Recreational Activities and Smoke Breaks

Ever since class on Monday, I have not quite been able to reconcile the idea that dating does not fit into the category of "recreational activity." I think the definition of "recreational activity" provided by N.Y Labor Law encompasses most of the activities I think of as recreational - like sports and hobbies. But what about the case (and I think we have all known our share of these people) where someone literally spends all his or her time with their boyfriend or girlfriend? When people have few or no hobbies because they spend all their time 'dating', wouldn't dating in fact constitute their main "hobby"? (and thus, a recreational activity?) I think broadly there are only two categories of time - work and recreational activities. If dating does not fit into the category of recreational activity, where would it fit? Perhaps then dating might fit into both of those categories, depending on the well-being of the relationship. A second reason that I have a problem with the distinction between dating and recreational activity is because in reality, the line is often murky and gray. Sometimes two people will swear they are not dating, when outsiders would perceive them as being "on a date." Other times these same people might look back and see that yes, in fact, they actually WERE dating, but didn't see it that way at the time. At what time is dating defined? And is dating defined by the members involved or an outside observer? Lastly, I think the distinction is not warranted because at least personally, the best "dates" that I have been on have been comprised of the same activities that are included in the recreational activity category - going out to dinner, hiking or climbing, getting coffee, or watching a movie. All these activities were lawful, leisure-time activities for which I received no compensation. More often than not, they were the exact same "recreational activities" I would be pursuing in my free time singularly. Any thoughts??

On a unrelated tangent, I also wanted to touch on the mention of North Carolina's statute that protects employees from firing (or not hiring) based on "lawful use of lawful products off the premises of the employer during nonworking hours." The paper (Pagnattaro) also mentions that the use of such products must "not adversely affect the employee's job performance or the person's ability to properly fulfill the responsbilities of the position in question or the safety of other employees." Does anyone know, are there other guidelines for the lawful use of lawful products during working hours on the premises of the employer?? Because I wonder how smoking and smoke breaks fit into this equation. As a non-smoker, I have never seen smoke breaks as fair. Why should a smoker taking a 5 minute paid break get the same money that I should while I am doing work for the company. Non-smokers don't get to take chewing gum breaks, or granola bar breaks, or whatever else you could think of. Yet smokebreaks are accepted in the workplace and accomodated for. You could argue that smoke breaks DO adversely affect the employee's job performance and abilities to properly fulfill the responsibilities of the position because over time, smoke breaks build up and employees spend less time actually doing work for the company in question. Anybody know anything more about this or have opinions?