Antone's Nightclub
A Stupid Fight
RECEIVED Thu., May 19, 2005
Dear Editor,
Geez, Louis, pick better fights, will ya? Stand up for our rapidly eroding right to offer a dissenting opinion against our government, or how about fighting for the rights of consenting adults to do whatever the hell they want in their bedrooms? These are good fights. Standing up for the right to inflict harm on others in a confined public place is a stupid fight. And you lost – get over it. Unless you think Diebold machines were tampered with in this process, this does appear to be the will of the people.
You ask where to draw the line, and the answer is: when your freedom inflicts harm on others. We have an overriding freedom to be left unharmed in the public arena. The evidence is not ambiguous; it is entirely clear that smoke harms nonsmokers. This also plays to your final point about addiction – you have the freedom to harm yourself; that freedom stops when your addiction harms me. Is that clear enough? Apply it to any of the addictions you mentioned.
As to your call to the “army of nonsmokers” to come and listen to music while you simultaneously disparage their musical choices: I can't begin to tell you how misdirected this is – instead, you should be calling for smokers to come and attend shows even if they can't smoke. If alleged music-lovers have prioritized their need to consume tobacco over their need to consume music, then why not address this problem directly? Get with the program, Louis, it is time for society to evolve to this point, and Austin is establishing its mark in this social Darwinism. It is a good thing, embrace it!
Geez, Louis, pick better fights, will ya? Stand up for our rapidly eroding right to offer a dissenting opinion against our government, or how about fighting for the rights of consenting adults to do whatever the hell they want in their bedrooms? These are good fights. Standing up for the right to inflict harm on others in a confined public place is a stupid fight. And you lost – get over it. Unless you think Diebold machines were tampered with in this process, this does appear to be the will of the people.
You ask where to draw the line, and the answer is: when your freedom inflicts harm on others. We have an overriding freedom to be left unharmed in the public arena. The evidence is not ambiguous; it is entirely clear that smoke harms nonsmokers. This also plays to your final point about addiction – you have the freedom to harm yourself; that freedom stops when your addiction harms me. Is that clear enough? Apply it to any of the addictions you mentioned.
As to your call to the “army of nonsmokers” to come and listen to music while you simultaneously disparage their musical choices: I can't begin to tell you how misdirected this is – instead, you should be calling for smokers to come and attend shows even if they can't smoke. If alleged music-lovers have prioritized their need to consume tobacco over their need to consume music, then why not address this problem directly? Get with the program, Louis, it is time for society to evolve to this point, and Austin is establishing its mark in this social Darwinism. It is a good thing, embrace it!
Kevin Taylor