Kidman is Smokin'

[Azred]

Obviously her evil plot worked because her name is in the news and people are talking about her (always good for a celebrity). [img]graemlins/petard.gif[/img]

[Stormymystic]

Originally posted by AzRaeL StoRmBlaDe: Anti-smoking people need to find something better to do than harague celebrities that smoke. I am not for smoking and I do not smoke myself, but its far from my business to judge others that smoke. Its their own business. People are well aware of what serious side effects smoking results in and if they are not, then they must have been living under the earth in complex series of caverns, as a drow elf captive or something for the past 50 years. It is their own adult decision to make to decide whether they want to smoke or not. Last time I checked smoking was still legal. If Nicole Kidman was 16 then that's a different story, but assuming she is a fairly intelligent adult, no one has any right to question her or anyone else on how they live their life. I'm seriously sad to see this story actually made the news. It must be a slow news day. I hope the next time they show her she is blazing the fattest cuban cigar anyone has ever seen.

pokes head out of hole in ground.........huh did ya call me????
what is wrong up here in the real world now?
smokin' is as smokin' does, no one but us smokers know what we are realling doing to our bodies....*cough* *cough*

[Yorick]

Originally posted by MagiK: Since when did becomming a celebrity confer special responsibilities? and since when have they (celebrities) been moral or ethical role models?

It has ever been thus. With power comes responsibility. She has influence over young women that want to be like her. When she smokes in public, she's not just affecting her life, but countless others. Is she prepared to make that choice? She knows the deal. It's not like she was handed fame and admiration without her asking for it.

When you accept fame as an entertainer, you also accept a restriction in civil liberties. There are simply things you can no longer do. Parts of you become public property. If she was really bothered by that reality she could quit and find another career, otherwise she can cop the criticisms on the chin. She's a big girl, an Aussie to boot so I'm sure she can handle the flak.

[ 05-23-2003, 01:11 AM: Message edited by: Yorick ]

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Since when did becomming a celebrity confer special responsibilities? and since when have they (celebrities) been moral or ethical role models?

It has ever been thus. With power comes responsibility. She has influence over young women that want to be like her. When she smokes in public, she's not just affecting her life, but countless others. Is she prepared to make that choice? She knows the deal. It's not like she was handed fame and admiration without her asking for it.

When you accept fame as an entertainer, you also accept a restriction in civil liberties. There are simply things you can no longer do. Parts of you become public property. If she was really bothered by that reality she could quit and find another career, otherwise she can cop the criticisms on the chin. She's a big girl, an Aussie to boot so I'm sure she can handle the flak. [/QUOTE]Do you honestly believe that is is her responsibility to hide the fact that she smokes?! Restriction of civil liberties...you make fame sound like it is a conversion into a radical communist community lol.

So many celebrities smoke its not even funny. I don't know of one person in my whole life who has started smoking because their favorite celebrity did/does and I seriously doubt that Ms. Kidman has so many followers that any young girl would follow her lead.

There is so much media coverage over the dangers and the hows and why's of not getting started...people who do choose to do so knowing the health risks they are subjecting themselves to, even the teenagers. I was well aware of the risks when I started and since then there has been a tremendous boost in the anti-smoking campaign that anyone without any knowledge of the dangers has to have come here from some other planet altogether.

Does anyone here remember "Johnny Smoke"? lol

http://www.geocities.com/dpjohnson.g...g Johnny Smoke

Rembering Johnny Smoke

Sorry, I didn't have the link when I posted a few minutes ago.

Originally posted by Yorick: quote: Originally posted by MagiK: Since when did becomming a celebrity confer special responsibilities? and since when have they (celebrities) been moral or ethical role models?

It has ever been thus. With power comes responsibility. She has influence over young women that want to be like her. When she smokes in public, she's not just affecting her life, but countless others. Is she prepared to make that choice? She knows the deal. It's not like she was handed fame and admiration without her asking for it.

When you accept fame as an entertainer, you also accept a restriction in civil liberties. There are simply things you can no longer do. Parts of you become public property. If she was really bothered by that reality she could quit and find another career, otherwise she can cop the criticisms on the chin. She's a big girl, an Aussie to boot so I'm sure she can handle the flak. [/QUOTE]I am not trying to say you are wrong Yorick...but Im still looking for the contractual obligation, a rule, or law, or bylaw
that there is any reason to think actors have any of those responsibilities...they are just "actors" nothing more or less.....

I am also asking..what kind of parent wants their kid basing their moral or ethical behaviour on those of the Hollywood nitwits? Historicly I think the Hollywood set has been a bit on the low side as far as morals and/or ethics and big on destructive behaviour and habbits.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Yorick: It has ever been thus. With power comes responsibility. She has influence over young women that want to be like her. When she smokes in public, she's not just affecting her life, but countless others. Is she prepared to make that choice? She knows the deal. It's not like she was handed fame and admiration without her asking for it. When you accept fame as an entertainer, you also accept a restriction in civil liberties. There are simply things you can no longer do. Parts of you become public property. If she was really bothered by that reality she could quit and find another career, otherwise she can cop the criticisms on the chin. She's a big girl, an Aussie to boot so I'm sure she can handle the flak.

Spoken by the guy who wants to be the nanny police and make sure no one smokes anywhere ever except their home. Sorry, guy, you lost all credibility with me on this issue when you wouldn't even let me have a measley 1 in 5 bars to go puff at, after I offered to not even smoke outside and after I begged for 20-odd pages of posts. Let me be clear. Mr. My Way or the Highway. Nanny police. Fascist.

While I will agree that, for better or for worse, our kids will always idolize entertainers and famous folks of all ilk -- as will many adults. However, PARTS OF YOU DO NOT BECOME PUBLIC PROPERTY. The only legal benefits you lose inure toward the torts of defamation and libel. In short, you lose a lot of your rights to sue those who spread lies and rumors about you (though you can still recover if they act maliciously). Besides, if we made idiots like the papparazi (it ought to be punishable by death to be one of these) actually respect the privacy of actors/entertainers a bit more, maybe some of the idolization would go away.

But, it's all capitalism anyway. Nicole's puff just sold cigarettes and crappy magazines everywhere.

[ 05-23-2003, 09:07 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by MagiK: I am not trying to say you are wrong Yorick...but Im still looking for the contractual obligation, a rule, or law, or bylaw that there is any reason to think actors have any of those responsibilities...they are just "actors" nothing more or less..... I am also asking..what kind of parent wants their kid basing their moral or ethical behaviour on those of the Hollywood nitwits? Historicly I think the Hollywood set has been a bit on the low side as far as morals and/or ethics and big on destructive behaviour and habbits.

Magik, it's not that parents *want* their kids to use actors as a moral compass, it's that they will no matter what. And, the "obligation" you refer to does not come from a law or contract, but from morals and ethics. I know if I were idolized by some pre-teenies, I would feel a moral obligation of sorts. I don't know if it would extend to making me put out a cigarette, but then I'll never have to worry through this dilemma -- unless one of our IWF posters is a movie producer who wants to give me a call. Now, this "obligation" does not mean she is legally bound, but not all duties are derived from or punishable by law.

LOL TL [img]smile.gif[/img] I actually believe that if you do achieve fame and fortune, you are required by ethics and morals to set a better example...but how many hollywood types ever actually do? Or non hollywood types for that matter [img]smile.gif[/img] . I guess what I was trying to pointout, is that the hollywood elite have so much smoke blown up their butt that they really start to believe the hype that they are "above" mere mortals....and yet their behaviour is lacking in oh so many ways...of course [img]smile.gif[/img] that is just me being judgemental [img]smile.gif[/img]