I was going to make a Lord of the Rings analogy with this. Something about the Prancing Pony, Strider's Pipe and Sharkey, but I decided to save that for another topic.

Most of my small audience knows I'm a smoker and have tried to quit at least twice since I've had this blog. On the 8th of December, I will quit again making the best of the non-smoking ban I-901, but until that date arrives every cigarette I have shall be savored as though it were the last. Already, I hear the sound of non-smokers nodding in approval, applauding: "Good for you. See, I knew this would work. It's for the greater good." Or something lame like that.

Screw the greater good. I loathe that phrase as much as I loathe "it's for the children."

I'll repeat here on my humble blog what I've already said aloud to others. This initiative was not even necessary and is a bold intrusion into the affairs of private business owners. It grates at my libertarian mindset. There exist already a high number of bars, clubs, restaurants and coffee houses where smoking is not permitted. That number would have increased naturally in time because of consumer demand. If any individual wants to dine, drink and work in a smoke free atmosphere, he or she should avoid the businesses that cater to smokers. The responsibility is theirs, it's that simple.

I realize there is no good reason to continue smoking and my decision to stop will no doubt save my life, but I'm doing this grudgingly. It's exactly the type of result that the well-intentioned folk expect from this ban and I'm resentful towards the way it came to be. The lobbyist, the nanny State have triumphed--triumphed over my choices and those of other individuals by using the shadowy guise of "protecting" another person who is perfectly capable of looking out for his or herself. The whole thing is absurd.