-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
COVID-19
- Thread starter Treetop Flyer
- Start date
It is likely Jacobson v Massachusetts will be a part of any legal proceedings. It certainly did leave us with some good sound bites. But I didn't see in the article some very key points that will limit the weight of this case in todays legal debate. This was a the Commonwealth of Massachusetts ordering the vaccinations. Not the Feds. And it wasn't an executive order. I don't think you can ignore the relative necessity as a public health matter containing the hyper deadly Small Pox in 1904 vs the vastly lower fatality rate in covid cases. The courts always takes into account the down side when restricting liberties.An interesting article...
The Surprisingly Strong Supreme Court Precedent Supporting Vaccine Mandates
In 1905, the high court made a fateful ruling with eerie parallels to today: One person’s liberty can’t trump everyone else’s.www.politico.com
The year was 1904, and when his politically charged legal challenge to the $5 fine for failing to get vaccinated made its way to the Supreme Court, the justices had a surprise for Rev. Jacobson. One man’s liberty, they declared in a 7-2 ruling handed down the following February, cannot deprive his neighbors of their own liberty — in this case by allowing the spread of disease. Jacobson, they ruled, must abide by the order of the Cambridge board of health or pay the penalty.
“There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good,” read the majority opinion. “On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.”
How many of them caught it at a football game? I’m shocked that you’re in support of the super spreader events now.
Sorry for the doublepost but some Mod felt the need to delete it on the CFB thread.
Surprised we haven’t seen an order or “regulation” to force vax/testing on sports venues. We can’t have people being conspicuously carefree and unscathed by scaryvirus.
Maybe the 2nd or 3rd largest university in the country has refused to obey the state governor's order prohibiting mask mandates at the state universities. So masks are required on campus. Saw on TV last night this university play in a stadium full of maskless students.
So sitting at a table in the library by myself is more dangerous than being packed in like sardines with dozens of maskless, yelling, cheering people?
That is good to hear. No one thought ventilation was a major consideration back when they closed parks and beaches, wrapped crime scene tape around picnic tables, and playground equipment and banned outdoor dining and canceled sporting events?
At the start of the pandemic, in an effort to keep his team on the field, my son a brand new engineer and HS lacrosse coach, took CDC data , resperation science and typical weather to prove the kids were safe practicing on an outdoor field. The big shot government scientists could not do that? Now ventilation is king. Glad they caught up with a twenty something undergrad educated aeronautical engineer.
Aussie Karen. Who knew.
I'm not the one making wild accusations that it is man-made, isn't the burden on the person making the accusation?
As for the 'proof', after looking at the virus the folks I know were expressing an informed professional judgement which may not be the proof you want but it is far better than trafficking in conspiracy theories.
Not really how things work, but whatever floats your boat.
Very true, and still a realistic possibility for the origin on the virus but that is not what I was arguing against, it was the unfounded accusation that it was man-made/created in a lab. BIG difference.
