Conrad, I think I understand your position, and empathize with most of it.

However, if a given talented performer is trying to make a living in his art, but can't expect to draw enough to hire a hall, what needs to happen? YOU don't want him to do a paid concert in your home; fine! If I decide I really want to hear this fellow (we'll say "fellow" for convenience's sake) and don't think he will be able to perform in my town without a private venue, would you "prohibit" me from offering my hospitality? If you don't like the concept of a house concert, don't come!

If I DO decide to hold the concert, __I__ will decide whether I allow smoking in MY home. If I don't want the present secondary fumes during the concert or (to me just as important) the clinging continuing stink of smoke which gets absorbed into carpets, upholstery, drapes, and so forth, I will take that into consideration in making the two decisions whether to have the concert at all or whether to placard against smoking. In either case, that's no-one else's concern. If a smoker REALLY wants to hear Joe Schlutz perform, he can do one of two things:
1) Forgo smoking for one evening and come to my house to the concert.
2) Sponsor his own (smoking) house concert with Joe Schlutz.

If I understand your position, Conrad, you seem to be saying there should be no professinal musicians. Or that if there are they may only perform in venues that you approve.

Dave Oesterreich