Policy discriminates against smokers

The Jan. 17 issue of the Exponent contained an article by Kurt Esposito entitled, "Dorms to become smoke-free by fall." It seems Purdue announced that it would sacrifice the comfort and convenience of tobacco consumers in order to come "on-line with what is happening across the University," said Lanny Wilson, director of administration for University Residences.

Wilson believes that the policy is progressive — that the concerns and conveniences of non-smokers are more important than those of the smoking population. I believe the policy is both discriminatory and un-American.

Here's why:

Esposito’s article listed the three main issues, verified by Wilson, which led to the decision.

One: Roommate conflicts over smoking.

There should be no roommate conflict over an issue that has already been resolved for them. It is my understanding that rooms are designated smoking or non-smoking before the semester begins. Simple logic tells us that residents in non-smoking rooms cannot smoke and those in smoking rooms can. If habits change mid-stream, that’s your tough break and no fault of your roommate.

Two: Students with medical conditions that make them sensitive to smoke.

Although resident smokers are in decline, from 400 to 260 in the past three years, according to Wilson, I’m sure they are still a much larger number than the number of people suffering from smoke sensitivity. University Residences obtained smoking data from incoming freshmen, but as Wilson said, habits change. I know mine did. I started smoking as an excuse to get out of my less-than-adequately ventilated residence hall room.

But what about these smoke-sensitive individuals? They have rights, too, although smokers obviously do not. If the same decision were made to remove these "sensitive" individuals from the residence halls for the convenience of others, there would be a lot of action groups up in arms, not to mention the state and federal courts.

Three: Non-smoking students and staff who are forced to share areas with smokers.

No one is forced to sit in a smoke-filled room. The only places that still allow smoking in the residence halls are the designated private rooms. Wilson and others argue that smoke may drift down hallways, out windows and into the adjoining rooms.

There is no more danger from the few renegade tobacco fumes than there is from the car exhaust being billowed at you from the parking lots that surround all the halls.

If the University really wanted to do something to benefit student health, they would improve the ventilation in the rooms so you don't have to leave the windows and doors open all the time to air out the foul smell of your roommate’s gym shorts.

The University has found a way to persecute without ramifications, perhaps even with the blessings of the people. How can it be that residence halls, some of which have been around since the University began, are now having a problem with smokers inside their walls?

Perhaps this is due to the fact that up until the 1970’s smokers were in the majority and, therefore, untouchable. Only recently have they fallen into the socially persecuted minority. Today, around 50 million Americans smoke — that’s about one out of every three adults.

Overly exaggerated health concerns and a federal government that holds a personal grudge against tobacco companies have led to a decline in smokers. The industry’s rights to freely defend themselves on television, radio and even billboards were also taken away.

It is a personal choice to smoke. It is a personal choice not to smoke. It is a choice to like smokers or not like them, just as it is a personal choice to like or dislike any other social group or lifestyle, whether it is in the minority or majority.

It is not wrong to warn people of the dangers of smoking. It is wrong to make rules that discriminate.

The University is a public institution paid in part by tax dollars and in part by students, some of whom are members of a variety of minority groups, including smokers. It is in the best interest of all publicly funded institutions to keep personal opinion out of public policy.

Ian Clift is a sophomore in School of Science.

Policy discriminates against smokers

Students should attend provost forums

Internet speed needs improvement

Student defends Boilermaker fans

Students express thanks for support

Letter Submission Form

OPINIONS DESK PHONE:
(765) 743-1111 ext. 256

Opinions editor:
Tom McHenry

Online Columnist Archive