw in the factors of different culture and different socio-economic standing, and the unlikelihood of agreement increases exponentially. Please; for the sake of the posters on this site who just want to state their ideas and the reasons for them- whether you agree or not - leave out the personal insults and attacks. You will be surprised at how much credibility this lends to you as a person.

Yes, the same could be said, if, when you drink, you do something that could possibly harm someone else.

And the last time I looked, drunk driving is a crime.

But that wasn't the statement. The statement was that the government should make going out without sunscreen against the law if they are going to regulate smoking. And the last I heard, not putting sunscreen on yourself (or simply drinking, for that matter) won't hurt anybody else, unlike cigarette smoke.

I think we are all getting way off the issue at hand. Can and does secondhand smoke do damage to the smoker in question and the others around him(or her)? Yes. We can all think of other eqating scenarios that fit the same bill. For example; diesel fuel fumes. Do you think the governments(city, state, and federal will even entertain such an idea as to ban public transportation? It will never happen. Why? because you would be told that the ratio of cancers that may be caused by this (as well as cigarette smoking are not close to the number of people who would, and do, use public transportation. In other words, science cannot be uninvented. Check it for yourselves; diesel fuel fumes are also a carcinogen. I (or my father) didn't like the smoking bans, but will accept smoking in my private residence or outside so as not to break any current laws.