They've gone out of their way to screw themselves over; I see no particular reason to accommodate them. (Obvious exception for people who really do pre-date the widespread knowledge that cigarettes are both addictive and harmful, but that's a decreasing subset of smokers.)
> In your example, they could just move the smoking area, couldn't they?
Off campus, preferably. If you can't go eight hours without your drug of choice (especially one that harms the people around you when you use it), perhaps you have a bigger problem than an intentional lack of accommodations at your workplace.
I see no particular reason to accommodate them.
Because they're people? And they're accommodating you by smoking only where it's allowed? So maybe out of the kindness of your heart you could leave them a place to smoke? Off campus, preferably. If you can't go eight hours
without your drug of choice (especially one that harms
the people around you when you use it), perhaps you have
a bigger problem than an intentional lack of
accommodations at your workplace.
See above.Their habit harms the health of everyone around them. Your comments make it seem like you don't understand that fact. Being mean or nice has nothing to do with any of it, it's about not inflicting harm on people that choose not to smoke.
Because banning all areas to smoke it a kinder attitude as it eliminates any appearance of acceptance of smoking.