Dear Editor,
My anger with the university and SGA in general was kindled when I innocently picked up the paper and found that the non-smoking campus phase was moved up from a four-year gradual installment to just one year. I was furious last semester when I found out that this plan had even been proposed, let alone passed. However, I was willing to cut SGA some slack when I heard that the plan would proceed over a four-year period. Now the university just wants to drop the bomb on smokers and expect us to take it lying down! Forget it!
Advocates of this proposal claim it is the responsibility of the university to promote healthy living among students, but let’s be realistic. People’s bad health choices are not a reflection on the university itself and personal rights should be taken into account in this situation.
Lee Bird stated that punishment for students unwilling to abide by the new regulations will face punishment, even possible suspension for continuing to smoke outside of the designated areas. Well, I have news for you, Dr. Bird. You will lose half of your student population if you impose suspension as a punishment. Furthermore, smoking is not like drinking. If you get into a car after smoking a few cigarettes, your chances of crashing and killing someone else do not increase.
I am very glad that I graduate in May and do not have to face the ridiculous rules this university and SGA are trying to impose on students to ensure their health. Students should ask themselves what is next on the health agenda. Will selling junk food on campus also be taken away? Perhaps the university will force students to work out everyday in the Colvin Center as their next line of defense in the health issue. The bottom line is that students need to stand up for their rights and voice their concerns. This university would be obsolete without the students.
Ayanna Bell
political science senior
Loading ...
All Articles
I think that the SGU made a very difficult and overwell, well advised decision when it comes to tobbacco use on campus. Anyone whom believes that this bill is not necessary would be sorely mistaken. This campus needed to be smoke free simply for the benifit of anyone who does not want to inhale other people’s smoke.
Smoking is no more a right than drinking or being naked in public. The sooner people start saying every single thing they do is a right, the better. You don’t have a “personal right” to smoke, hence why it can be banned in buildings. What you do in your personal residence is your business, the university can’t take that away, that’s part of your privacy rights. I can assure you, neither the Supreme Court nor the Constitution have mandated a right to smoke in public.