I haven't been out to nightclubs in Sydney for some time and this weekend, I must say that watching the rituals at licensed venues, the situation was surreal.

I've always been a non smoker and never really had a problem with others smoking.

As a reformed alcoholic friend of mine once said, if smoking is so bad in a bar, what makes you think that alcohol is so healthy? Isn't there some hypocracy in this? By trying to make drinking in a bar look more healthy and respectable, they ban smoking. Can you see that there is an inconsistency here?

In night clubs and bars in the thick of night, there are as many, if not more people outside the clubs as there are inside, so that they can smoke. Venues have those window-less fronts so that they are covered by the by-laws. Then there are strange contraptions like sliding doors that open and close, much like the door to the dairy room in big brother, to these porch like areas, enclosed as part of the bars and yet open to the streets. There are more heaters under awnings now.

For Police, traffic control is more difficult as there are so many crowds and tables over the pavements, people have to walk on the roads to get past. Now the divide between the patrons of the venue and public property gets more foggy. Who is responsible when something goes wrong, when the pavement is clearly part of the venue?

There is something sterile, something strange, something fake about night clubbing now. I wonder if pubs and clubs will suffer when people's social habits are undergoing a rapid change under so much political correctness?

Apparently in places like Kings Cross and Oxford Street, the rates of physical abuse on the pavements keep rising as well in the chaos of the crowds. How is entertainment and socializing in the city going to be sustainable under these conditions? Are we seeing the fall of part of city culture that we had to have?

I am not sure that the overall message is that drinking is ok but smoking is not. My understanding of the move is that there was more of a concern over health risks to those in the establishments that didnt smoke, particularly OHS issues for bar staff. I think its a fair call from that perspective. Allowing smoking in what are fairly crowded and poorly venitlated areas is asking long-term bar staff to take the risk of life-threatening illnesses (namely cancer) in order to work.

I take your point re the increase of people outside venues. I thought that venues were required to set up ventilated areas for smokers, rather than simply putting them out of the street. Certainly where I live (a country town), most pubs that I have seen since the change have built special areas to provide somewhere for their smoking patrons to go. In a number of cases this has encroached on the general floor space of the venue, and has required significant investment from the owners. If we can do this in the country, why not the city?

A good friend of mine, a life-long non-smoker, died of lung cancer. I would not wish her death on any other person. If banning smoking in such venues stops even one other non-smoker getting lung cancer then I welcome the ban.
Smoking also causes a range of other problems - peripheral vascular disease and macular degeneration are just two.
Smoking costs the community not just the individual. The cost to the workplace and the public health system is enormous. Some smokers still believe that they have the right to a cigarette on work time. They take more sick time than other workers.
I once observed one irresponsible person so hooked on cigarettes that she chose to buy a carton of those and put back groceries intended for her children. When they complained she verbally and physically abused them, saying she "needed" the cigarettes - and then I saw her light up in the car with her children present.
Yes of course alcohol causes problems, some of them just as severe but to knowingly and selfishly harm others merely because something is 'legal' is not on.

It blows my mind that the government have a conscience about drugs and their effect on society and the person. Quite justifiably they made it illegal to possess and use the vast majority of drugs (my internal jury is still out on pot) but when it somes to arguably the most destructive drugs around (alcohol and tobacco) they are happy stick bandaids over the issue...

I'm an ex-smoker, and the best thing that could've happened was to ban smoking from pubs and clubs. I chose to smoke, others didn't. Why should they potentially suffer from my choices?. Plus, cheap bastards, buy your own ;o).

That is an interesting comment StG. I find it astonishing the social pressure living in the inner city to drink and smoke pot. I don't like pot at all, it stinks, tried it once, not nice, never do it again. Likewise I don't like alcohol either. Usually after one drink a get dehydrated, get a headache and it's not pleasant.

Yet the pressure in social functions to drink or smoke joints is amazing. People who consider themselves as politically correct will pass around the bong, try and get me to puff, and when I pass it on I get questioned? like: "are you sure you don't want some"? "Why not"? "Its good for you", "It will calm your nerves" and so on. I end up repeating myself, no, no, no and no and finally I have to leave because I am embarassed about having to say no all the time.

Similarly, when people pour out the wine. "Are you sure you don't want some"?, "Why not?", "everyone in Europe has a glass of wine", and "Oh go on, don't be such a party pooper".

What I'm getting at is that these are the same people who have lobbied and legislated for banning of cigarettes in venues. They would like to smoke their joints outside, have a wine at the table, or 10. This is all so politically correct.

The difference is no one expects or pushes you to smoke a cigarette.

Is there anyone here who socializes outside of Church groups, who is not pressured frequently by people wanting them to drink, drink more, or smoke dope, or have more dope as it is socially acceptable? How many wonder why the same people are so militant against cigarettes?

Can people see where I'm coming from? I just thought I'd paint more of a picture here.

Cheers.

Saintfletcher, I dont socialise in church groups and have never been offered pot. I do drink, but generally not much, and have certainly turned down more than one drink.But then I dont live in the city, so maybe dont see that pressure. Have been to uni though, so chance that I should have been offered pot. But would have turned it down - just not interested. If you cant have a good time without it......

Gee Saintfletcher where do you socialise? I went through more than one uni and was never offered pot. I didn't spend much time in the bar because of the smoke and everyone respected the fact that I do not actually like the booze and happily let me get on with the bitter lemon or the orange juice.
I have mixed with writers, playwrights, musicians, theatre people and artists. The successful ones are not normally heavily into drink or drugs

Back when I used to smoke fish I had an active social life, spent time with the kids in the great outdoors and had a generally rounded lifestyle. There didn't seem to be any harm in it at the time.

Then I switched to poultry and I didn't spend nearly as much time outdoors, and friends and relatives soon got sick of my smoked offerings. There was a constant pall of smoke in the house because I could smoke poultry inside, whereas I used to do my fish smoking outside.

Eventually my family banned all indoor smoking, which opened my eyes. I still sneak the occasional chook. It's not as exciting as it used to be but I just can't seem to completely break the habit.

I like it chainsmoker. On tripple J today they were telling us how to make curry out of feral cats. Only problem is that you risk toxoplasmosis.

Well, I can't say it was a University communicat, but between you and I, it used to happen frequently when I went to Greens functions. Can you see what I'm saying now? How many time have I been subject to absurd monologues?

I'm suspicious of all the parties now, they all have their hypocrisies. Hopefully no one will notice this comment now that it is sliding down the page. Don't tell anyone of my observations, people I know will get most upset. lol ;-)

FLETCH......

good question.. why is grog so good? hmm.. well I often ask myself this question:

"Grog is connected with Alchohol, which is a mind/mood altering substance, so.. WHY do we need said 'mind/mood' altering in the first place"?

-We are not happy.. so we drink.....to 'become' happy.
-We are depressed, so we drink...to FLEE from the source/thoughts which depress us.
-We drink because our friends are there... (so why do we need to alter our minds to have good friendship)?

Basically, the whole concept of "drinking" is peppered with drawbacks, problems and 'down'side.

Are we so bereft of fundamental happiness and fulfillment that we have to seek it in a bottle ?

*WARNING...BIBLE COMING UP* :)

The Bible does not condemn drinking alchohol outright, it DOES condemn drunkenness. "Do not be drunk with wine for that is:
-riot
-excess
-Dissipation
-luxury
-lead to wild living.
-debauchery
(all from various translations of Ephesians 5:18)

BUT....Instead, be filled with the Spirit.

and...

19Speak to one another with psalms, hymns and spiritual songs. Sing and make music in your heart to the Lord, 20always giving thanks to God the Father for everything, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

QUITE A CONTRAST... to say the least. But one thing stands out, being filled with the Holy Spirit rather than the 'spirit' of the vine, results in everything that we might have sought in the grog, but:
-Without the financial outlay.
-Without the health problems.
-Without the black eyes and crushed skulls that result from alchohol related violence.

Hmmm seems like a pretty good deal to me :

Gawd - and yet another thread is shamelessly hijacked by the OLO missionary.

Boazy, the topic is 'Smoking and Licensed Venues' - not the Bible.

You chide other forum members when they depart from the topic, so how about practising what you preach?

BD, what you say about alcohol applies more to alcoholics and those that are not yet mature enough to look past their social insecurities. For a lot of people though, they just like a drink - most have a favourite, and its based on taste rather than effect. I love red wine (and its supposed to be good for me- yum!), but I drink it because I enjoy the flavour, not because I am trying to escape from anything. I like other alcoholic drinks as well (and there are some that I dont like), but red wine comes in top position. There is a big difference between having a glass (or stubby/can) now and then, and alcoholic escapism.

One of the concerns that I do have is over the availability of pre-mix lolly-water. If you want to taste a softdrink, then have one - dont hide alcohol in it. It makes getting drunk for young girls in particular, far too easy.

So Boazy, the bible says not be drunk on wine, but to filled with spirits? Probably cheaper in the long run and makes sense, seeing as how Jesus didn't bother paying for the grog at that wedding in Cana.

But what does Jesus say about smoking in licensed venues?