As a restaurant worker, I have followed with great interest the debate over the proposed clean indoor air law currently being explored by Cincinnati City Council, which would ban smoking in most indoor public places, including bars and restaurants.

Many people seem to believe this is a public heath issue, but I disagree. No one is forcing anyone to dine in a smoke-filled room, and there are many restaurants whose owners have already voluntarily banned smoking. People who wish to dine completely smoke-free could support these businesses and encourage, rather than force, others to follow in their footsteps.

It seems to me, however, that we are debating the wrong questions; in this case, whether secondhand smoke is good or bad. Most people would agree it's bad, even if there is differing opinion as to what extent. But a more important, if not largely overlooked question is: Who decides which legal and consensual activities should be allowed on privately owned property, the property owner or the government?

For good or ill, smoking is perfectly legal for adults. Many of us consider smoking to be a nasty habit, and rightfully so, but the thought of government trying to regulate that habit should be considered frightening. If politically unpopular, yet otherwise legal activities such as smoking can be outlawed, what could be next? We can easily walk away from a smoke-filled bar or restaurant; can we so easily walk away from our civil liberties?

Whether the public favors a smoking ban is irrelevant, and whatever economic impact such a ban may or may not have is equally irrelevant. What is relevant is whether government has a right to interfere in the operation of a private business when no illegal activity is taking place, or has been.

It has been said that of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victim may be the most oppressive, because those who torment us for our own good do so with the approval of their own conscience, and thus will torment us without end.

Though the proposed smoking ban doesn't seem to strike as much fear into the hearts of Cincinnatians as, say, the USA Patriot Act, it should worry them even more, because it represents the first small step down a very real slippery slope that we, as Americans, don't really want to travel.

Matthew McGowan of Cheviot is an employee of a downtown Cincinnati restaurant.

Want your voice here? Send your column or proposed topic, 400 words or fewer, along with a photo of yourself, to assistant editorial editor Ray Cooklis at E-mail: rcooklis@enquirer.com; (513) 768-8525.