This is interesting.

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids argument strikes me analogous to a position that favors abstinence education. In both situations, there is something we don't want happening: consumption of tobacco and kids engaging in sex. And now, in both situations there is a way to do these things in a way that is safer but not wholly safe: opting for snus and engaging in safe sex.

I wonder if everyone who is against snus favors abstinence-only sex ed., and if they don't, how they differentiate between the two?

(As for me, I think consumers should be told about snus and that kids should be told about condoms.)

The only differentiator I could see would be the relative strengths of the taboos involved - people, especially religious ones, get a lot more worked up about sex than they do about even cigarettes, much less snus. But I think your analogy is a good one, although I don't see any big mystery about how those people would handle any incongruity: in the same manner as those who oppose stem-cell research while supporting in vitro fertilization, by remaining ignorant (willfully or by accident) of the contradiction. When legislating someone else's behavior, after all, there is really no need to be super-picky about consistency.

Here in San Diego, there was a discussion about sex education and a comparison was made to the anti-drug message the schools put out, too. One of the parents, arguing in favor of comprehensive sex education, put it this way (and I'm sure I'm paraphrasing):

We don't want our kids ever using drugs. We do want our kids eventually to have sex.

That's the difference.

To the Dudeguy comment: He writes, "In both situations, there is something we don't want happening..." This wording is scary..."We don't want happening" is one heck of an assumption. I can tell all that as a neighborhood restaurant/bar owner our customers have other choices but we provide smoke processing machines and exhaust fans in addition to a fairlly well-sealed, non-smoking area. We also have outside seating, weather permitting. The public can readly choose to go to any of the above-type establishments. Employees have the same choices.

This country is increasingly becoming a society where a sector of society believes they have a right to determine the freedome of others. What will be the next freedom threatened? Gun ownership? OK, let the good be disarmed and then mostly the crimminals will have ne reason to avoid home invasions, car-jacking and other similar activities where they are statistically avoiding - would you jack a car if you felt the owner had the means for protection.

If people want to avoid tobacco smoke, obviously they can go to a tobacco-free establishment. Restaurant owners have began to determine whether they choose to be non-smoking, smoking or provide smoke-free areas.

This is America and people should be frree as customers to make their own choices as should restaurants and taverns.

it is sounding like the U.S is no longer a free country. it seems today we are being told what we can and can not do, what we can eat and not, drink what we can and not what we can belive in and not . so what is next who can and can not have children, who and who not you can talk to.when is it going to stop. or are we going to start acting like korea. where we have no rights or liberty. its heading that way. and if you think it can't happen take a look around you now.

It seems to me that tobacco (or drug) abstinence education has a major advantage over sexual abstinence education. Sex is a fundamental biological urge -- nay, imperative. As strong and deep as you might say the urge to self-medicate is (I know, ancient Egyptian recipes for beer, yadda yadda yadda), it ain't the same as sex.

I've not seen any statistics on the efficacy of tobacco and drug abstinence education, but my own meager observations seem to indicate it's pretty effective.

Are you including alcohol in that definition because there doesn't seem to be any real decrease in drinking.

Smoking, for some reason, seems to be one of those things where if you can't get hooked when you're pretty young, you'll never take it up.

True. I suppose we can again point to important similarities between sex and alcohol. Both are legal and socially acceptable for adults. Both are available without going to the black market. The trouble then is that tobacco bears those same similarities. In addition to what you mention, there has been a sea change since my youth in the extent to which smoking is "socially acceptable." Not so with drinking or sex.