Smoking is a very simple behavioral construct, based solely on your addiction to the addictive substances contained within the cigarette. Eating is a much more complex behavioral construct with multiple variables. It is way too hard to make that determination about eating habits based on one single act.

By that logic, anybody who eats anything unhealthy at anytime would be labeled as an unhealthy eater, so pretty much everybody.

Accepted. I wouldn't admit to being a monster either.

Btw, "spatula" neg-repped me for this statement. He added the comment "you're brown water trash. die." Baby. Get a life man, and don't get so butt hurt over a little disagreement.

Some people smoke because they like to smoke. Some people smoke once in a blue moon when something stressful happens. Some people eat crap food because it tastes good, or once in a blue moon when something stressful happens. Not everybody fits into these neat little boxes you're trying to put them in.

You have reached the highest plane of human thought.

People who smoke because they like to smoke are habitual. The once in a blue moon characterizes maybe 5% of smokers, maybe. It is extremely hard to occasionally smoke considering how addictive it is. Do you honestly think 95% of people who eat crap food are unhealthy eaters? You are taking a very simple, straightforward act (smoking) and equating it to a very complex act (eating). If a mother ate a full bag of cheetos every day, but was otherwise nourished, the baby would be fine. However, if she was smoking consistently is completely different. Introducing ANY of those substances to an unborn during a highly critical period in a child's development can lead to drastic effects.

I am not going to continue with this argument. It's much harder to be malnourished as a mother, especially with the high volume of fortified foods in this country, than to smoke habitually. Further, if you can't see that introducing rat poison into a very sensitive fetal environment is worse than eating poorly, I can't help you.

ROFLROFLROFLROFLROFL

So introducing toxins into a fetal environment for the sake of temporary pleasure does not qualify as being selfish? Makes sense.

Look up the effects of smoking on an unborn fetus. Jesus

I assume this is in place of a logical rebuttal.

Hi, dumb****.

Maybe you didn't understand, he saw her smoke once and labeled her.

Maybe she smoked a pack a day before her pregnancy and didn't plan on getting pregnant in the first place. Maybe she's trying like hell to quit because of the baby. Maybe she's down to one or two cigarettes every few days... he doesn't ****ing know. YOU don't ****ing know. Do you get it? You don't know her well enough to label her a selfish piece of shit based on one ****ing act.

How do you know she hadn't quit and relapsed? Do you know how hard it is to quit? Maybe she quit and found out that her whole family had been exploded in a plane mid air?

Of course, I disagree with it but to label one person's existence in just a snapshot is simple thinking.

Another thing... we are males. We can not sympathize with a woman who is carrying a child. This needs to stop.

With less than 200 posts you haven't earned the right to a logical rebuttal yet. All you've earned thus far is a smiley parade.

That's a great excuse for debilitating congenital anomalies associated with smoking. Derp!

It's okay. It's really hard to not smoke.