Vaccine coercion/bribery

[bobzilla]

wow....just wow.

Apparently, it's been a busy, though not particularly productive, morning.

And here comes one of those good ones I mentioned earlier

 

[HoughMade]

Kirk:

The issue is mandated vaccination. Some of us have been vaccinated. Some not.

What most of us agree on is that the government should have no right to mandate vaccination in this specific situation. The data does not support it.

In my instance, I've had the full regimen and I support the position against mandatory vaccination.

I think most of us agree that government should not mandate the COVID vaccines.

...but saying that the "government should have no right to..." is fine, but the way the law is now, and has been since at least 1905 the state governments do have the authority to mandate vaccines. Should they exercise that authority? In my opinion, no. Could either legislation or state constitutional amendments take that authority away- sure. So if a government "should have no right..." There is a way to accomplish that. Use the law to take the authority away (governments don't really have rights, people do. They have authority). If someone claims the "do not have the authority", that's just not true as the law now stands. Opinions don't change that.

Now- the federal government- it has no authority to generally mandate a vaccine. In certain circumstances with certain people, it would have such authority, but again in my opinion, not through executive action except in the rarest of cases. Further, based upon what I know at this point, even with legislation, I do not believe the federal government has the authority to regulate the health behavior of wide swaths of the population, employees, students and teachers based upon a connection to federal authority that only involves receipt of federal money or workplace "safety".

Its kind of a complicated subject, but I hope we can all agree that regardless of what authority may exist, it should not be exercised so as to mandate COVID vaccines. I'm pretty sure that even Kirk said that.

 

[foszoe]

I think most of us agree that government should not mandate the COVID vaccines.

...but saying that the "government should have no right to..." is fine, but the way the law is now, and has been since at least 1905 the state governments do have the authority to mandate vaccines. Should they exercise that authority? In my opinion, no. Could either legislation or state constitutional amendments take that authority away- sure. So if a government "should have no right..." There is a way to accomplish that. Use the law to take the authority away (governments don't really have rights, people do. They have authority). If someone claims the "do not have the authority", that's just not true as the law now stands. Opinions don't change that.

Now- the federal government- it has no authority to generally mandate a vaccine. In certain circumstances with certain people, it would have such authority, but again in my opinion, not through executive action except in the rarest of cases. Further, based upon what I know at this point, even with legislation, I do not believe the federal government has the authority to regulate the health behavior of wide swaths of the population, employees, students and teachers based upon a connection to federal authority that only involves receipt of federal money or workplace "safety".

Its kind of a complicated subject, but I hope we can all agree that regardless of what authority may exist, it should not be exercised so as to mandate COVID vaccines. I'm pretty sure that even Kirk said that.

You had me at hello!

Many good points here

 

[buckwacker]

You tell me what part is going personal?

How do you define going personal?

For me, its when you talk about a person as a matter of being, not the person's actions. I didn't attribute anything to Bugs character, but rather to behavior.

Now when someone says another person is stupid, tells them to GFO, responding with a post that only discusses a person not the thread or a content of a post, that is a personal attack. Mostly my guidelines are:

Am I talking about the person or a behavior?
Am I posting solely to denigrate someone?
Am I looking for where someone could be right instead of wrong and using that to build on in a discussion?

I am perfect? no. Do I break my rules? sometimes.
Do I apologize? Yes.

Bug and I have gone back and forth a long time. That post had some sarcasm in it, sure! However, Bug does tend to ignore points in my posts. If I genuinely felt Bug was offended, then that wasn't the intent of the post.

I wasn't telling you, I was asking.

I think you've overstated my propensity for engaging in personal attacks because I might have stepped on your toes a time or two. Sometimes it seems like you're just trolling, and that generally earns a pointed, blunt response from me. Sometimes you take umbrage, sometimes you reel it in, switch to a more substantive conversation, and we continue on.

There's a topic or two from a poster or two that just earns that response from the get go, because they've proven they don't care about facts or reasoned discussion.

But generally, I try to treat others with the respect they appear treat me. It's the internet, and written words are not always terribly emotive, so perception might not always be reflective of feelings or intention.

 

[foszoe]

I wasn't telling you, I was asking.

I think you've overstated my propensity for engaging in personal attacks because I might have stepped on your toes a time or two. Sometimes it seems like you're just trolling, and that generally earns a pointed, blunt response from me. Sometimes you take umbrage, sometimes you reel it in, switch to a more substantive conversation, and we continue on.

There's a topic or two from a poster or two that just earns that response from the get go, because they've proven they don't care about facts or reasoned discussion.

But generally, I try to treat others with the respect they appear treat me. It's the internet, and written words are not always terribly emotive, so perception might not always be reflective of feelings or intention.

Sorry for saying telling it wasn't taken in the tone intended. I more meant how would you define a personal attack? I do tend to respond in kind. I just try not to go personal. Usually I just start to lean sarcastic sarcastic!

 

[drillsgt]

I think most of us agree that government should not mandate the COVID vaccines.

...but saying that the "government should have no right to..." is fine, but the way the law is now, and has been since at least 1905 the state governments do have the authority to mandate vaccines. Should they exercise that authority? In my opinion, no. Could either legislation or state constitutional amendments take that authority away- sure. So if a government "should have no right..." There is a way to accomplish that. Use the law to take the authority away (governments don't really have rights, people do. They have authority). If someone claims the "do not have the authority", that's just not true as the law now stands. Opinions don't change that.

Now- the federal government- it has no authority to generally mandate a vaccine. In certain circumstances with certain people, it would have such authority, but again in my opinion, not through executive action except in the rarest of cases. Further, based upon what I know at this point, even with legislation, I do not believe the federal government has the authority to regulate the health behavior of wide swaths of the population, employees, students and teachers based upon a connection to federal authority that only involves receipt of federal money or workplace "safety".

Its kind of a complicated subject, but I hope we can all agree that regardless of what authority may exist, it should not be exercised so as to mandate COVID vaccines. I'm pretty sure that even Kirk said that.

Could we tie the vaccine to acceptance of welfare benefits, disability, or unemployment? If people actually working are getting fired for it, why not level the playing field?

 

[buckwacker]

Sorry for saying telling it wasn't taken in the tone intended. I more meant how would you define a personal attack? I do tend to respond in kind. I just try not to go personal. Usually I just start to lean sarcastic sarcastic!

Personal attack? Caustic, derogatory comments regarding one's immutable attributes or worth.

I guess the accusation that I engaged in personal attacks was confusing when you stated your standards for defining them.

 

[rooster]

Could we tie the vaccine to acceptance of welfare benefits, disability, or unemployment? If people actually working are getting fired for it, why not level the playing field?

Can’t have standards for unemployment, no drug tests remember ?

 

[ditcherman]

Could we tie the vaccine to acceptance of welfare benefits, disability, or unemployment? If people actually working are getting fired for it, why not level the playing field?

Yea no.
Continue down that path.
Medicare, Medicaid, social security, banking privileges, access to credit, anything anything anything that to govt is tied to including any and all subsidies, tax credits, child support and visitation right, the privilege to drive….
Yea no.
Besides, they don’t want to punish “those people”, they’re already being rewarded. They want to punish the free thinkers, the producers, the go-getters.

 

[drillsgt]

Yea no.
Continue down that path.
Medicare, Medicaid, social security, banking privileges, access to credit, anything anything anything that to govt is tied to including any and all subsidies, tax credits, child support and visitation right, the privilege to drive….
Yea no.
Besides, they don’t want to punish “those people”, they’re already being rewarded. They want to punish the free thinkers, the producers, the go-getters.

True, I wouldn't want to go there either but strange that those categories have received no mention.

 

[ditcherman]

True, I wouldn't want to go there either but strange that those categories have received no mention.

Oh just wait. They wouldn’t want to let that cat out of the bag, yet. If they did that it would wake the people up.

 

[printcraft]

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2021-10-iceland-halts-moderna-jabs-heart-inflammation.html

 

[Hatin Since 87]

 

[Leo]

View attachment 162274

This boys and girls is a example of a male north American Madman. They mostly do nothing productive, but on occasion they act to harm others for no purpose at all. Instead of using direct physical altercations like the common North American slum thug, the Madmam sneaks around and introduces poisons into the herd that act slowly to damage the DNA of his victims. This is a very dangerous creature, even though he looks like he could be a friendly pet. The North American Madman should be captured and isolated from civilized society.

 

[daddyusmaximus]

So now, hospitals are denying you NON-RELATED life saving, medical treatment... if you don't take the stick.

 

[Ark]

So now, hospitals are denying you NON-RELATED life saving, medical treatment... if you don't take the stick.

Genocide starts with the easiest, most vulnerable people to kill. Usually the sick and disabled.

 

[daddyusmaximus]

Genocide starts with the easiest, most vulnerable people to kill. Usually the sick and disabled.

OR... it's an antidote.

They want a docile, compliant population. Those that give in... will live... albeit to be the slaves in the new world order.
The rest of us, will all be killed off in the next "accidental" new designer plague.



Damn, where's my tinfoil hat?

 

[Magyars]

 

[ditcherman]

View attachment 162541

Or just coming into focus…..

 

[yote hunter]

2019 pre planned & here is the proof !