It is currently Fri Sep 26, 2025 11:02 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 3:39 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:34 am
Posts: 978
http://www.allbollywood.com/v2/bd/stc/n ... 8860.shtml

New Delhi, Jan 27 (IANS) Health Minister Anbumani Ramadoss has appealed to Bollywood stars Shah Rukh Khan and Amitabh Bachchan to stop smoking in movies as millions of youngsters emulate them and imbibe the bad habit."I have already made appeals to Shah Rukh Khan," Ramadoss said in Karan Thapar's "Devil's Advocate" programme being aired on CNN-IBN Sunday.
"
But I would be happy to do it again and say, 'Please don't smoke in your movies, Mr. Shah Rukh Khan'. I would like to make an appeal to Mr. Shah Rukh Khan and Mr. Amitabh Bachchan and all the other personalities.

"Fourteen-year-olds are taking to tobacco. India should be very, very concerned about the alarming rise of incidence of tobacco (use) amongst young people," the minister emphasised.

Criticising movies with smoking scenes, the minister said: "The movies are most responsible (for encouraging smoking). When I said movies should not have smoking scenes, we have statistics which show that 52 percent of children have their first puff of a cigarette because of movie celebrities."

When asked about Shah Rukh smoking during a recent cricket match, Ramadoss said the actor should not have done it.

"Absolutely not. What was the necessity? See these are celebrities and millions of youngsters look up to these celebrities...I again say to celebrities, in whichever field they are, whether it's movies or sports, not to do these things in public."

Responding to a question if Shah Rukh and Amitabh could stop smoking like Tamil superstar Rajnikant, the minister said: "Easily, they could do it. Without a doubt."


Thoughts? I feel it's out of line to suggest people ought to alter their lifestyles simply because they're in the public eye, "looked up to," or any such thing. As for smoking in films, I'm a little more sympathetic to the reason, but I don't condone any sort of legal action against artistic freedom.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:45 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 11:01 pm
Posts: 2070
Location: Toronto, Canada
I might sound a little naive here, but I think in a country where people can actually equate these two to the level of "God", than it's most certainly important that they be imposed to stop smoking wheather on or offscreen before it actually becomes a religious requirement for some to follow the path of anything these two do.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:01 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:34 am
Posts: 978
But, "imposed"? Whatever a person wishes to do in his or her personal life -- so long as it's not of direct damage to another -- is his or her business.

*Ron Paul...? Eh...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 7:28 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 11:01 pm
Posts: 2070
Location: Toronto, Canada
Commando303 wrote:
*Ron Paul...? Eh...

Well, I realize that he's pretty much not even in the leading race, but his ideas about leadership seems to akin with the left-wing public opinion and anyone else who wishes that the United States should mind their own dman business when it comes to foreign relations.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 5:47 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 16, 2005 4:34 am
Posts: 978
I feel, the only thing that makes Ron Paul so popular is his position against the Iraq War; if he were running as a Democrat, he likely would have dropped out by now. When it comes to his ideas about domestic policy — hell, even when you expand his wishes on foreign matters, beyond just Iraq — he quickly falls from the pedestal of "ideal candidate."

As for the possibility of his winning the Republican nomination, I'd say it's very slim. Those who support him do so passionately, but those who oppose, do so with a ridiculing fervor their own. Certainly, if he did get the ticket, it would be hard as hell for Hillary Clinton to beat him in the general election; he just probably can't make it that far.

Of course, I don't say any of this to attack you, but just to engage in a bit of conversation.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 6:52 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 11:01 pm
Posts: 2070
Location: Toronto, Canada
Commando303 wrote:
Of course, I don't say any of this to attack you, but just to engage in a bit of conversation.

No offense taken at all. It's my ignorance that I haven't followed much on other candidates, it's just that I've noticed that Ron Paul is the only one giving stress towards US foreign relations while other's seem to forefront the issue of rising above the potential US economic contraction or universal health care. Though, vital issues, but almost pale compared to foreign relations in my opinion.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Jan 29, 2008 10:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 2:39 am
Posts: 873
I think people in India are stupid to be follwing Shah Rukh Khan anyway. But that's the way it is and I don't think SRK is going to pay much attention and stop smoking just because the health minister said so.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group