I am not a smoker, never have been, but I do watch with interest the efforts to eliminate smoking from our society. It started in public areas and is now moving quickly into the private arena. In California, we have seen our way clear to forbid smoking in restaurants. This in spite of the fact that restaurants are private businesses and both the employees and the patrons have thousands of other options. In March of this year, following California being the first state in the nation to declare second-hand tobacco smoke a toxic air pollutant, Calabasas proudly enacted the nations toughest public anti-smoking laws.

Now, Arkansas Democratic Representative Bob Mathis, who has already successfully passed legislation making it illegal to smoke in cars with young children as passengers, is wondering about the viability of legislation that would prohibit mothers from smoking while pregnant.

He has support for this exploration from George Washington University law professor John Banzhaf, who has recently added an attack against fast food restaurants to his well documented work as an anti-smoking crusader and says “Since court after court has held that smoking is not a fundamental right like voting, and that smokers are not a protected class like African-Americans or women, the government has wide leeway in fashioning a remedy for whatever it concludes is a problem requiring corrective action.”

Beyond the sheer audacity of continuing to try and dictate and control the private lives of Americans, while at the same time continually questioning the “religious rights” right to attempt to dictate any type of behavior, I am wondering how this will impact the discussion of abortion.

The left offers two arguments in favor of unlimited abortions.

First, the fetus is not alive, not yet a human being and so it has no rights. If that’s the case, what does it matter if the mother smokes? It would seem difficult to justify both positions.

Second, whether or not the fetus is alive, the mothers right to control her own body (reproductive system) trumps those of the fetus. Again, it would seem a bit counter intuitive to argue that society has no right to tell you if you can abort a fetus, but we can tell you whether or not you can smoke while pregnant.

Most fanatics are not bothered by issues of logic and consistency, but it would be entertaining to see this issue addressed by those who support unlimited abortion rights and at the same time, want to eliminate smoking privileges for pregnant women. Any takers?