Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1156
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1200 on: November 08, 2021, 11:23:23 AM »
Victory in court!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59194421

As a temporary injunction by a  judge who apparently didn't see that this has already been settled over 100 years ago.

In 1905 the Supreme Court ruled that a state can mandate a vaccine for the benefit of public health even if it interfered with individual rights. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905))
This, naturally, extends to the federal government, whose job it is to ensure "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".  Guess what vaccines fall under?
As usual, you have no clue concerning this issue.

At question in front of the Supreme Court was the issue of state law, not a mandate.

This decision doesn't extend to unlawful mandates.

Try again.

Neither do you, it seems.
The conclusion was that the state can impose mandates for public safety even if they infringe on individual rights.
Jesus...The conclusion was that STATE LAWS, not MANDATES, could be enforced.

"Justice John Marshall Harlan delivered the decision for a 7–2 majority that the Massachusetts law..." did not violate the 14th Amendment.

Kindly point out in the decision anything referencing mandates, if you're so cocksure.

"Mandate are quickly implemented to face a specific situation, limited in time. A law is a long-term rule, voted by the elected representatives, and that often take more time to be created. Both are enforceable by the police, but they respond to different situations."

"A mandate is defined as “the authority given to an elected group of people, such as a government, to perform an action or govern a country” (Cambridge Dictionary)...While they might not be laws, a mandate is still legally enforceable. In fact, they will often have the same effect as bills that have passed into law...Additionally, mandates can be as widespread."
https://alldifferences.com/difference-between-mandate-and-law/

Seems that mandates and laws are interchangeable and are differentiated more in terms of effect duration, temporary versus permanent.
A piece of trash source written by some hipster doofus isn't going to carry any water here.

Mandates and laws are not interchangeable in the least.

And the Supreme Court passed its ruling based on a state law, not a mandate.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2394
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1201 on: November 08, 2021, 06:11:40 PM »
Victory in court!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59194421

As a temporary injunction by a  judge who apparently didn't see that this has already been settled over 100 years ago.

In 1905 the Supreme Court ruled that a state can mandate a vaccine for the benefit of public health even if it interfered with individual rights. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905))
This, naturally, extends to the federal government, whose job it is to ensure "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".  Guess what vaccines fall under?
As usual, you have no clue concerning this issue.

At question in front of the Supreme Court was the issue of state law, not a mandate.

This decision doesn't extend to unlawful mandates.

Try again.

Neither do you, it seems.
The conclusion was that the state can impose mandates for public safety even if they infringe on individual rights.
Jesus...The conclusion was that STATE LAWS, not MANDATES, could be enforced.

"Justice John Marshall Harlan delivered the decision for a 7–2 majority that the Massachusetts law..." did not violate the 14th Amendment.

Kindly point out in the decision anything referencing mandates, if you're so cocksure.

"Mandate are quickly implemented to face a specific situation, limited in time. A law is a long-term rule, voted by the elected representatives, and that often take more time to be created. Both are enforceable by the police, but they respond to different situations."

"A mandate is defined as “the authority given to an elected group of people, such as a government, to perform an action or govern a country” (Cambridge Dictionary)...While they might not be laws, a mandate is still legally enforceable. In fact, they will often have the same effect as bills that have passed into law...Additionally, mandates can be as widespread."
https://alldifferences.com/difference-between-mandate-and-law/

Seems that mandates and laws are interchangeable and are differentiated more in terms of effect duration, temporary versus permanent.
A piece of trash source written by some hipster doofus isn't going to carry any water here.

Mandates and laws are not interchangeable in the least.

And the Supreme Court passed its ruling based on a state law, not a mandate.

A law and a mandate have the same power to be enforced. The only difference is how it came to be.
A law is passed by the senate and the house of representatives and signed by the governor. A mandate is made by the governor, with the power given to them by the legislature in a state of emergency.

And who was that prestigious doctor you were referring to?

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1156
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1202 on: November 09, 2021, 11:19:42 AM »
Victory in court!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59194421

As a temporary injunction by a  judge who apparently didn't see that this has already been settled over 100 years ago.

In 1905 the Supreme Court ruled that a state can mandate a vaccine for the benefit of public health even if it interfered with individual rights. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905))
This, naturally, extends to the federal government, whose job it is to ensure "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".  Guess what vaccines fall under?
As usual, you have no clue concerning this issue.

At question in front of the Supreme Court was the issue of state law, not a mandate.

This decision doesn't extend to unlawful mandates.

Try again.

Neither do you, it seems.
The conclusion was that the state can impose mandates for public safety even if they infringe on individual rights.
Jesus...The conclusion was that STATE LAWS, not MANDATES, could be enforced.

"Justice John Marshall Harlan delivered the decision for a 7–2 majority that the Massachusetts law..." did not violate the 14th Amendment.

Kindly point out in the decision anything referencing mandates, if you're so cocksure.

"Mandate are quickly implemented to face a specific situation, limited in time. A law is a long-term rule, voted by the elected representatives, and that often take more time to be created. Both are enforceable by the police, but they respond to different situations."

"A mandate is defined as “the authority given to an elected group of people, such as a government, to perform an action or govern a country” (Cambridge Dictionary)...While they might not be laws, a mandate is still legally enforceable. In fact, they will often have the same effect as bills that have passed into law...Additionally, mandates can be as widespread."
https://alldifferences.com/difference-between-mandate-and-law/

Seems that mandates and laws are interchangeable and are differentiated more in terms of effect duration, temporary versus permanent.
A piece of trash source written by some hipster doofus isn't going to carry any water here.

Mandates and laws are not interchangeable in the least.

And the Supreme Court passed its ruling based on a state law, not a mandate.

A law and a mandate have the same power to be enforced. The only difference is how it came to be.
A law is passed by the senate and the house of representatives and signed by the governor. A mandate is made by the governor, with the power given to them by the legislature in a state of emergency.

And who was that prestigious doctor you were referring to?
If they did, then the legislative part would be skipped and the mandate would be enacted as law, and police chiefs and sheriffs wouldn't issue statements about how the mandates will not be enforced.

Stop blubbering about crap you have no clue about.

The prestigious doctor certainly isn't you.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2394
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1203 on: November 09, 2021, 10:00:06 PM »
Victory in court!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-59194421

As a temporary injunction by a  judge who apparently didn't see that this has already been settled over 100 years ago.

In 1905 the Supreme Court ruled that a state can mandate a vaccine for the benefit of public health even if it interfered with individual rights. (Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905))
This, naturally, extends to the federal government, whose job it is to ensure "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".  Guess what vaccines fall under?
As usual, you have no clue concerning this issue.

At question in front of the Supreme Court was the issue of state law, not a mandate.

This decision doesn't extend to unlawful mandates.

Try again.

Neither do you, it seems.
The conclusion was that the state can impose mandates for public safety even if they infringe on individual rights.
Jesus...The conclusion was that STATE LAWS, not MANDATES, could be enforced.

"Justice John Marshall Harlan delivered the decision for a 7–2 majority that the Massachusetts law..." did not violate the 14th Amendment.

Kindly point out in the decision anything referencing mandates, if you're so cocksure.

"Mandate are quickly implemented to face a specific situation, limited in time. A law is a long-term rule, voted by the elected representatives, and that often take more time to be created. Both are enforceable by the police, but they respond to different situations."

"A mandate is defined as “the authority given to an elected group of people, such as a government, to perform an action or govern a country” (Cambridge Dictionary)...While they might not be laws, a mandate is still legally enforceable. In fact, they will often have the same effect as bills that have passed into law...Additionally, mandates can be as widespread."
https://alldifferences.com/difference-between-mandate-and-law/

Seems that mandates and laws are interchangeable and are differentiated more in terms of effect duration, temporary versus permanent.
A piece of trash source written by some hipster doofus isn't going to carry any water here.

Mandates and laws are not interchangeable in the least.

And the Supreme Court passed its ruling based on a state law, not a mandate.

A law and a mandate have the same power to be enforced. The only difference is how it came to be.
A law is passed by the senate and the house of representatives and signed by the governor. A mandate is made by the governor, with the power given to them by the legislature in a state of emergency.

And who was that prestigious doctor you were referring to?
If they did, then the legislative part would be skipped and the mandate would be enacted as law, and police chiefs and sheriffs wouldn't issue statements about how the mandates will not be enforced.

A mandate is made by the governor, with the power given to them by the legislature in a state of emergency. When the emergency is over, the mandate goes away. With a law, it stays on the books until it is legislatively/voter repealed. The difference is duration, temp versus permanent, as shown to you before. I'm not sure why you are having such a hard time understanding something so simple.

And I guess there has never been an instance where a Sheriff refused to uphold a law?

Last fall, voters in Washington state approved a package of firearms restrictions, generally called I-1639. It raises the minimum age for buying semi-automatic rifles, tightens background checks and makes it a crime to fail to store a gun safely, if the gun ends up in the wrong hands.

The restrictions have raised the ire of some county sheriffs.

My plan is not to enforce it,” says Klickitat County Sheriff Bob Songer.

https://wamu.org/story/19/02/21/when-sheriffs-wont-enforce-the-law/

What a woefully ignorant and pitiful argument.

The prestigious doctor certainly isn't you.

So you lied about a "prestigious doctor" being cited. Got it.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1156
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1204 on: November 09, 2021, 10:41:28 PM »
So, you finally understand mandates are not law.

Good.

And yes, no one has ever credited you or cited your writing as you are not a prestigious doctor or even a run of the mill lawyer.

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2394
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1205 on: November 10, 2021, 12:44:28 AM »
So, you finally understand mandates are not law.

Good.

I never said mandates and laws are the same thing. I exhaustively explained and showed how they have the same impact and are both enforceable. One is temporary and one is permanent (until repealed), but they both carry the same weight. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

What's even more hilarious is your argument that "and police chiefs and sheriffs wouldn't issue statements about how the mandates will not be enforced." Laughably, perhaps blissfully, ignorant.

And yes, no one has ever credited you or cited your writing as you are not a prestigious doctor or even a run of the mill lawyer.

And yep, understood - You never had a prestigious doctor to point to even though you said you did. Good work on completely making things up.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1156
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1206 on: November 10, 2021, 07:41:16 AM »
So, you finally understand mandates are not law.

Good.

I never said mandates and laws are the same thing. I exhaustively explained and showed how they have the same impact and are both enforceable. One is temporary and one is permanent (until repealed), but they both carry the same weight. Why is this so hard for you to understand?

What's even more hilarious is your argument that "and police chiefs and sheriffs wouldn't issue statements about how the mandates will not be enforced." Laughably, perhaps blissfully, ignorant.

And yes, no one has ever credited you or cited your writing as you are not a prestigious doctor or even a run of the mill lawyer.

And yep, understood - You never had a prestigious doctor to point to even though you said you did. Good work on completely making things up.
The federal court judge knows better.

I know you are terribly distressed over this, but too bad.

*

Online Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8697
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1207 on: November 10, 2021, 11:49:17 AM »
The 5th circuit is known for having an activist bent and I’ve seen a few lawyers comment that the rationale for the decision wasn’t very rational. It seems like it could go either way on appeal.
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Offline Action80

  • *
  • Posts: 1156
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1208 on: November 10, 2021, 01:18:18 PM »
The 5th circuit is known for having an activist bent and I’ve seen a few lawyers comment that the rationale for the decision wasn’t very rational. It seems like it could go either way on appeal.
Pro-fascist lawyers labeling things as "... activist tendencies of courts," when things don't go their way is unsurprising.

Further, the 5th circuit merely cited officials at OSHA in justifying the reason for the decision.

OSHA admitted it cannot justify the mandate based on the science.
« Last Edit: November 10, 2021, 01:32:02 PM by Action80 »

*

Offline xasop

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8091
  • Professional computer somebody
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1209 on: November 13, 2021, 02:34:31 AM »
Latvia is banning lawmakers from taking their seats unless they get vaccinated.

Latvian MPs who have not been vaccinated or recovered from COVID-19 will have their pay suspended and no longer be able to take part in parliamentary votes.

MPs approved the measure in a vote on Friday with 62 votes in favour in the 100-seat parliament.

"From November 15, an MP will be entitled to participate in the work of the Saeima [Latvia's Parliament] only if he or she has presented an interoperable COVID-19 certificate confirming the fact of vaccination or illness," the statement from the parliament press office states.

"The payment of a monthly salary and compensation will be suspended for a Saeima MP who will not be entitled to participate in the work of the parliament," it adds.

I'm not sure how I feel about this one. Latvia does have a very low vaccination rate, so some measures are clearly necessary, but deciding who can participate in the political process based on how they lean on a politically charged issue is not great for democracy, to say the least.
when you try to mock anyone while also running the flat earth society. Lol

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9102
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1210 on: November 15, 2021, 05:33:12 PM »
lol @ anyone who thought that they were, or ever would be, fully vaxxed


*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2394
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1211 on: November 15, 2021, 07:39:10 PM »
lol @ anyone who thought that they were, or ever would be, fully vaxxed



I guess I'm fully vaxxed now. Cool.

Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1212 on: November 15, 2021, 07:57:40 PM »
lol @ anyone who thought that they were, or ever would be, fully vaxxed



What's wrong with the notion of booster shots?

Are you fully vaxxed against Tetanus? Whooping cough? Right after your jab for a number of years you can feel confident that you wouldn't get deathly ill but if your last dose was 10 years ago you might need to worry. Same with thus corona virus. Immunity wanes. Right after your first 2 doses you can be confident but leave it too long and you're not in a good place immunity wise. It's how your immune system works. How can you be so old, but be so clueless?

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 9102
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1213 on: November 15, 2021, 11:00:06 PM »
What's wrong with the notion of booster shots?

Are you fully vaxxed against Tetanus? Whooping cough? Right after your jab for a number of years you can feel confident that you wouldn't get deathly ill but if your last dose was 10 years ago you might need to worry. Same with thus corona virus. Immunity wanes. Right after your first 2 doses you can be confident but leave it too long and you're not in a good place immunity wise. It's how your immune system works. How can you be so old, but be so clueless?

Actually I didn't say anything about the insufficiencies of any other vaccine. If you thought that you would be fully vaccinated from other vaccines you are also a dummie.

I am pointing out that many people thought that they would be fully vaxxed from their shots when in reality they would need to take boosters for the rest of their lives. We can see that you were likely one of these people, considering how triggered you were at that post.
« Last Edit: November 15, 2021, 11:05:57 PM by Tom Bishop »

*

Offline stack

  • *
  • Posts: 2394
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1214 on: November 15, 2021, 11:17:05 PM »
What's wrong with the notion of booster shots?

Are you fully vaxxed against Tetanus? Whooping cough? Right after your jab for a number of years you can feel confident that you wouldn't get deathly ill but if your last dose was 10 years ago you might need to worry. Same with thus corona virus. Immunity wanes. Right after your first 2 doses you can be confident but leave it too long and you're not in a good place immunity wise. It's how your immune system works. How can you be so old, but be so clueless?

Actually I didn't say anything about the insufficiencies of any other vaccine. If you thought that you would be fully vaccinated from other vaccines you are also a dummie.

I am pointing out that many people thought that they would be fully vaxxed from their shots when in reality they would need to take boosters for the rest of their lives. We can see that you were likely one of these people, considering how triggered you were at that post.

Same with the Flu shot I imagine.

Doesn't really change the equation of once you're fully vaxxed you have a decidedly less likely chance of ending up in the hospital or dead than if no vaxx at all.

*

Online Rama Set

  • *
  • Posts: 8697
  • Round and round...
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1215 on: November 15, 2021, 11:25:40 PM »
What's wrong with the notion of booster shots?

Are you fully vaxxed against Tetanus? Whooping cough? Right after your jab for a number of years you can feel confident that you wouldn't get deathly ill but if your last dose was 10 years ago you might need to worry. Same with thus corona virus. Immunity wanes. Right after your first 2 doses you can be confident but leave it too long and you're not in a good place immunity wise. It's how your immune system works. How can you be so old, but be so clueless?

Actually I didn't say anything about the insufficiencies of any other vaccine. If you thought that you would be fully vaccinated from other vaccines you are also a dummie.

I am pointing out that many people thought that they would be fully vaxxed from their shots when in reality they would need to take boosters for the rest of their lives. We can see that you were likely one of these people, considering how triggered you were at that post.

How many people thought they would be “fully vaxxed” after the two doses?
Th*rk is the worst person on this website.

Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1216 on: November 16, 2021, 03:17:33 AM »
I always figured this would never be a one and done deal. I don't give an F getting a shot every 6 months if that's the case. No different to your influenza shot and that isn't as deadly or could cause permanent damage so easily

How's your diet Tom? Do you eat processed foods? Added sugars? Sweeteners? Preservatives? Have you ever smoked? Drank a little too much? Ever gone outside and smelled the pollution of traffic?

People inhale or ingest that shit every day. And any one of those is orders of magnitude worse than a vaccine dose. At least the vaccine dose comes with the pay-off that it could save your life.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6540
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1217 on: November 21, 2021, 11:14:56 AM »
https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/11/the-mass-exodus-of-americas-health-care-workers/620713/?utm_source=pocket-newtab

This is a really good article.
It talks about how many medical professionals are leaving in droves and why.  Its about hospitals choosing 'travel nurses' for higher pay vs staff nurses at a good pay and benefits.

Its about the struggle of seeing surges of COVID then surges of non-covid care, then surges of covid again.
Its about unvaccinated patients attacking the very people trying to keep them alive.

And its about being powerless as you watch thousands die, the bodies piling up in trucks because they ran out of body bags.   Of watching coworkers die because their hospital didn't provide them with proper equipment.  Of seeing people with long term effects from COVID because they chose to get together for a family dinner.
All of this even after the vaccine became available. 



Read it.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1218 on: November 28, 2021, 04:11:25 PM »
...I am pointing out that many people thought that they would be fully vaxxed from their shots when in reality they would need to take boosters for the rest of their lives. We can see that you were likely one of these people, considering how triggered you were at that post.

I thought we only needed one booster after our "original" two shots?   Or possibly others if
or when Coronavirus mutated over time.  I haven't seen it reported that we'd need boosters
for the "rest of our lives".

Links please.

*

Offline Lord Dave

  • *
  • Posts: 6540
  • Grumpy old man.
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« Reply #1219 on: November 28, 2021, 06:40:48 PM »
...I am pointing out that many people thought that they would be fully vaxxed from their shots when in reality they would need to take boosters for the rest of their lives. We can see that you were likely one of these people, considering how triggered you were at that post.

I thought we only needed one booster after our "original" two shots?   Or possibly others if
or when Coronavirus mutated over time.  I haven't seen it reported that we'd need boosters
for the "rest of our lives".

Links please.
Honestly, with the new Omnicron varient, we probably will.
Becaues of people like Tom, this won't go away.  Ever.  So we'll need to keep getting booster shots for the newest strain.
If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance. Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.