ACLU vs. Seattle Smoking Ban

Seattlest posted a lament recently about the unexpected down-side to the new indoor smoking ban, specifically our newly rediscovered sense of smell. Where is the justice in prohibiting one foul odor only to open the floodgates to lesser noxious fumes? Apparently, the champions of freedom at the ACLU read Seattlest, as they have now seized this historic opportunity to answer the call to justice (from their recent news alert):

Religious exemption to the Clean Indoor Air Act SB 6213, HB 2652

Position: Support

Status: Did not pass

In November 2005, the voters overwhelming [sic] approved a statewide smoking ban. Unfortunately, the drafters of the initiative did not consider the impact the ban would have on certain religious rituals. A number of religions incorporate smoke or smoking in their ceremonies. The smoking ban unconstitutionally prohibits these practices. These bills would have simply inserted a religious exemption into the Clean Indoor Air Act to make the statute constitutional. We had strong support from a number of legislators. However, the bills did not pass due to the concern that the change would be interpreted as a reversal of the initiative and a rejection of the "will of the people." We will continue to work on this issue in different arenas, and we may seek to pass this legislation next year if it is still needed.

If banning indoor smoking equals religious persecution, then who will protect the devout followers of Crybaby the Sentient Fart Cloud, an angry yet effervescent God frequently depicted in religious paintings hovering over Dick's on Broadway? Stay tuned to Seattlest for further updates.