Yes, but only with a permit.
Yes. No permit necessary.
I have no idea.
Whatever it takes.....short of assasination...Governments tend to be slow to learn....Ghandi,Thoreau,King do answer for those who read, trouble is.....too few do this...reading of the classics.
Disappointing in that I am in the minority (again)
I hate when the correct answer is not a choice.
First of all "Civil Disobedience" is an oxymoron. You can't be civil and disobey at the same time. If you are disobeying the law you are breaking the law. Things are sometimes so simple that the concept is lost in the simplicity.
But what you are talking about would mean that government would be required to step in on behalf of those citizens who do not want smoking in public businesses and those businesses that might have to shut down should they be protested for having a smoking allowed policy.
You really can't have it both ways because there is almost always going to be someone who disagrees with a company's policies, especially policies that are discriminatory or potentially dangerous. And that someone is going to work to get those policies changed, either through government force or through public pressure, which basically means pocketbook pressure. Whether you agree that the reason for them disliking the policy or not doesn't really matter.
"A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt
Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.
Occupying Civil Disobedience
"With the Occupy protests continuing, and with hundreds of arrests at the various protests across the country, some people that oppose the protests have resorted to attacking the character of the protesters instead of the message. Some of the accusations are:
* They didn’t get a permit, the “TEA Party” did.
* They’re getting arrested, that never happened at “TEA Party” protests.
* They don’t respect public or private property, “TEA Party” protests rented porta-potties, they use the restrooms of local businesses.
Other accusations are more outlandish, claiming the occupy groups are anti-semitic, anti-American (because of the supposed absence of American flags), and the derogatory term “fleabagger” has come about because of a perception that the protesters are dirty.
The first three accusations are inter-related (I will not dignify the more outlandish claims with a response). The Constitution of these United States of America supposedly protects the right to peaceably assemble. The Constitution does NOT say “you have the right to peaceably assemble, as long as you receive permission from your local government.” The Occupy protesters that are being arrested have mostly been charged with “disorderly conduct” and “protesting without a permit” though a few have been charged with assaulting police – the latter being a charge I do not condone."
Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb