Vaccine or not?

You must have started drinking early today.

All I said that was if something that can be taken it away, it's a privilege. You naively believe that Constitutional Rights are irrevocable, this must be quite embarrassing to publicly have to admit you weren't aware of what most kids learn in grade school.

Take a few minutes and bone up on your civics.

3-Minute Civics: Can my constitutional rights be limited?
If I commit a felony or something like that get back with me. Other than that your stupid deflection from your initial stupid post is acknowledged
 
I'm going to guess that if you survey all the doctor/nurse patient conversations regarding the vaccine today, the question "Is this vaccine shielded by the law from liability?" came up less than 1% of the time.

Almost equivalent to Covid deaths.
 
If I commit a felony or something like that get back with me. Other than that your stupid deflection from your initial stupid post is acknowledged

You missed - own it and move on.

You know it too. Your tell is when you start hurling "stupid" or ther insults around like an insolent child that's been scolded.

It's no ones fault but your own that you didn't realize constitutional rights weren't absolute, otherwise you wouldn't have tried to assert that losing gun ownership "rights" were some sort of miscarriage or violation of the Constitution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostsheep
You've moved the goal post. We're talking about things that can legally be taken from you, you're delving into an argument that's not being had.

I think however, it could be argued that life is a privilege in its strictest sense. Cause it can damn sure be taken from you...
Legally you usually have to be proven guilty or get a court order to have those rights restricted. Neither is happening here.
 
Legally you usually have to be proven guilty or get a court order to have those rights restricted. Neither is happening here.

But flying on a plane isn't a protected "right" requiring a court order or guilty sentence to revoke, otherwise I'd agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bamawriter
This has been the case since 1988, it's not as if suddenly in September of 2019 pharma companies were given immunity for injecting nano-bots into the population for mind control.

Thanks for mentioning that. I could have sworn there was liability protection for vaccine manufacturers that were put in place by Reagan. Every time someone's mentioned the whole "protected from liability" argument I would think about going to look it up, but then I'd move on and forget.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
  • Like
Reactions: bamawriter
You missed - own it and move on.

You know it too. Your tell is when you start hurling "stupid" or ther insults around like an insolent child that's been scolded.

It's no ones fault but your own that you didn't realize constitutional rights weren't absolute, otherwise you wouldn't have tried to assert that losing gun ownership "rights" were some sort of miscarriage or violation of the Constitution.
Oh stop. You used a stupid, yes stupid, case to justify your statement on how rights can be limited based on the context of the discussion we were having. Run along now.

Edit: and thanks for the admission in this little nugget to louder.

But flying on a plane isn't a protected "right" requiring a court order or guilty sentence to revoke, otherwise I'd agree.
 
You've moved the goal post. We're talking about things that can legally be taken from you, you're delving into an argument that's not being had.

I think however, it could be argued that life is a privilege in its strictest sense. Cause it can damn sure be taken from you...
No. That means another Individual(s) has infringed on your right it doesn’t downgrade it to a damn privilege FFS
 
But flying on a plane isn't a protected "right" requiring a court order or guilty sentence to revoke, otherwise I'd agree.
Depends on who is denying you.

A private business should be able to deny whomever. some federal laws say they cant discriminate based on certain factors. But beyond those you are right.

The fed government no fly list absolutely takes some court room/judge involvement.

Where it gets fuzzy for me is when the federal government starts "colluding", maybe not the right term, to get the private businesses to do the bans the feds cant mandate.
 
Depends on who is denying you.

A private business should be able to deny whomever. some federal laws say they cant discriminate based on certain factors. But beyond those you are right.

The fed government no fly list absolutely takes some court room/judge involvement.

Where it gets fuzzy for me is when the federal government starts "colluding", maybe not the right term, to get the private businesses to do the bans the feds cant mandate.
The bolded is where the ultimate power is though. The Feds can lean on interstate commerce oversight to coerce any airline to do whatever they want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
Oh stop. You used a stupid, yes stupid, case to justify your statement on how rights can be limited based on the context of the discussion we were having. Run along now.

Edit: and thanks for the admission in this little nugget to louder.

Maybe you think it was stupid because you didn't understand it.

Again, I think you constantly resorting to that term says more about you than it does about anyone else you hurl it at.

Use big boy words, ad hominems are the last bastion of a failed argument.

You missed and are looking to save face by projecting your own insecurities, not a great look man.
 
No. That means another Individual(s) has infringed on your right it doesn’t downgrade it to a damn privilege FFS

A death sentence imposed by a court of law says that a life can be forfeited.

Like I said - a right to life or any other right, isn't absolute.
 
Maybe you think it was stupid because you didn't understand it.

Again, I think you constantly resorting to that term says more about you than it does about anyone else you hurl it at.

Use big boy words, ad hominems are the last bastion of a failed argument.

You missed and are looking to save face by projecting your own insecurities, not a great look man.
I’m calling it stupid because it was stupid. That’s it you deflected to limited rights caused by unlawful activity which is in no way related to the initial discussion.

That’s it.
 
I’m calling it stupid because it was stupid. That’s it you deflected to limited rights caused by unlawful activity which is in now way related to the initial discussion.

That’s it.

I'm OK with you thinking it was "stupid" as long as you're OK with me believing you're projecting your own insecurities as a way to not look stupid.

You didn't understand the argument and stepped on your d*ck. It happens man, no need to keep reliving it.
 
Just got the numbers back from the my University. 80% fully vaccinated, 20% with medical, moral, or religious objection registered, less than 50 people total who haven't yet turned in their forms.

The pre-term withdrawal rate is at the same amount as before the pandemic, so guidelines aren't running anyone off. The University president came by today's faculty meeting to remind us to be inclusive of everyone regardless of vax status and to notify student conduct if anyone is being an agitator in either direction during instructional time.

Nice even-handed approach.
 

VN Store



Back
Top