Should Incense be banned?

[icehorse]

Incense is really bad, often deadly, for birds. So my parrot would be very happy if it was banned.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

it's a "problem" that doesn't affect most of the people who would be against it. So this thread is more about people whining about things in life that don't really affect them just because they don't like them.

You don't know that.

 

[ChristineM]

Think of the effect on climate change

 

[Secret Chief]

It should be banned in restrooms.

 

[Secret Chief]

Think of the effect on climate change

I blame the Catholics.

 

[ChristineM]

It should be banned in restrooms.

Restrooms on busy country walks or a country park on a hot summers day... Incense may help alleviate the obnoxious stench.

 

[mangalavara]

That and some people don't like the aroma. Based on these, should incense be banned?

Nobody is taking my incense from me unless they can pry it out of my cold, dead, ash covered hands.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I blame the Catholics.

And Orthodox Christians, Hindus, Buddhists...

 

[ChristineM]

I blame the Catholics.

Not the Catoholics... Never the Catoholics

 

[Secret Chief]

I'm so niche, I have Indian downstairs and Japanese upstairs.

 

[Secret Chief]

And Orthodox Christians, Hindus, Buddhists...

Oh well if you're going to be consistent...!

(I was only joking)

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh well if you're going to be consistent...!

(I was only joking)

I know.

 

[Alien826]

Why do you assume it's my logic? Where did I say or even imply this?

I was just going by what you said. When you said "why shouldn't it be banned" you weren't suggesting it should be banned?

I don't own my body. I'm just borrowing it while I'm here.

I assume you are joking, but in case you aren't, who owns it?

Added: Oh crap, I just read the title. I assumed we were in the incest thread.

 

[Secret Chief]

I was just going by what you said. When you said "why shouldn't it be banned" you weren't suggesting it should be banned?


I assume you are joking, but in case you aren't, who owns it?

It's on loan from the rest of the universe. T&C apply.

 

[SalixIncendium]

I was just going by what you said. When you said "why shouldn't it be banned" you weren't suggesting it should be banned?

I wasn't suggesting anything. I was asking a question.

I assume you are joking, but in case you aren't, who owns it?

No one. Everything in this reality is borrowed. I came into this world with nothing. I will leave it with the same.

 

[Debater Slayer]

But like the thread that inspired the potential of parody, it's a "problem" that doesn't affect most of the people who would be against it. So this thread is more about people whining about things in life that don't really affect them just because they don't like them.

Same-sex marriage bans don't affect me in the slightest, but I still oppose them because I view them as unnecessary and harmful to a subset of other people. I don't think something has to affect someone in order for them to believe it should be banned or allowed.

Regarding incense, no, I don't think it should be banned. If it's banned, where do we draw the line? Should cigarettes also be banned? What about meat whose production results in major deforestation and reduced air quality for some people? The list goes on. I think bans should be kept to a minimum and always ensured to be absolutely necessary and unavoidable if they are to be implemented.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Same-sex marriage bans don't affect me in the slightest, but I still oppose them because I view them as unnecessary and harmful to a subset of other people.

Yes, but we're not talking about opposing bans. We're talking about implementing bans to begin with, often as a result of someone simply not agreeing others' choices.

Regarding incense, no, I don't think it should be banned. If it's banned, where do we draw the line? Should cigarettes also be banned? What about meat whose production results in major deforestation and reduced air quality for some people? The list goes on. I think bans should be kept to a minimum and always ensured to be absolutely necessary and unavoidable.

There was a ban on alcohol manufacture and sales in the form of Prohibition in the US from 1920-1933. One would think something would have been learned by that given consequences and the aftermath of the repeal.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Yes, but we're not talking about opposing bans. We're talking about implementing bans to begin with, often as a result of someone simply not agreeing others' choices.

I think the same reasoning applies; some things can be harmful enough to a subset of people to warrant a ban even if they don't affect everyone. Of course, there are many people who support bans on things they merely don't like (e.g., premarital sex and public expression of certain religious beliefs), but many people support bans on certain things for valid reasons too, in my opinion.

There was a ban on alcohol manufacture and sales in the form of Prohibition in the US from 1920-1933. One would think something would have been learned by that given consequences and the aftermath of the repeal.

I think this kind of thing should be considered on a case-by-case basis due to the historical, social, and cultural differences between different countries. For example, the US allows public expression of Nazi beliefs, while many other developed countries ban it. The latter consistently rank at the top of freedom and quality-of-life indices, so I don't think they're any worse off due to the bans. It's just a matter of having a different history and culture (and therefore different needs) in that case.

 

[YmirGF]

I blame the Catholics.

I knew it was right wing extremists!

As to the OP. Meh? Don't care.

 

[Father Heathen]

I love Nag Champa.