This guy is good.unless you’re willing to erect fat-camp gulags, dose klonopin in the water of minority neighborhoods, and deny medical care to diabetics, be very careful just what vampire you invite into your home here.
because it’s easy to let them in.
getting them out is another matter.
are you ready for another foray into eugenics? culls of groups and gene signatures that show increased risk for anti-social behavior? because the rulings and prerogatives invoked last night are the same ones these groups used to suggest doing so not so very long ago.
are you ready for lists of political enemies and outgroup roundups because they “did not heed our demands”?
do you really want a system where coercive force is wielded upon people for what they MIGHT do (like spread disease or commit murder or need a triple bypass) because distant demagogues claim it serves the common good?
is statistical likelihood a good guide to punishable culpability and loss of liberty?
because that’s the fire you’re playing with.
I've just read an update on an italian site on the rules to enter the US as an Italian. listen to this:
-You still can't go to the U.S. if you have been in Italy during the prior 14 days, same rule as May 2020
There are some exceptions
Between those exceptions:
-if you are vaccinated you have to take a PCR test in the previous 72 hrs before the flight, and then take another test between 3 to 5 days after you arrive. This applies for anyone above 2 years old. 2 years old.
-if you are not vaccinated you do the same thing but if your second test comes back negative you have to isolate for "only" 7 days starting from the day you enter the country.
If it's positive, for 10 days. If you take no test you automatically have to isolate for 10 days.
Can anyone give me any, ANY, scientific explanation for this?
Here's the original report for those that would like to see more than the data picked out here.
https://assets.publishing.service.go..._-_week_36.pdf
I don't know what to believe. But that wasn't my point. My point was that he would need to have a discussion, with some real 'publicity' vs a blog post to prove he's right and 'they' are wrong.
There may be, what, 3000 people who will read that post. That won't make a difference. And if there's 30k people that read it, it won't make a difference.
Need difference makers. I'm not one of them. Right now, he's not either, even though he's right. Sucks, but our side is losing, and losing big.
The problem here is that these points do not reflect settled law regarding vaccine mandates. Vaccine mandates regarding the smallpox vaccine were upheld by the Supreme Court in 1905 as cited by "Jacobson v. Massachusetts" which ruled that you don't have the freedom to place other people at risk. This ruling was later upheld regarding vaccine mandates for children in school and was referred to as settled law. Recently the Supreme Court refused to hear a case against Indiana University's required vaccine mandate, further cementing this as settled law.
Other peoples obesity and diabetes does not place someone else at risk as these are not communicable diseases so these aren't apt comparisons. The whole minorities and gunshot argument is simply too ridiculous to comment on. But I will say it is also strange to say that gun control doesn't work when there have been no meaningful gun control restrictions that have been placed into law, but that is an entirely different discussion.
If you want to make the case that certain groups should pay more for health insurance for poor lifestyle choices (smoking, obesity, etc), I'm all for it. Why should I pay more for health insurance because (the proverbial) you wanted to smoke for 50 years. I personally think the same should be said for those who refuse to be vaccinated for COVID. I can guarantee that insurance companies currently have actuaries looking into this and I certainly would prefer those who are unvaccinated to pay more for their insurance. Why should I pay for your poor choice? If you work for the federal government (or you are contracted by the federal government) and you don't want to get your required vaccine, you have the option to find a new job. Remember, you aren't being fired, but you quit based upon your beliefs. Same goes for any private sector employer. Why should they risk their employees being absent from the office, factory, etc. because people didn't want to get their vaccine. It will cost them money and drag down the economy if large portions of their employees are out sick. I am betting that once people are shown consequences for their choices things will change. But if people are fine with having their employment opportunities limited and paying higher care premiums so they don't have to get the vaccine that is perfectly fine with me.