[Bumpman]

I wasn't implying anything from a passive smoking angle. Also trying to turn scientific fact sourced from the WHO/EPA into a debate won't get you far. Phillip Morris has been trying to do it for years and he was prosecuted for it. Your point about damaging yourself being a drop in the ocean compared to enviormental pollution is fair enough. But the ethics that say you have the right to smoke are the same ones that say that a business has the right to create products and have at least some impact on the enviorment. Are you saying that a fair judicial system in your mind would prioritise finding fault with a small number of people doing a large amount of damage before a large number of people each doing a small amount of damage? I don't claim to be an enviormental expert. I would certainly take issue with the idea that I've been brainwashed to believe that cigarettes are bad. Even to a point of being worse then carbon emissions.

My point is that you have the right to do whatever you want to do with your life, Just don't try to justify genetically impacting yourself with carcinogenics against the fact that power stations are depleting the ozone. Especially in the context that you can do that and still be responsible. The truth is that once cancer is in your DNA it will affect your family for generations, and that's not an opinion, it's fact. You see, it's not passive smoking which is the issue, it's cancer... and no, you don't have a right to pass it on.