Is the affordable care act considered discrimination?

No, these questions have all been determined to be underwriting factors to determine how much they can charge you for having insurance coverage.

We, who actually work and pay taxes, get tired of paying for the consequences of other peoples' conscious bad behavior. Knowing that smoking is the leading cause of death in the world, I do not know how any intelligent person can smoke. If you choose to do so, go for it, but don't expect the non-smokers to pay for your bad choice. Yes, they can discriminate. And they darned well should.

No. Smoking is a choice that people make, and the enormous costs that are dumped on society by smokers who in the past refused to buy health insurance are part of the reason for the ACA in the first instance.

No, it is not discriminatory on that basis because it is proven that smoking leads to higher medical bills.

You asked the wrong dude. The entire of this Obama debacle is filled with discriminatory practices, starting with the unequal protection of the laws for unions, congresspersons, Obama friends and such like don't know why a thousand GOP lawyers have not filed suit in federal court. is everybody afraid of Obama answer: yes. Hitler rides again 80 years later

No. Questions about smoking have been part of private health and life insurance applications for decades, as it is an established underwriting risk factor. The insurance exchanges use private insurance providers, and there is no reason for them to stop asking those questions. The affordable care act has nothing to do with the fact that they are being asked. Smokers who have already developed conditions related to their tobacco use will benefit from the law, as they can no longer be excluded from coverage for pre-existing conditions.

To start with, the legal concept of "discrimination" refers to classes of persons, not types of behaviors. If you paid any attention at all to this issue over the last four years you would know that the ACA was vigorously debated for months in Congress and that Consitutional challenges were made and decided by the Supreme Court of the United States. Moreover, the questions you propose are unworkable: there are studies that say that a glass of wine once in a while has beneficial effects, but your proposal covers any consumption of alcohol. The phrase "abuse drugs" is impossibly vague and no one who actually does so would answer it honestly. Finally, if questions were to get into behavior that could have adverse health effects, there would be no end to it.