Flapjack and a Cigarette

During the summer, PA legislators voted to ban smoking, and the bill was signed into law (PDF) by Gov. Ed Rendell on June 13, going into effect 90 days later, on September 11, 2008. The public had three months notice to know this was going to happen.

Senate Bill 246 forbids smoking in public places such as restaurants and businesses. Smoking is still going to be allowed at private functions and in private homes, as well as at tobacco shops. I think that this is great. Now when we go to dinner, we won't need to decide between smoking or non-smoking sections. Places that have patrons that hang out while they smoke might loose some business - diners, bowling alleys, and the like. On the flip side, maybe more people will come out to celebrate the new found clean air.

This law also prohibits smoking at government facilities. By extension, the ban effects campuses in the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE). As a student at a state school (West Chester University), I got an e-mail on 9/11 which included this paragraph "Based upon the above, it is the position of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education that smoking, as defined by the statute, is now prohibited on the entire campus. “No Smoking” signs will be prominently posted at appropriate locations throughout the campus and maintained by the university. It is a violation of this law for employees and students to smoke on campus." (See the full e-mail at the bottom of this post)

The Clean Indoor Air Act is now controlling outdoor air quality as well. I submitted a Letter to the Editor of the WCU Quad (campus newspaper) after this e-mail was sent out. I will not be re-posting that Op-Ed, but will link it, and recall some key points.

-As of 9/16, the ashtrays are still all over campus. They are by some benches and near the doors of many buildings. If smoking is not allowed, they should have been removed prior to 9/11, as to send a clear signal.
-As of 9/16 there are no "no-smoking" signs on the north campus academic quad, and no increased presence of campus safety, public safety, or officials from the Department of Health to patrol for smokers.
-As of 9/16 there are no designated smoking areas that allow students to smoke in a safe environment. Students are still forced to smoke in the West Chester community.
-As of 9/16, there is no notice on the WCU website about this law, or on the main page of the PASSHE website. The homepage of the PASSHE site merely links to an Associated Press news story.

I maintain that this ban is a good idea that will help protect the health of non-smokers, but the three months of preparation should have been used to actually prepare. PASSHE should have notified students earlier than the day of action, and there should have been a more forum type approach for students, instead of just pawning inquires about the PASSHE policy to the Dept. of Health.

Check out news stories on this topic from: The Philadelphia Inquirer, NBC, and Fox.

Right now, the state is profiting, with one hand, off the sales of tobacco products, while profiting on the other side, by fining people for using their products.

What is the appropriate way to enforce a ban like this? Complete and total ban of all products, including sales, possession, and purchase? Or a free-for-all?

PA Department of Health
PASSHE

Points of View

Did all of August slip by without me writing a post? Wow. The middle of September is rapidly approaching.

I'm writing this in the new Google internet browser, Chrome. So far, I like it. It's very similar to Firefox, but I am not sure which one I will continue to use. The point to that is that I am not sure how the formatting will look, but it should be fine...after all Google also owns Blogger's parent company. I have noticed some sites being unresponsive: Facebook and Wired so far.

I've already made it clear which blogs I typically read. I found this off Wired maybe a week or 2 ago, and it raised an interesting point. One of my favorite childhood books was Ender's Game by Orson Scott Card. Think of it as Starship Troopers for kids, but less military oriented. Orson Scott Card, who has written over two dozen SciFi, fantasy, and religion related books in multiple series, and has written as a commentator for various political and religious events.

As a writer, Card is very passionate with either fiction or non-fiction. One glance at the bottom of his Wikipedia page chronicles them better than I can. I turn my attention to his article that was highlighted in the Wired article, which can be found at Mormon Times, a website that Card identifies with. He is a member of the Church of LDS (Latter Day Saints). Fine. Normally, at least for me, I don't care about anything personal about authors I read. White, Black, Asian, Mixed, Albino, Male, Female, Transgender, Jewish, Muslim, LDS, Christian, Wicca - All Fine By Me. I usually just care about when the next publishing is going to be.

When an author uses his "celebrity status" to endorse certain view points, like this one when Card calls anything pro-gay coming from the "propaganda mill." It upsets me to see someone so against a view. Propaganda is going to be spewed from either side in a major argument. But comparing Gay Marriage to abortion is absurd. They are totally different, the only thing they have in common is that 50 years ago they were all hush hush.

I can't really say enough how disappointed I am that Card has written like this, even if it was meant just for a Mormon audience. My question is: Do we read because the author is outrageous or his idea/story is outrageous. A (bad) example: OJ Simpson's unreleased book If I Did It was inflammatory. But was it such a big deal because of who wrote it, or the subject matter? Tom Clancy is not what I would think of as an inflaming writer. He writes military related stories - and usually meets our exceptions. Card has been injecting his religious views into his books for a long time, and it took me a long time to understand all of them, and finally get turned off by them. Maybe if his works were presented in that new section at Borders the Religious and SciFi and Fantasy cross section. Oh wait. That's not real.

We can't separate the writer from the tale unless its really engrossing. If JK Rowling (Harry Potter fame) wrote her next book about a raunchy orgy, people would be shocked. Shock sells BIG. I think that if we know the background of writers before we read their work, we will search out influences, instead of letting them get flushed out naturally, we loose part of the story. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and a story is just a story.

What do you think? Does the writer make the book? Or does the written word make the author? And how does this change with cross genre writers?