Hospital Will Not Hire Those Who Use Tobacco

[Digging4Truth]

Hospital Will Not Hire Those Who Use Tobacco Products (http://www.katv.com/story/15518986/hospital-will-not-hire-those-who-use-tobacco-products)Posted: Sep 21, 2011 5:35 PM CDT
Updated: Sep 28, 2011 9:24 AM CDT

Administrators at a hospital in Searcy say you can't light up and work for them. Effective October 1, the White County Medical Center will not hire people who smoke or use tobacco products. Current employees will be grandfathered in under the new policy.

This change is in an effort for all employees to adopt a more healthy lifestyle. Not only is tobacco products not allowed, but cafeteria menu items are also changing.

Brenda Engle, the Director of Health Works at WCMC says by doing this, they are hoping to address the two biggest issues, smoking, and obesity. "As a health care facility we believe this is the right thing for us to do for our employees"

She along with other administrators have been working to make the atmosphere around the hospital a healthier one. About 200 employees use tobacco.

"For me I'm allergic to smoke, and it bothers me when I'm near someone who smokes. I can't be around them. so it's going to be positive change for me. I know for some it will be negative but we're trying to embrace it and it's all for a healthy change for our hospital", says Cassandra Feltrop, Executive Director of the hospital Foundation.

The hospital already conducts random drug testing on their associates. After October 1, a nicotine screening will be added. So if a new hire uses tobacco in the privacy of their own home or is using a patch or gum to kick the habit and tests positively, Feltrop says they will lose their job. "They will be terminated. After that date, the policy states they will be terminated from the hospital. We will no longer hire smoking associates."

The cafeteria is being revamped too. Fresh, new, healthier food choices will be offered including a fruit bar. All in an effort to help their employees live a more healthier lifestyle.

[Amanah]

smoking, drinking, and unhealthy eating habits are among the things that should be made socially unacceptable

[Dagwood]

I believe the Baylor Healthcare system (a large, reputable hospital/physician chain) here in the Dallas area adopted the same policy recently.

Being a health care worker myself, I support policies like this...

[Dagwood]

smoking, drinking, and unhealthy eating habits are among the things that should be made socially unacceptable

...which is why cities like Allen, Plano, and others here in the Dallas area have adopted no-smoking policies in restaurants and other entertainment venues. It's nice for a change...

Coming from a smoking environment growing up, it was something I never desired to do. But, I also don't look down upon one who does. So, we have to exercise caution when displaying our distaste for that kind of environment...

[Digging4Truth]

Wow... these types of threads are always amazing to me.

I don't smoke.
I don't support smoking.
I think that the hospital has every right to deem their place of business as non smoking. Even the parking lot. It doesn't have to actually... it's illegal to smoke in hospitals in Arkansas. And they have every right to tell smokers that you get 15 minutes break every 2 hours... just like everybody else. No special breaks because you're a smoker.

But... come on...

Y'all are for people being fired because they smoke when they get home?
Y'all are for people being fired because they used a patch or gum to try and quit?

Will you be for it when they test for alcohol residual in blood? Probably so.

How about when they test for trans fats and fire you because you ate McDonalds on the way home yesterday?

How about when they run a test and fire you because you ate bacon for breakfast. This type of thing is precedent setting and it will come home to roost one day. They start the precedents with the "Yeah... I'm glad to see them get theirs" groups and then move your way.

It is said that the only way to ensure your freedoms is to fight for the freedoms of those you abhor the most. America has really lost any realization of what personal privacy is all about. And that, my friends, is what America is ALL about. So we've lost our sense of everything we've ever been about.

These things amaze me beyond belief.

[AncientPaths]

Wow... these types of threads are always amazing to me.

I don't smoke.
I don't support smoking.
I think that the hospital has every right to deem their place of business as non smoking. Even the parking lot. It doesn't have to actually... it's illegal to smoke in hospitals in Arkansas. And they have every right to tell smokers that you get 15 minutes break every 2 hours... just like everybody else. No special breaks because you're a smoker.

But... come on...

Y'all are for people being fired because they smoke when they get home?
Y'all are for people being fired because they used a patch or gum to try and quit?

Will you be for it when they test for alcohol residual in blood? Probably so.

How about when they test for trans fats and fire you because you ate McDonalds on the way home yesterday?

How about when they run a test and fire you because you ate bacon for breakfast. This type of thing is precedent setting and it will come home to roost one day. They start the precedents with the "Yeah... I'm glad to see them get theirs" groups and then move your way.

It is said that the only way to ensure your freedoms is to fight for the freedoms of those you abhor the most. America has really lost any realization of what personal privacy is all about. And that, my friends, is what America is ALL about. So we've lost our sense of everything we've ever been about.

These things amaze me beyond belief.

Private corporations get the freedom to make those policies without the government preventing it. There's an aspect of that I can appreciate.

[Dagwood]

Wow... these types of threads are always amazing to me.

I don't smoke.
I don't support smoking.
I think that the hospital has every right to deem their place of business as non smoking. Even the parking lot. It doesn't have to actually... it's illegal to smoke in hospitals in Arkansas. And they have every right to tell smokers that you get 15 minutes break every 2 hours... just like everybody else. No special breaks because you're a smoker.

But... come on...

Y'all are for people being fired because they smoke when they get home?
Y'all are for people being fired because they used a patch or gum to try and quit?

Will you be for it when they test for alcohol residual in blood? Probably so.

How about when they test for trans fats and fire you because you ate McDonalds on the way home yesterday?

How about when they run a test and fire you because you ate bacon for breakfast. This type of thing is precedent setting and it will come home to roost one day. They start the precedents with the "Yeah... I'm glad to see them get theirs" groups and then move your way.

It is said that the only way to ensure your freedoms is to fight for the freedoms of those you abhor the most. America has really lost any realization of what personal privacy is all about. And that, my friends, is what America is ALL about. So we've lost our sense of everything we've ever been about.

These things amaze me beyond belief.

One thing to consider is that there are smoking cessation programs available. I would lean more toward allowing one to complete such a program before termination. However, this is something the article doesn't mention and makes me wonder if it is indeed in place for all smoking employees. I would hope so...

[Digging4Truth]

One thing to consider is that there are smoking cessation programs available. I would lean more toward allowing one to complete such a program before termination. However, this is something the article doesn't mention and makes me wonder if it is indeed in place for all smoking employees. I would hope so...

The present employees are grandfathered in.

This affects new hires mostly.

[Digging4Truth]

Private corporations get the freedom to make those policies without the government preventing it. There's an aspect of that I can appreciate.

I agree that this is different than government intervention.

But should a private business be able to stipulate what you do in the privacy of your own home when your activities are not illegal and happen on your own time?

It is a tricky area. I don't like seeing this happen but, at the same time, I wouldn't like to see it cured by any sort of government intervention into private business either.

Someone needs to file suit against this company IMO. Money talks.

[Ferd]

I agree that this is different than government intervention.

But should a private business be able to stipulate what you do in the privacy of your own home when your activities are not illegal and happen on your own time?

It is a tricky area. I don't like seeing this happen but, at the same time, I wouldn't like to see it cured by any sort of government intervention into private business either.

Someone needs to file suit against this company IMO. Money talks.

you are on the slippery lope brother.

the only intity that can "allow" or "disallow" is the government.

Eitehr a private company can do this or we ceed power to the government to decide.

[Digging4Truth]

you are on the slippery lope brother.

the only intity that can "allow" or "disallow" is the government.

Eitehr a private company can do this or we ceed power to the government to decide.

I think it is they who are on the slippery slope. The slippery slope of allowing corporations to rule our personal lives when we are not on the job.

And government isn't the only solution. Government isn't a solution at all in my opinion.

This can, and should, be handled in the courts by a jury of our peers.

[Aquila]

I think if an employer can tell you want to do in your own home and on your own time... they should be paying you for those hours you're beholden to their will.

Corporate power at it's worst. I know the corporations already bought the government on this issue. But I'd march into the director's office and tell him that I'm an American and that I'm free to do what I wish on my own time. If he wants to command that I not smoke in my own home, on my private time, he can pay the God foresaken mortgage, and pay me by the hour as I watch TV and yet still beholden to his will. Then I'd tell him to take the job an shove it where his head is.

I believe in FREEDOM and LIBERTY... especially in my own home and on my own time.

[Aquila]

Soon corporations will start telling us what associations we can have. No gays. No singles. No children. No unions. No churches. No bingo halls (it's gambling).

Get real and wake up people! Corporate power needs to be kicked in the teeth before they expand their power another inch.

[Aquila]

Right now... they are coming for the smoker. If we stand by and let them... who's next?

[Digging4Truth]

Soon corporations will start telling us what associations we can have. No gays. No singles. No children. No unions. No churches. No bingo halls (it's gambling).

Get real and wake up people! Corporate power needs to be kicked in the teeth before they expand their power another inch.

I think if an employer can tell you want to do in your own home and on your own time... they should be paying you for those hours you're beholden to their will.

Corporate power at it's worst. I know the corporations already bought the government on this issue. But I'd march into the director's office and tell him that I'm an American and that I'm free to do what I wish on my own time. If he wants to command that I not smoke in my own home, on my private time, he can pay the God foresaken mortgage, and pay me by the hour as I watch TV and yet still beholden to his will. Then I'd tell him to take the job an shove it where his head is.

I believe in FREEDOM and LIBERTY... especially in my own home and on my own time.

I don't get the chance to say this very often so I am going to jump on the opportunity. :)

I agree with Aquilla's posts. :)

[Dagwood]

Soon corporations will start telling us what associations we can have. No gays. No singles. No children. No unions. No churches. No bingo halls (it's gambling).

Get real and wake up people! Corporate power needs to be kicked in the teeth before they expand their power another inch.

I think most of what you stated as an example of won't happen, except homosexuality. I'm surprised, for health reasons too, that's not being considered or even banned in the workplace. But, then again, STDs can be transmitted regardless of gender involvelemt. So, again, another example of a vicious circle...

[Ferd]

I think it is they who are on the slippery slope. The slippery slope of allowing corporations to rule our personal lives when we are not on the job.

And government isn't the only solution. Government isn't a solution at all in my opinion.

This can, and should, be handled in the courts by a jury of our peers.

hmm.... constitutional grounds for such?

[Aquila]

I think most of what you stated as an example of won't happen, except homosexuality. I'm surprised, for health reasons too, that's not being considered or even banned in the workplace. But, then again, STDs can be transmitted regardless of gender involvelemt. So, again, another example of a vicious circle...

I have the right to sleep with who I want to. I have the right to smoke if I choose to. I have the right to have a drink if I want to. I have the right to read what I want to. I have the right to associate with who I want to. I have the right to say what I want to. I have believe what I want to. I have the right to call God what I want to. And... I have the right to protest, resist, and petition the government if I so desire.

I am an American.

And so are all of YOU. All of these rights are yours too. Even GOD acknowledges these rights, because they are GOD GIVEN rights. Now, for those who believe in Jesus Christ... we use our liberty to glorify Christ with as much as is within us. But if another free individual chooses not to... that's their right. My Jesus may not be pleased, but He desires that they live and believe in accordance to their conscience. He'll do the judging. Sure, I can tell them what I think about their lifestyle and choices. But guess what... I'll die protecting their freedom to live as they choose. Because that very same freedom that allows them to live as they choose.... allows me and my family to live as we choose.

Freedom is holy... even if free men choose to live unholy.

[Aquila]

They have so quickly forgotten know what free men like us used to do to Kings and Popes haven't they???

If they push any further... I vote we do it again.

http://libcom.org/files/images/history/American-revolution.jpg

[Ferd]

"corporate power is at its worst"

that is an interesting commnet. I suspect a coal minor living in a company town being paid in company script, living in company housing circa 1880 would beg to differ.


I suppose an Irish immagrent working in a sweatshop along with all of their underaged children being told to have more children to work in the sweatshop, being chained to the machines so they wouldnt walk off the job, circa 1900 would beg to differ.

I would like to see a comparison of Standard Oil before Teddy Roosevelt broke it up and Exxon. Exxon would be a poor relation. Shoot Standard Oil still hase 2 senators alive and kicking to this day.

We should consider the historic reality before making such comments.

There is room to improve things. there are areas where some corporations over step. those things should be dealt with. that does not however mean that we live in some dangerous liberty threatend period where corporations are trying to take over. That is a liberal myth created to scare people into accepting progressive politics.

[Ferd]

Digging, if we can find existing constitutional authority for a court to stop an action, then I am with you.

beyond that the answer is the employees should get together and make a stand.

government however is not the answer.

[Digging4Truth]

hmm.... constitutional grounds for such?

I don't understand what you're asking.

The constitutional grounds for trial by a jury of ones peers is Article 3 Section 2.

[Ferd]

I don't know what you're asking.

The constitutional grounds for trial by a jury of ones peers is Article 3 Section 2.

No the constitutional ground for a court to stop the business from this action.


this would not likely be a Jury trial.

[Aquila]

Digging, if we can find existing constitutional authority for a court to stop an action, then I am with you.

beyond that the answer is the employees should get together and make a stand.

government however is not the answer.

A government that represents the people is definitely the answer. And when it ceases to do so... the people should destroy it and form one that does.

[Digging4Truth]

Digging, if we can find existing constitutional authority for a court to stop an action, then I am with you.

beyond that the answer is the employees should get together and make a stand.

government however is not the answer.

That would be fine too.

Are you saying that no one but the individuals affected have any recourse against corporations who overstep their bounds of intrusion into people's personal lives?

[Aquila]

"corporate power is at its worst"

that is an interesting commnet. I suspect a coal minor living in a company town being paid in company script, living in company housing circa 1880 would beg to differ.


I suppose an Irish immagrent working in a sweatshop along with all of their underaged children being told to have more children to work in the sweatshop, being chained to the machines so they wouldnt walk off the job, circa 1900 would beg to differ.

I would like to see a comparison of Standard Oil before Teddy Roosevelt broke it up and Exxon. Exxon would be a poor relation. Shoot Standard Oil still hase 2 senators alive and kicking to this day.

We should consider the historic reality before making such comments.

There is room to improve things. there are areas where some corporations over step. those things should be dealt with. that does not however mean that we live in some dangerous liberty threatend period where corporations are trying to take over. That is a liberal myth created to scare people into accepting progressive politics.

Friend... it's the desire to control human beings and endenture them in their own homes that led to the atrocities you speak of. Sure, the specific offense of trying to control a free man who chooses to smoke is not as serious as many of the atrocities you mentioned... but the very spirit behind the notion is just as evil. Such abuses of power need to be kicked in the teeth quickly and without remorse.

[Digging4Truth]

A government that represents the people is definitely the answer. And when it ceases to do so... the people should destroy it and form one that does.

Our current government is a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations.

[Ferd]

That would be fine too.

Are you saying that no one but the individuals affected have any recourse against corporations who overstep their bounds of intrusion into people's personal lives?

if you are talking about a court of law the answer is yes.

you must have standing to bring suit. YOU cannot sue this company because you are not an employee, you are not a potential employee who smokes. etc.

[Aquila]

Our current government is a government of the corporations, by the corporations and for the corporations.

Exactly. On one side you have the corporations... on the other the communist nutcases.

Today... our government is ruled by the right and the left. The right and the left hands of evil.

Where are those who love REAL liberty?

And what were they thinking when they recognized corporate personhood??? With slavery... they saw people as property. With corporate personhood... they see property like it's people.

[Ferd]

Friend... it's the desire to control human beings and endenture them in their own homes that led to the atrocities you speak of. Sure, the specific offense of trying to control a free man who chooses to smoke is not as serious as many of the atrocities you mentioned... but the very spirit behind the notion is just as evil. Such abuses of power need to be kicked in the teeth quickly and without remorse.


Aquila, you suggested that corporate power is at an all time high. That is a false notion. Corporations are far more limited today than at anytime in history.

is there a shift back taking place? there is certainly a strong and ugly move by powerful people to work within the current framework to buy the influence of government. WE need to work to stop that.

but your intial comment was simply, historically wrong.

[Aquila]

Any legal action against something like this will fail in our current climate. We need courts that are for the freedom of the individual... and it's slowly slipping away.

[Aquila]

Aquila, you suggested that corporate power is at an all time high. That is a false notion. Corporations are far more limited today than at anytime in history.

is there a shift back taking place? there is certainly a strong and ugly move by powerful people to work within the current framework to buy the influence of government. WE need to work to stop that.

but your intial comment was simply, historically wrong.

Where did I say corporate power as at an all time high?

[Dagwood]

Okay, okay...I'll admit. The policy is a little extreme. I've read through enough comments since my initial response and find myself re-thinking what I was thinking. I'm not afraid to admit that.

I'm for freedom beyond measure without interference. So, with that being said, I would consider raising a smoker's insurance rates even higher than they may already be. After all, damaging one's body does cost more than not, correct? At least in the long-term it would.

In times like these, we need to keep people employed before sending them home or, better yet, sending their job(s) overseas...

[Aquila]

Okay, okay...I'll admit. The policy is a little extreme. I've read through enough comments since my initial response and find myself re-thinking what I was thinking. I'm not afraid to admit that.

I'm for freedom beyond measure without interference. So, with that being said, I would consider raising a smoker's insurance rates even higher than they may already be. After all, damaging one's body does cost more than not, correct? At least in the long-term it would.

In times like these, we need to keep people employed before sending them home or, better yet, sending their job(s) overseas...

So do you think insurance companies should raise the rates on a man who choose to eat a Big Mac during his lunch break over a Mc Salad? Or what if he drinks soda (big reason for obesity in the US) over water? Why must a free man who is no danger to anyone be beholden or enslaved to any entity?

Where is this CONTROL spirit coming from??? You see it on the right... give private entities power to crush the one who doesn't behave like we think he should. On the left... give the government power to crush the one who doesn't behave like we think he should.

What about... just allowing individual freedom without penalty? What about supporting laws that ensure that free men are treated equally?

A smoker is a free man, a fellow American. A non-smoker is a free man, a fellow American. If ABC Corp. doesn't want them smoking on corporate property... so be it. But to control them on their own time and in their own homes is tyranny. Yes, there are more serious instances of tyranny down through history. But tyranny is tyranny.

[Aquila]

Americans need to get ANGRY and kick this kind of thing in the teeth while it's just a small issue. Sure, it's a tollerable, cute little lion cub. But if you allow it to live and it will have you for dinner one day. A lion is a lion. Kill it.

[Dagwood]

So do you think insurance companies should raise the rates on a man who choose to eat a Big Mac during his lunch break over a Mc Salad? Or what if he drinks soda (big reason for obesity in the US) over water? Why must a free man who is no danger to anyone be beholden or enslaved to any entity?

Where is this CONTROL spirit coming from??? You see it on the right... give private entities power to crush the one who doesn't behave like we think he should. On the left... give the government power to crush the one who doesn't behave like we think he should.

What about... just allowing individual freedom without penalty? What about supporting laws that ensure that free men are treated equally?

A smoker is a free man, a fellow American. A non-smoker is a free man, a fellow American. If ABC Corp. doesn't want them smoking on corporate property... so be it. But to control them on their own time and in their own homes is tyranny. Yes, there are more serious instances of tyranny down through history. But tyranny is tyranny.

Evidently, you're not in the health care industry earning a living. Evidently, you don't see the aspect of my rates being raised and healthcare level remaining the same, to pay in part for those who choose to damage themselves. I don't smoke. Never have and certainly don't intend on changing that.

We can get so caught up in freedom, freedom, freedom to the point we become selfish in the process. So, yes, raise the rates on those who choose to damage their bodies. I could benefit from it since I don't smoke myself, therefore allowing me to pay for my children's health care issues that are far more pressing than mine. I've had my fair share of seeing how health care is so one-sided but I'm tired of being the victim of other people's downright selfishness in having the choice to what they feel. I'm already a victim of the government needlessly taking tax dollars to pay for the single mother raising 4, 5, or 6 kids without a father in the picture. Or, if there is a father in the picture, he's driving a 50k dollar Escalade or Benz while I'm sitting back trying to pay for my daughter's health issues that are far more pressing than a welfare child whose mom or shack-up boyfriend take their mutual offspring to the doctor for a simple runny nose...

[houston]

smoking, drinking, and unhealthy eating habits are among the things that should be made socially unacceptable

Nein! Nein! Nein!

[AreYouReady?]

I worked in a hospital for nearly 20 years.

I treated patients with respiratory illnesses. It is not a pretty site to watch people suffocate to death because of what tobacco has done to their lungs. You can see the panicked look in their eyes as they try to breathe in and out. I encountered many who would rather breathe than eat.

While we all want the freedom to do as we please, where is the line drawn to when one's right infringes upon another's right? Does another have the right to blow smoke in a nonsmoker's face? Must a nonsmoker breathe the smell of smoke on another's clothes after they finish their ciggie?

I've been on both sides of this barrel. I used to smoke when I was a teenager and young adult. It was the thing to do when I was growing up in the environment I lived in. A 2 1/2 pack a day smoker, my left lung collapsed at the age of 23 that I attributed to smoking. I did not know God then, but I begged Him to help me quit smoking, then my lung collapsed. It was spending 7 days hooked up to a vacuum that allowed me to quit this terrible habit. That was the best thing that happened to me because I do not believe that I would be living at my age right now had I continued to smoke.

We all want our freedoms, but many Americans have proven that they cannot handle freedom. It is abused all in of the physical sense, spiritual sense and moral sense.

We are going to lose all our freedoms because we as a nation handle our freedoms recklessly. We lost our pathways to God because of "good times" entertainment, television and the "me first" attitudes.

The only answer to the freedoms we are losing is for Christ's return to straighten the mess that man has made on this planet out.

[Digging4Truth]

Much of this thread is a lesson is where the American mind is right now... and it is full out scary.

[Nitehawk013]

Yep.

I do not smoke. I think it is gross and unhealthy. Do I have the right to tell others they can't smoke? Not unless they are in my home I don't.

It is sad that we so rarely value liberty nowadays. Smoling is not illegal. If one wishes to smoke in their own home, ti si their right to do so. Companies have no business IMO sticking their noses into employees private lives unless the activity is illegal.

Hopefull some smoking employees get together and sue this hospital into oblivion over descriminatory practices.

[Dagwood]

Much of this thread is a lesson is where the American mind is right now... and it is full out scary.

And you're basing that on who's posts within this thread?

I don't think you've allowed enough responses from a variety of thinking to form that opinion...

[Hoovie]

Private corporations get the freedom to make those policies without the government preventing it. There's an aspect of that I can appreciate.

I am with digging on this. It's no one's biz what one does when not at work as long as it's legal.

[Nitehawk013]

If a hospital chose to enforce a policy of no longer hiring Christians who were faithful to service every week then I wonder if as many Christians would be supportive of the private hospitals right to do so?

Many jump on the hospitals side bc they don't like smoking. It's easy to support the kicking of someones goat when it isn't your goat.

[Digging4Truth]

If a hospital chose to enforce a policy of no longer hiring Christians who were faithful to service every week then I wonder if as many Christians would be supportive of the private hospitals right to do so?

Many jump on the hospitals side bc they don't like smoking. It's easy to support the kicking of someones goat when it isn't your goat.

Yep...

[houston]

All that I have to say is...

[AncientPaths]

I can't jump on the "tyranny" bandwagon as long as there are other places available to work. They choose to work there, and thus need to abide by their policies.

If you are on staff at a church, do you think they have the right to tell you that you can't smoke or drink at home?

[deafdriscoll]

I do not smoke people. I sat that for the record.
However, to all of you who support this smoking ban and think smokers have to get fired.
You also will support the idea when those same companies say if you talk about jesus you will be fired. :heeheehee
You are the ones that will stop talking about jesus.
REMEMBER NAZI GERMANY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE JEW
SECOND THEY CAME FOR THE COMMUNIST
THIRD THE CHRISTIAN
LAST YOU WERE ALL ALONE, THEN THEY GOT YOU

YOU SUPPORT DICTATORSHIP AND NOT DEMOCRACY

In my home what I do is none of your bussiness. You have no right to tell me how to live my life in my home. take your anti democratic beliefs somewhere else.
Remember I do not smoke. What I do off the clock is nobodies bussiness.period.

[AncientPaths]

And look, I agree. Let the employees take a stand if they don't like it. Let them go on strike. But then the hospital has to decide if it's worth having this policy or not. Odds are, they'll get a lot of smokers quit, and a lot of non-smokers hired.

[Digging4Truth]

Wow... still... amazing.

[Praxeas]

Private corporations get the freedom to make those policies without the government preventing it. There's an aspect of that I can appreciate.
They can't discriminate against gays or race but they can against tobacco use

[Aquila]

Evidently, you're not in the health care industry earning a living. Evidently, you don't see the aspect of my rates being raised and healthcare level remaining the same, to pay in part for those who choose to damage themselves. I don't smoke. Never have and certainly don't intend on changing that.

We can get so caught up in freedom, freedom, freedom to the point we become selfish in the process. So, yes, raise the rates on those who choose to damage their bodies. I could benefit from it since I don't smoke myself, therefore allowing me to pay for my children's health care issues that are far more pressing than mine. I've had my fair share of seeing how health care is so one-sided but I'm tired of being the victim of other people's downright selfishness in having the choice to what they feel. I'm already a victim of the government needlessly taking tax dollars to pay for the single mother raising 4, 5, or 6 kids without a father in the picture. Or, if there is a father in the picture, he's driving a 50k dollar Escalade or Benz while I'm sitting back trying to pay for my daughter's health issues that are far more pressing than a welfare child whose mom or shack-up boyfriend take their mutual offspring to the doctor for a simple runny nose...

You're in the health care industry I assume. Nicotine is as addictive as heroin. I know guys who started smoking when in the military, going through a divorce, after a parent or child died, etc. It's often something people get into when they are extremely stressed because it relaxes you. Before you know it, you're addicted. My experience with smoking was one such story. When my wife left me for some fling with a married man she worked with I was devestated. My entire life fell apart. My ministry crumbled. My work started suffering. I found myself only able to be a father half the time because she has him the other half of the time. I felt like the church turned it's back on me. In some ways, I felt like the church contributed to the problem (LONG story). So I started "going out" and yes, I started drinking to numb the pain. And while out socializing I had my first cigarette. At first, I'd only smoke if I went out for a drink after a stressful day of work (I'm in aviation security) or after my estranged wife would go wacko and torment me with threats that I'd never see my son again unless I did as she said. I never became an alcoholic. However, I found myself needing a smoke on the way to work and on the way home. Then it was on my breaks. Then I'd buy my own and smoke at home. It's an addiction that grows on you and it's absolute Hades to overcome. If anything... smoking itself should be considered an addiction that affects health... not necessarily a choice. Because for most people you can't just stop cold turkey with success. Most need a treatment to get off the nicotine... but that doesn't address the psychological side of the addiction.

Those who have never smoked may not understand the above. But it's true. In my opinion, smokers should be treated like they have already have a serious health condition.

Now... if you eat fast food for lunch. Now, that's an unhealthy choice that can be dropped in a second. According to your logic insurance rates should be increased for those who regularly eat fast food. America's number one health problem is heart disease due to obesity. Maybe if you don't eat salads for lunch every day... your rates should be increased.

[Dagwood]

Bottom line is that, while the principle may be worthy of disagreement among many, it is a private company doing what it feels is best for their employees. If it was the government, I could see the fuss because I'd be wagging my finger in their faces too.

It seems while people want to jump on private companies for policy changes and decisions made, there are frauds right underneath our noses who are contributing far more to the bigger problem than we realize. Welfare is where I start with that one -- where are the people who want to set them straight? Just trying to prove a point.

Until a federally-mandated smoking ban takes place, there are choices available for people to make if they don't like what's going at where they are working at the time.

[Amanah]

I work with young to middle aged professionals in a large corporation.

So my acquaintances consist mainly of professionals and church people who overwhelmingly disdain smoking.

Most people I know don't want to associate with smokers, don't want to breathe second hand smoke, would not date a smoker, don't want to eat in a restaurant near a smoker, ect.

Society changed its opinion about smoking and now it's not socially acceptable. I hope the same happens with drinking, drugs, unhealthy eating and other behaviors that are destructive.

I believe John Stuart Mill proposed changing people's behaviors with societal disapproval versus legislation, but I would have to go back and do some reading to make sure.

[Amanah]

ok

John Stuart Mill's book on Liberty:

"The remedy is civilization: "Social existence is only possible by a disciplining of those more powerful propensities, which consists in subordinating them to a common system of Opinions."

We can change the world by changing people's opinions about their behavior.

[NotforSale]

I smoked cigarettes for 10 years, and quit cold turkey because I didn’t like how they were hurting my lungs. My father died of lung cancer when he was in his 50's (he smoked 3 packs a day). I grew up when smoking was the thing to do. When I was in the Marines, many of us smoked. Tobacco use has been around forever. I might even smoke again if circumstances changed, or my life fell into insurmountable stress. As Aquila pointed out, smoking calmed his nerves, and this is why men in combat, smoke.

The bottom line is, people can smoke, chew, snort, use nicotine patches, and even drink nicotine drinks (Which are available in other Countries. My son in law found this out on his military tour in Iraq. Nicotine drinks were everywhere.)

I personally don't think it's anybody's business if someone wants to use nicotine, and that includes Christians who don't like tobacco products. Christians are also HUGE hypocrites when they tell others to NOT smoke, while they are stuffing their faces with food and drinks that are doing far more damage than Nicotine has ever done! Obesity is the number one Heath Epidemic in this Country, and Christians are the fattest of them all!

Smoking can kill someone, but so can riding a bicycle. If a person wants to torch their lungs with cigarettes, working in a coal mine, or breathing fumes from being a painter, the choice is not mine, it’s theirs. And, the more we make laws against everything, we end up needing more laws to uphold the law. This vicious cycle is exactly what happened to the Scribes and Pharisees, and those of Old Testament Law. The end result was, BONDAGE, not LIBERTY! Paul rebuked Christians, saying “Who hath bewitched, you??” referring to those who felt circumcision was necessary to please God.

If this Hospital doesn't want to hire people who smoke, fine, go find another Hospital to work at. But I will say this, our over-regulated society is about to fall over a cliff. 100 years ago, you could buy morphine at the local drug store WITHOUT a prescription. Today, folks, it's all about the MONEY!!! MONEY, HONEY!! The Pharmaceutical Industry is massive with MONEY and POWER!

Laws and Regulations are big business, while at the same time, these supposable safeguards are slowly putting us in a prison where everything we do is being watched and monitored!!

I don’t need the Government, Religion, or friends to tell me that I can’t smoke! If I want to smoke, I’ll smoke, just like the Indians did. In fact, we could use a Peace Pipe on AFF once in a while!!

I have a good friend who told me a few weeks ago; his great grandmother and great grandfather lived to be well over 100 (one was 110 and the other was 103 when they died). They both smoked and drank alcohol until they died. He also told me, they rolled their own cigarettes, avoiding the dangerous chemicals found in modern cigarettes that are made in today’s factories.

You can also tell everyone how TERRIBLE smoking is, and how the person who died of lung cancer, they withered away to nothing in absolute pain and suffering. But don’t forget to tell them about the Apostolic Christian who was severly obese, dieing of stomach cancer because they ate junk food, and on their hospital bed they were in so much pain, the doctor gave her so much pain medication, she actually died from the medicine (I personally watched this happen).

Oh, and don’t forget, we will all die of something…and to be honest, I don’t want to live to be old, winding up in a rest home with Alzheimer’s Disease, or unable to walk because my legs or back are toast from old age. In some ways, I think my dad was a lucky guy.

[Hoovie]

I would support not hiring people with high cholesterol or obesity, if it could be linked to their eating habits, the same as I would support not hiring someone who smokes in their off time. Bad policy.

As a side issue, insurance should be able to charge what they wish. Or not even cover smokers and obese people.

[AreYouReady?]

The name of the game is "control over the people".

While I abhor smoking because what I've been through and what I've seen others go through, I truly do understand why people are bucking up against these regulations. I
I live in a region where whole cities banned smoking in all public buildings, restaurants, stores etc. Yes, they will fine private business for anybody smoking inside. There has been little resistance to the smoking ban.

On a more insidious note, many hospitals are forcing their staff to take vaccines. Some will not agree with me about vaccines, but I've done an in-depth study about them after I had a series of vaccines and developed an auto-immune illness. I can quit smoking, drinking (I don't drink) and all that, but I draw the line at forced immunizations. Do a study of what is actually in vaccines...not what they tell you, but what actually is in them.

[AreYouReady?]

You're in the health care industry I assume. Nicotine is as addictive as heroin. I know guys who started smoking when in the military, going through a divorce, after a parent or child died, etc. It's often something people get into when they are extremely stressed because it relaxes you. Before you know it, you're addicted. My experience with smoking was one such story. When my wife left me for some fling with a married man she worked with I was devestated. My entire life fell apart. My ministry crumbled. My work started suffering. I found myself only able to be a father half the time because she has him the other half of the time. I felt like the church turned it's back on me. In some ways, I felt like the church contributed to the problem (LONG story). So I started "going out" and yes, I started drinking to numb the pain. And while out socializing I had my first cigarette. At first, I'd only smoke if I went out for a drink after a stressful day of work (I'm in aviation security) or after my estranged wife would go wacko and torment me with threats that I'd never see my son again unless I did as she said. I never became an alcoholic. However, I found myself needing a smoke on the way to work and on the way home. Then it was on my breaks. Then I'd buy my own and smoke at home. It's an addiction that grows on you and it's absolute Hades to overcome. If anything... smoking itself should be considered an addiction that affects health... not necessarily a choice. Because for most people you can't just stop cold turkey with success. Most need a treatment to get off the nicotine... but that doesn't address the psychological side of the addiction.

Those who have never smoked may not understand the above. But it's true. In my opinion, smokers should be treated like they have already have a serious health condition.


I feel for you brother Aquilla. I found myself planning my day around cigarettes when I did smoke. When I sneezed, I blew out brown nicotine. I was 23 when I found I was out of breath walking 50 feet. I've heard it said that nicotine was just as hard to withdrawal as heroin.

I've also been in the place where my life fell apart into little pieces. I've been to the place where numbness ruled the days of living. Only those who lived through a shattering experience know how bad this really is and very few really care. Most do not know how to help someone in this condition unless they have been there themselves.

But during those times of feeling absolutely alone, I felt the Holy Ghost wrap itself around me when I cried out and that gave me true comfort. Many days I've cried, and God was always there. People scattered because they do not know how to help, but God never leaves.

[Digging4Truth]

I work with young to middle aged professionals in a large corporation.

So my acquaintances consist mainly of professionals and church people who overwhelmingly disdain smoking.

Most people I know don't want to associate with smokers, don't want to breathe second hand smoke, would not date a smoker, don't want to eat in a restaurant near a smoker, ect.

Society changed its opinion about smoking and now it's not socially acceptable. I hope the same happens with drinking, drugs, unhealthy eating and other behaviors that are destructive.

I believe John Stuart Mill proposed changing people's behaviors with societal disapproval versus legislation, but I would have to go back and do some reading to make sure.

That's the only thing that really works anyway. We can put legislation in order all we want to but nothing really changes until the mindset of the people actually changes.

[Aquila]

Bottom line is that, while the principle may be worthy of disagreement among many, it is a private company doing what it feels is best for their employees. If it was the government, I could see the fuss because I'd be wagging my finger in their faces too.

It seems while people want to jump on private companies for policy changes and decisions made, there are frauds right underneath our noses who are contributing far more to the bigger problem than we realize. Welfare is where I start with that one -- where are the people who want to set them straight? Just trying to prove a point.

Until a federally-mandated smoking ban takes place, there are choices available for people to make if they don't like what's going at where they are working at the time.

Neither the government nor the corporations we work for are our nannies. There is no difference between one telling me how to live on my own time, on my own property. The way I see it, if the corporation I work for controls me 24/7, they should pay me 24/7.

Ultimately, the courts are at fault for giving them the power to do this.

[Aquila]

I work with young to middle aged professionals in a large corporation.

So my acquaintances consist mainly of professionals and church people who overwhelmingly disdain smoking.

Most people I know don't want to associate with smokers, don't want to breathe second hand smoke, would not date a smoker, don't want to eat in a restaurant near a smoker, ect.

Society changed its opinion about smoking and now it's not socially acceptable. I hope the same happens with drinking, drugs, unhealthy eating and other behaviors that are destructive.

I believe John Stuart Mill proposed changing people's behaviors with societal disapproval versus legislation, but I would have to go back and do some reading to make sure.

Prohibition never worked.

[Aquila]

I would support not hiring people with high cholesterol or obesity, if it could be linked to their eating habits, the same as I would support not hiring someone who smokes in their off time. Bad policy.

As a side issue, insurance should be able to charge what they wish. Or not even cover smokers and obese people.

Let me guess, you have no problems in these areas. What happens when the witchhunt targets you? Smokers might be the ones defending your liberty.

[Aquila]

The name of the game is "control over the people".

While I abhor smoking because what I've been through and what I've seen others go through, I truly do understand why people are bucking up against these regulations. I
I live in a region where whole cities banned smoking in all public buildings, restaurants, stores etc. Yes, they will fine private business for anybody smoking inside. There has been little resistance to the smoking ban.

On a more insidious note, many hospitals are forcing their staff to take vaccines. Some will not agree with me about vaccines, but I've done an in-depth study about them after I had a series of vaccines and developed an auto-immune illness. I can quit smoking, drinking (I don't drink) and all that, but I draw the line at forced immunizations. Do a study of what is actually in vaccines...not what they tell you, but what actually is in them.

Amen.

[Aquila]

That's the only thing that really works anyway. We can put legislation in order all we want to but nothing really changes until the mindset of the people actually changes.

Amen.

[Hoovie]

Let me guess, you have no problems in these areas. What happens when the witchhunt targets you? Smokers might be the ones defending your liberty.

Not sure I understand your point. I would defend a right to smoke and eat double cheeseburgers - as long as it's legal.

Are you making the case that health insurance or term life insurance rates should be the same for a three pack a day smoker or majorly obese person, as they are for a fit non smoking athlete?

[Aquila]

Not sure I understand your point. I would defend a right to smoke and eat double cheeseburgers - as long as it's legal.

Are you making the case that health insurance or term life insurance rates should be the same for a three pack a day smoker or majorly obese person, as they are for a fit non smoking athlete?

Yes. The market decides the price for a product. Do we make junk food more expensive for fat people? I know, every time you shop, you have to get weighed. If you weigh more than the American Heart Association recommends, food is more expensive and you can only buy certain veggies. lol

Weight is also genetic, some are predisposed to being over weight.

[Hoovie]

Yes. The market decides the price for a product. Do we make junk food more expensive for fat people? I know, every time you shop, you have to get weighed. If you weigh more than the American Heart Association recommends, food is more expensive and you can only buy certain veggies. lol

Weight is also genetic, some are predisposed to being over weight.

Good luck with that. It's never been that way and never will be. Car insurance is always cheaper if you don't have a list of accidents and DWIs.

Term life is up to ten times less is you are in good health.

The junk food analogy falls short... unless we acknowledge one demographic may eat more junk food...

In terms selling insurance consider warranties. A product warranty for residential use may be 20 yrs, but only 2 yrs if the item is used commercially. Why? Because of the nature of use and higher incidence of failure. It's predictable and measurable. Same is true in medical coverage.

[Digging4Truth]

Yes. The market decides the price for a product. Do we make junk food more expensive for fat people? I know, every time you shop, you have to get weighed. If you weigh more than the American Heart Association recommends, food is more expensive and you can only buy certain veggies. lol

Weight is also genetic, some are predisposed to being over weight.

The market decides certain portions of insurance rates but the biggest factor is risk. People get higher rates because they are a higher risk. The same way car insurance is higher for a 16 year old boy then it is for a 42 year old woman.

Your point is nonsensical and, honestly, plain out scary.

[Hoovie]

The market decides certain portions of insurance rates but the biggest factor is risk. People get higher rates because they are a higher risk. The same way car insurance is higher for a 16 year old boy then it is for a 42 year old woman.

Your point is nonsensical and, honestly, plain out scary.

Yep. The cost of a cheeseburger is determined by ingredients and market determination. But the "ingredients" in an insurance policy is inherently the level of risk being assumed.

[BrotherEastman]

I agree with digging and aquila; what kind of boloney is America gonna keep putting up with? This is the kind of stuff that causes revolutions. Just my 2 cents.

btw, I am a non smoker just in case you wonder.

[AncientPaths]

Let me ask you this. As a customer, if a company has a policy you dont agree with, or treats you poorly, how do you respond? Withdrawing your support. Not giving them your money? If enough people do that, that business will not survive.

How is this any different? Just like people have a choice where to do business, they have a choice where to work. If the job pool and potential hires dwindle, the message will have been sent to the hospital that this is not what "the people" want. And they subsequently won't be able to find anyone that wants to work for them. Seems self-regulating to me.

[Hoovie]

I agree with digging and aquila; what kind of boloney is America gonna keep putting up with? This is the kind of stuff that causes revolutions. Just my 2 cents.

btw, I am a non smoker just in case you wonder.

But do Digging and Aquilla agree? :)

[ILG]

What's next? Banning fat people?

[BrotherEastman]

I don't get the chance to say this very often so I am going to jump on the opportunity. :)

I agree with Aquilla's posts. :)

But do Digging and Aquilla agree? :)

looks like it to me. lol

[BrotherEastman]

What's next? Banning fat people?

Cops, firefighters, and the military do it all the time, lol

[Hoovie]

looks like it to me. lol

I see that!


I'll just say it's tricky to say one agrees with Aquilla. He is all over the place! :heeheehee

[Hoovie]

I'll just go on record as saying I think private business should be able to insure who they wish, and not insure who they wish - as long as there is full disclosure and all parties understand what they are agreeing to when they enter the contract.

[Digging4Truth]

But do Digging and Aquilla agree? :)

looks like it to me. lol

I'd like to be sure and point out here that my post was to specific posts and is not an overall statement of mine toward Aquilla's posts. :)


As I've stated... we don't often agree. But... when we do we'll enjoy the moment and move on. :)

[Hoovie]

What's next? Banning fat people?

Banning from??? If you are asking if obese people have special categories in both health premiums and treatment they receive. I would think that has always been true.

[jfrog]

Let me ask you this. As a customer, if a company has a policy you dont agree with, or treats you poorly, how do you respond? Withdrawing your support. Not giving them your money? If enough people do that, that business will not survive.

How is this any different? Just like people have a choice where to do business, they have a choice where to work. If the job pool and potential hires dwindle, the message will have been sent to the hospital that this is not what "the people" want. And they subsequently won't be able to find anyone that wants to work for them. Seems self-regulating to me.

You can't really withdraw support from a hospital. If you are in such bad condition you gotta go where the ambulance takes you. If it's the only hospital within 50 miles of you then you also don't have much of a choice on where to go. Now if it's a hardware store or some other business which offers some non-time-essential service then you can choose to go a little out of your way without any other concern than your gas and time spent to get there.

My personal opinion is that the hospital is probably mandating the no smoking workers policy so they won't have to pay as much on insurance. Sure, I get the hospital is a business... but it's the type of business that is free to mandate pretty much any policy within legal limits with the added benefit that the nature of its business ensures there can't be much of a backlash in terms of potential customers and thus profits.

At least that's how it seems to me...

[jfrog]

You can't really withdraw support from a hospital. If you are in such bad condition you gotta go where the ambulance takes you. If it's the only hospital within 50 miles of you then you also don't have much of a choice on where to go. Now if it's a hardware store or some other business which offers some non-time-essential service then you can choose to go a little out of your way without any other concern than your gas and time spent to get there.

My personal opinion is that the hospital is probably mandating the no smoking workers policy so they won't have to pay as much on insurance. Sure, I get the hospital is a business... but it's the type of business that is free to mandate pretty much any policy within legal limits with the added benefit that the nature of its business ensures there can't be much of a backlash in terms of potential customers and thus profits.

At least that's how it seems to me...

Maybe I should explain it this way: what if there was a hospital in your area that really went out of their way to support gays. Sure I get you wouldn't go there for the minor stuff anymore... but what about the major stuff? What if they had the best cancer treatment in your area? Would you take inferior care just to not support a hospital that supports gays? I don't think anyone would. Or what if you were in a bad car wreck and they were the closest hospital. You would go there regardless. That's my point, the nature of the business a hospital does ensures that you are going to go there for the major stuff regardless of their policies.

[Aquila]

I'll just go on record as saying I think private business should be able to insure who they wish, and not insure who they wish - as long as there is full disclosure and all parties understand what they are agreeing to when they enter the contract.

What if it becomes socially acceptable to only ensure or hire healthy atheists?

[Aquila]

When we changed health insurance companies they gave us a "voluntary" twenty page questionnaire. We were instructed to decline on the basis they might curtail coverage for some of us.

We are free men, not slaves. If a company can tell me how to live 24/7, they should pay me 24/7.

Besides, with the growing political power of companies, who is to say government will not use the private sector to control and cull us? After all, government is giving this power to corporations.