Old 07-29-12, 10:42 AM
  #58  
DaveWC
Senior Member
 
DaveWC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,561
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by DnvrFox
No, and neither was there a "smoking allowed" sign. The default condition should be "NO SMOKING" - everywhere that is open to non-smokers. You are implying that the default should be "smoking allowed unless otherwise stated." I think the US of A has gotten far beyond that.
Originally Posted by DnvrFox
If there was a sign or an indication stating "People with peanut allergies are sitting here, or are going to sit here." - then I would not eat them there.
There's where your argument broke down. You are willing to stop putting others' lives in danger if they post a sign, yet you expect the default to be that people don't smoke regardless of signage. How can you justify the double standard? Especially since someone with a severe peanut allergy (my son has one) can have a life threatening reaction simply by touching something you touched with peanut oil on your fingers. Your rant is on the basis of discomfort, my son's is on the basis of life & potential death.
DaveWC is offline