Letter: Right to breathe tops right to smoke

Sunday, July 16, 2006 | 7:49 a.m.

"Losing our rights" is the statement often used to oppose the ban on smoking, but the right to smoke is secondary to our God-given right to breathe.

The surgeon general's recent 709-page comprehensive scientific report puts to rest the belief that smoking only hurts smokers. The report details the extreme dangers of secondhand smoke.

Thankfully, our government protects the public's well-being by banning the use of, and association with, lethal substances. That is why drugs are pulled off the market and bans of use go into effect, as in the case of asbestos.

No one is arguing the use of those type of products. So why do we defend the use of tobacco? This issue gets into basic drug addiction problems.

As a previous smoker, I know only too well how difficult it is to quit. The use of nicotine, like it or not, is more addictive than heroin. Our human frailties support our efforts to continue our addiction. "Our right to smoke" is actually based on addiction to nicotine, not logic.

Addiction to nicotine, not logic, is behind the flawed defense of protecting "our right to smoke." Smoking is a weakness. Banning it supports our country's conviction of protecting the well-being of the public at large. Not banning it is almost un-American.

Martin McColly, Las Vegas