“I have the right to treat my body in an unhealthy way. It is my choice. There are many other bigger killers in the country. Obesity, AIDS, alcohol. But you don’t see legislation forcing people to eat better, use condoms or prohibit fast foods. “Why not enforce compulsory exercise, condoms, eating healthily? Because that infringes on personal freedom.”
“When it comes to plain packaging, we have always believed that this policy is disproportionate, will not deliver its intended results and significantly erodes our intellectual property rights by stripping us of our right to use our trademarks.”The company employs thousands of people, purchases goods and services worth billions from local suppliers and generates billions in tax revenues. These decisions, then, could have a significant knock-on effect in our economy. So, coupled with the fact that the proposed legislation is unconstitutional, infringes on the rights of individuals and private property owners and could have damaging economic implications, what else is there to worry about? How about the fact that businesses, particularly in the hospitality industry, and which might cater solely to smokers, will be banned and put out of business? Non-smokers are invited to these spaces and may choose whether or not to sit there. They do not infringe upon other public spaces. In effect, the proposed changes are both good and horrifically bad. Where do we draw a line? How much freedom are we satisfied with giving up? We ask our readers, should this legislation be fought? Or should it be accepted? Because today it may be cigarettes, but tomorrow it may be something else. Something you’ve chosen to enjoy.