Because millions of people are dying and there is a simple way=20
to reduce this figure/prevent it from increasing.
> The medical facts are widely known, and only
>highly paid lawyers even try to dispute them.
> =20
> The Noosphere has always had parasitic and destructive memes floati=
ng
>about in it. I see no likelihood that we will ever be free of dangerous
>ideas. Rather than go about shooting people, why don't we let those who
>succumb to this meme die of it, as nature intended?
So your position is what? you dont like the idea of shooting a=20
small number of people so you think better to sit back and let millions=20
die instead?.
> =20
> I myself am a reformed smoker, I stopped mostly because I was afraid
>that I might live long enough to regret it. No, it was not easy. =20
>There are a lot of other people like me out there, they have facts and
>choices available to them.=20
Arent you forgetting about the new markets in the developing=20
world, it will be a long time before those people have all the facts=20
that we have.
> If they choose death by smoking that is
>perhaps no one elses business. Let's knock off this stuff about
>shooting people whom we judge harmful to society, and get back to
>talking about memes.
This is about memes. specifically=20
<if you are a death-soon ciggy victim then it would be morally=20
virtuous to kill a well chosen tobacco plc spokesperson>.
> =20
>
> Besides, theses meme thingies seem to mutate readily. What if we s=
ent
>it out as =93Shoot the Evil Tobacco Lords=94 and it came back as =93Shoot=
the
>Evil Memetics Masters=94?
Or better still, shoot the evil tobacco lords memetic engineers.
>
Tony
Who feels compelled to answer all points in this thred in the hope =
that=20
he will get the antivirus but soon might just give up and accept that you a=
re=20
all programmed beyond your knowing.