On Sun, 4 Feb 2007 03:48:52 -0600, Mark Anderson
wrote:
>In article drmorrisnospam@comcast.net says...
>> Should coal miners be exposed unnecessarily to have a job,
>
>You have a point. According to the logic of anti-smoking zealots,
>people whose real purpose is to control and impose their will onto
>others, in order to make the coal miner's job so as they are not exposed
>"unnecessarily," the coal miner needs to stop mining coal and the owner
>of the coal mine needs to do something different with his/her land.
>Anti-smoking zealots require zero tolerance in their quest to protect
>the worker.
>
>And I'm sure these same anti-smoking zealots won't be crying a river of
>tears for the poor schlubs who live downwind of the coal fired power
>plant. Anti-smoking zealots know that's where they get the electricity
>to power their doo dads so there is only so much zealotry to go around.
>
So exactly what IS the product or service for the public good that is
being so nobly provided by the smokers?
|