Smoking, drinking & society
Why is it socially acceptable to consume alcohol, but not to smoke cigarettes?
I'm a smoker, and I accept and respect the rights of nonsmokers not to have to inhale my secondhand smoke. I understand why there are no TV commercials promoting smoking.
However, I don't understand why it's acceptable to advertise alcohol, or to sell and consume alcohol in many of those same places where I can't smoke. It is equally offensive to me to see others consume alcohol in public places where there are children, clergy members and elderly people present.
I know the effects of smoking on my body, but I do not commit crimes, commit adultery or kill innocent people while driving my car because I smoke. Unfortunately, that is not the reality of someone who is intoxicated.
The health risks of a drinker are just as great as those of a smoker, and when a person who is a drinker sees a TV commercial for some type of alcohol, it encourages that person to drink.
Although I understand our health-conscious society is only trying to protect smokers as well as nonsmokers, I think those same health-conscious people should put the same emphasis on alcohol.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ATI crying poor again
- EPA, methane & health
- Buyer beware
- Stop naming shooters
- Give Vick second chance
- Cops, stars shine
- e_SSLqProgressive’ should be ‘regressive’
- Personal fiscal restraint needed
- Overgrown North Versailles property needs attention
- ‘Climate clucker’ & proud
- Council actions questioned II