As a rule, I'm not a fan of government intrusion into our personal business. I believe that adults should be free to live their lives as they see fit, as long as their actions are not injuring another individual. As the old saying goes, "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins."

Certainly my "live and let live" philosophy applies to cigarette smoking. I'm not a fan of cigarettes and I've never taken up the habit myself, but if an adult wants to light up it is not my place to tell them they don't have the right to do so.

The problem with cigarettes, of course, is that if you smoke anywhere in the vicinity of another person, you are injuring them. It's called secondhand smoke and, like most non-smokers, I have no interest in breathing it in. Secondhand smoke is not just unpleasant, it's unhealthy.

A recently released surgeon-general's report confirms our worst fears about breathing in other people's exhaled smoke. According to the report, any level of exposure to secondhand smoke increases a person's risk of lung cancer, heart disease and other smoking-related illnesses.

That's why this Libertarian supports efforts to restrict smoking in public places not clearly designated as smoking zones. Smokers should have the right to smoke, and I should have the right to breathe clean air. That means no smoking in generally accessible areas like workplaces, restaurants, and stores, except in clearly designated, and separately ventilated, areas.

Efforts are under way all over the United States to protect adults from breathing other adults' cigarette smoke, but we seem to be all but ignoring the most serious concern we should have about secondhand smoke — adults who smoke around small children.

We have laws that protect children from being beaten, malnourished or otherwise abused, but there is nothing to stop a parent or other caregiver from lighting up and polluting the lungs of their little charges whenever the mood strikes them.

I don't see how this behavior does not qualify as abuse. Children who are exposed to secondhand smoke are at increased risk of dying from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). They also are more likely to develop lung infections such as pneumonia, ear infections, and to suffer from severe asthma.

We take children away from parents who smack their kids or don't feed them properly (and rightfully so), but we don't see fit to protect them from a parent or guardian who satiates them with secondhand smoke 365 days a year. I don't see the logic in that.

Perhaps it is time to put the weight of law behind a child's right to grow up without being exposed to toxic fumes by adults who cannot or will not curtail their smoking habit around children.

Such a law would, of course, be difficult to enforce. But so are all child-endangerment laws. A lot of things go on behind closed doors that remain hidden to most of the world, but we do what we can.

And right now, I'd say we're not doing enough to protect the health of children who are subjected to secondhand cigarette smoke. If you feel the same way, maybe you should let your elected representatives know how you feel.