KNOWING YOUR FRIENDS AND RELATIVES

Just when I think I can judge people fairly accurately, the conversation turns to politics or religion and I am floored by the realization that people I love think so differently than I. I tell myself that everyone has a right to think what they think. But, when what they think seems so poorly researched or thought out, I wonder what else do they blindly, impulsively, shallowly, mistakenly on erroneous data, or whatever else is involved in their position.

To tell myself that it should not change my feeling for my friend or relative falls flat. It does change my respect for their judgment, and I find myself trusting their stance on many other things more warily. Occasionally someone will differ but offer very logical (though different from my own) empirical thinking and conclusions based on criteria other than my own which gets me to change my earlier view. However, making a statement by voting for someone you know will have no chance to win, rather than your second choice who might win when there are millions of votes, does not make sense to me. As I listened to interviews of voters and the reasons they gave for voting, I only became more convinced that people don't really bother to acquaint themselves with a candidate but make early decisions based on rhetoric and empty promises. Now why should I be forever surprised at that? I have seen enough elections, especially the last one, when so many people voted for 'a man that looked like someone they could have a beer in a backyard barbecue with', that I should not be startled by these statements.

Perhaps my expectations should be lowered, yet I must be true to my own conscience and hope that people will take the electoral process more seriously, that people will consider all aspects of their lives and choose wisely, that people will stop thinking that plastic=cash, that vacations and the latest technology are more important than assuring the roof over your head is there to stay, that a 'spend today; tomorrow will take care of itself' attitude is acceptable. If only they did not believing vacant promises and studied real possibilities instead. But, alas, that does not seem likely during my lifetime.

NEW EUROPEAN SMOKING BANS

In 1986 we bought a cabin in Vermont where we went weekends and vacations. We stopped eating breakfast out because we could not stand the smoke. To our utter amazement, this state, where it seemed everyone smoked excessively, was one of the first to ban smoking in restaurants. At last, I could both eat and breathe at the same time in a restaurant. At last I could enjoy eating out and not pay for it later with a headache and wheezing.

Airplanes were even worse. You could be in a no-smoking section right behind a smoker. The circulating air, usually unfiltered, was as useless as the no pee area in a swimming pool. Those who think they are not bothering people when they smoke on the beach or outside haven't a clue. Murphy's Law draws the smoke to the nearest non-smoker every time.

There ought to be a ban on priests shaking incense into the air in churches. It is just as vile to asthmatics as smoking cigarettes would be. I'd like to see the lawmaker who dares outlaw that one! My solution is to just avoid church...God must want me not to be there or he would have taken away the incense burners by now.

Smoking bans are the only thing in which the US beats most other countries. Paris and Berlin just banned cafe smoking. They are usually so much smarter than the US about health issues. Their tobacco lobbies must be pretty strong. Does the US still give money to tobacco growers? Apparently no longer! Well Paris and Berlin are being very kind and letting themselves ease into it by turning the other cheek for six months or something like that.

Now I can only wish the doctors I worked with for 17 years had believed that second hand smoke was harmful when they were being told it by research results. Only after I quit my job and went into a smoke-free home office did I get free of daily headaches. Just before I left in 1983, they made one side of the large hall, where conferences were held, smoke free. Did they miss that the air mixes? It was another example of a no-pee section in a swimming pool. That move bolstered my belief that denial is rampart even in mental health institutions.

Oh well, is there any place left where people's judgment can be trusted just because they have a lot of letters after their names?