Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Fitzgerald
You STILL don't get it. Someone with a digestive disorder in not going to endanger the health of someone in the same general area. Someone polluting the air with second hand cigarette smoke endangers all around breathing that air that had previously been safe to breathe before smoking polluted it.
In an ideal society, all people would be considerate of others and not infringe on the rights of others and there would be no need for rules and laws. In reality, many people are selfish, others are just inconsiderate, and even more are just clueless of how their actions affect others nearby so rules and laws become necessary. One's rights stop where they infringe on the rights of other's. Again, if you can't deal with that, you have the option of leaving society and becoming a hermit. In the case of the cafe that disallowed the EBR, taking your business elsewhere would be the best option after letting management know that you will be doing so and why.
|
Naturally, I think that you are the one who doesn't get it.
You do not have a "right" to eat in a restaurant. The owner can keep you out if he doesn't like your hairdo.
Using laws to deal with what you see as selfishness, inconsideration & cluelessness reduces the moral space in which liberty exists, and subverts the role of custom and society by substituting law for for those flexible and changing informal rules which make freedom possible.
Read your last sentence. Substitute smoking or non-smoking for EBR. That's the way a free country works, and stays free.