Friday, July 20, 2007

Jobs that tell you "No Smoking" AFTER they hire you

Imagine you get hired for a job, say a cashier in a hospital cafe.

During the interview, the person interviewing never bothers mentions the smoking rules, and you never ask (since you assume you can just smoke outside on breaks as always).

But then you get hired! BUT...

When you DO get hired, the boss tells you "No smoking on the grounds of this hospital, not even on breaks. If you do walk away from the hospital on lunch breaks, and you smell like smoke, I will fire you on the spot! No exceptions!"

What's your reaction?

I'd probably walk away from the hospital and never come back. As I said in a group, I can't afford to accept a job where I'm not given even one inch of smoking freedom. And I'd hate being told the smoking rules once I'm hired. I wanna know the smoking rules upfront, so I won't waste my time preparing for a job that sounds more like living heck once I'm hired. I don't give a flying sheet if the pay is 15 bucks/hour. I am not gonna work at a job where I can't even smoke outside far away from the workplace.

And smelling my clothes to see if I HAVE been being me on a job break? I might get sent to jail if I punch a boss for sniffing my clothes. How would a boss like it if I sniffed HIS clothes just to see if he's been smoking himself? He would have every right to beat the sheet outta me for getting up close. The only person who's allowed to sniff my clothes is a special female friend in my life....preferrably one who smokes herself.

If there's a person at a job with an antismoking boss who says even if you smell like smoke, you'll get fired.....how can this smoker fight back? Well, I wouldn't recommend punching the boss and getting violent. I just said that outta anger from thinking about it.

But the smoker CAN enlighten his/her co-workers on the truth of SHS. Especially if the co-workers smoke themselves. Maybe pass out copies of the Dissecting Antismokers Brains book (the one written by Michael McFadden). Pass out copies of documents that mention how SHS tests conducted by antis themselves all failed to prove the claim that SHS is dangerous....these docs I'm thinking of are in my group's files.

Fight back with logic and proof from documents shared by smoking activists online, the pamphlets included. Pass them out to the co-workers (especially smoking ones) and encourage them to tell the union leader (jobs have unions that keep up with job issues that need to be resolved) about this truth on SHS. And then the union can enlighten the boss on the truth of SHS.

Tell co-workers to contact any politicians in IL (maybe even Rod B himself) and when you tell them the truth on SHS, make sure you provide citations from what you read.

The only way a state ban can get revoked is if 1000s of smokers let their displeasure known. I can do my part to help get a state ban smoked. But I can't do it alone. There are at least 999 other smokers out there who are as intelligent as me.

Once jobs understand the truth on SHS, that's the only way you'll get your smoking freedom on the job back.

Wednesday, July 18, 2007

Section 5 from Smoke-Free IL Act

First off, I came across an updated article on the PA mayor reversing the grill ban, and he admitted to making a mistake. If mayors can admit to making mistakes by banning smoking, life would be a lot better in America.

Now on to the topic of this blog post. With the citations from the section in bold.

Section 5. Findings. The General Assembly finds that
tobacco smoke is a harmful and dangerous carcinogen to human
beings and a hazard to public health. Secondhand tobacco smoke
causes at least 65,000 deaths each year from heart disease and
lung cancer according to the National Cancer Institute.

IL politicians need to ask the National Cancer Institute "How the heck did you determine SHS causes at least 65,000 deaths? Did they actually see 65,000 death certificates that all say SHS caused each death directly?"

Secondhand tobacco smoke causes heart disease, stroke, cancer,
sudden infant death syndrome, low-birth-weight in infants,
asthma and exacerbation of asthma, bronchitis and pneumonia in
children and adults.

SHS causing heart diseases in a lie I never heard of til now. I would cuss out someone who told me "Don't smoke around me! The last thing I need is you giving me a heart disease or a heart attack with that cancer stick!" To put it nicely, there are OTHER THINGS IN THIS WORLD that cause heart disease, strokes, and asthma. SHS causing all of these things in the quote are lies. If you think my cig can give you a heart disease, I'd love to give you a "heart attack" myself if you don't leave me the heck alone! It's a wonder why you're even around me if you're sooooo freakin concerned about my cig "giving you asthma or heart diseases."

Secondhand tobacco smoke is the third
leading cause of preventable death in the United States.
Illinois workers exposed to secondhand tobacco smoke are at
increased risk of premature death. An estimated 2,900 Illinois
citizens die each year from exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke.


Were IL workers dying on the job while being exposed to SHS years ago, during the days when folks could smoke in tons of places? I don't think so. SHS exposure in modern times is no different in that sense. And again, show me darn proof that IL workers and IL residents actually die from simply inhaling SHS! How tough is that to do (on showing me proof)?

The General Assembly also finds that the United States
Surgeon General's 2006 report has determined that there is no safe
level of exposure to SHS and that scientific evidence that secondhand smoke causes serious diseases, including lung cancer, heart disease, and
respiratory illnesses such as bronchitis and asthma, is massive and conclusive.

That General Assembly needs people who graduated with a high school diploma, and not only with an 8th grade diploma. They should know the SG report from 2006 is a report with screwed-up lies and false stats.

And BTW, IL politicians shouldn't believe everything they read. If someone said in a SG report "SHS exposure causes AIDS" (and this HAS been said before from antis themselves), would they believe it? I know banning smoking in IL won't protect me from AIDS (let alone strokes and heart diseases). Condoms would protect me from AIDS instead.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Random Thoughts

I oughta say I didn't mean to imply I hate living in America (in my previous blog post). I mean after all, this country was a much better place to live in when it WAS the actual land of the free. I'm an American when it comes to placing votes, and sending out emails to certain folks when smoking activists ask for help from others (by smokers sending out their own emails).

But I'm not apologizing for the way I see things in this country when it comes to smoking bans grill bans, and other stupid bans (when I think about being an African as well). Some rules in life actually make sense to me. But a lot of those "rules" deserve to be ignored (such as smoking bans and grill bans). But at least nobody makes a big deal about me smoking at a Metra train stop unless it was security of course.

I wasn't playing when I said "I hate folks of higher power who control Americans' minds." Controlling my mind won't be easy by establishing bogus rules in life.

If OBama ever becomes a president, you would see LOTS of changes in this country. Especially with America being involved in the Iraq war. I'd like to think he would change the antismoking culture too. But I heard he sadly supports antis since he's trying to quit smoking. It would be cool to not only have a president representing "us," but a president who smokes as well!

A president who's a fellow African-American smoker would agree with how I view smoking bans. But I guess an Obama-like president would also need bodyguards, whether he smokes or not.

I could see a President similar to being like Clinton where he disagrees with the attitude of smoking in illegal fashion publicly. And he even supports antis. But yet, the Clinton-like president smokes cigars himself! If America ever has a smoking President again (and regardless of who he represents), I hope he's actually darn proud to be a smoker instead of a brainwashed smoker. Brainwashed smokers are usually the same ones who actually believe in following no smoking signs. Or I should say, they actually believe in govts being their Big (freaking) Daddies.

Monday, July 16, 2007

No smoking. Now no GRILLING?

This isn't exactly off-topic. This is still about controlling the lives of folks by banning something else that doesn't make sense, just like a smoking ban being dumb.

I read an article where no one in this PA town can't grill anything after 8 pm. A lot of folks disagree with the decision, and some of them had an attitude sorta similar to "Screw it! I WILL grill after 8."

The mayor made this decision because someone complained to him about his (the person talking to the Mayor) neighbor starting fires every night. And the smoke drifts onto the complainer's property.

I don't understand why a whole town needs to be penalizied with "No grilling after 8," just because of one person's actions. Goes to show this decision is all about controlling the residents' personal lives. A lot similar to smoking bans controlling my personal life.

I wonder what will be banned next in that PA town. No fireworks after 8 pm for the NEXT 4th of July?

How am I supposed to enjoy living in America when this country is nothing but a bunch of nannies and (I guess) socialists, in relation to this forementioned article? I don't like living under another power's control. If I lived in that PA town, I'd ignore that dumb-A grill ban just like a smoking ban. If I'm starving after 8 pm and I can't grill a hot dog, what the heck am I supposed to eat?

Those folks got it right. There are more important issues to worry about than banning grilling after 8 pm.