Writing worth reading
Friday, March 20, 2009 Rod Liddle has written a piece in this week's Spectator (The smoking ban was always going to be thin end of the wedge) which sums up what many of us, including Rod, have been saying for years. In fact, I'm sure we had this very conversation when we shared a table at Forest's Revolt In Style dinner at The Savoy a couple of years ago.
Tom Utley, another recipient of Forest's coveted Smoker-Friendly Journalist of the Year award, also writes about the war on alcohol HERE.
Of course Rod and Tom - both heavy smokers who enjoy a drink or two - might be expected to write in this vein, not least because it provides an entertaining article and, as Tom is always reminding us, it pays for his children's school fees.
What we also need is for people who have hitherto kept quiet to make their views known. The longer they stay silent, the worse things will get. Writing on blogs and message boards isn't enough. People must write to their MP, to newspapers, and vote with their feet.
Oh, and they might also write to Sir Liam Donaldson, Chief Medical Officer, Department of Health, Room 114, Richmond House, 79 Whitehall, London SW1A 2NS.
Reader Comments (8)
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=525255917&ref=profile#/group.php?gid=70767623296&ref=mf
This may not be related entirely to this post but for those on Facebook this group gives an excellent opportunity to debate with anti-smokers.
One of them has posted a pic of a cancerous lung and a debate has sprung up about that. The pro-choicers are holding their own and there are some very good comments. It has been quite easy to lose it a bit but it is still informative and it gives an insight into their thoughts, Enjoy!
Pat -
Re: "One of them has posted a pic of a cancerous lung........................"
Why DO they do that - since a 'cancerous' lung looks exactly the same, whether from a smoker or a non-smoker.................
And a healthy smoker's lung...........etc etc
Such tactics are infantile and intellectually dishonest.
But highly effective, it would seem.............
Yep - stupid question, Martin !
That has been pointed out in the debate. The person who posted it has since said he is not debating anymore. That was after another poster told him that as a car driver he is also responsible for carcinogen pollutants that can cause kung cancer.
What has become apparent in the Facebook debate is that anti-smokers will never shift their position and to be fair, neither will we. However, not surprisingly, I believe the pro-choice argument has moral right on its side.
See my rant on "Who Runs Britain".
You can't argue against religious fundamentalists, and anti-smokers are just that
True John.It is blind faith, and when they are challenged scientifically, they ALWAYS resort to insult, which proves their lack of knowledge and truth. The only retort left to the scoudrel.
Trying to tell an anti smoker the truth is like trying to tell a creationist about evolution.
Sir Liam Donaldson? Isn't this Mr Panic who foresees hundreds of thousands of deaths every time a new strain of flu virus is found? Isn't this the man now responsible for our Tamiflu mountain? Not a person to inspire public confidence is he?