Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?maybe. maybe people are pretty shallow. but if people have legitimate questions about what we're being told vs. seeing, calling them shallow for asking is simply another form of shaming. you don't believe it, i will call you names.Is anyone getting tired of this rightwing whine fest about "shut downs" and "constitutional rights"?
The shut down sucks, but the whining (and I'm not talking about job loss, a valid complaint) but the whining about not being able to get together in large groups is pretty shallow.
Quarantine is nothing new. Restricting large gatherings is during an epidemic is nothing new. But this level of whining is.
Anyone over 70 probably remembers quarantine during the polio outbreaks...
“But absolutely, when coronavirus hit, the first thing I thought of were those summers in the 1940s, how you couldn’t go to pools, you couldn’t go to the movies, you just stayed home,” says Gray, who as a child lived in Kansas City. “When I was in high school, a wonderful young man got polio. It was just so terrifying for us.”
and while a quarantine may be nothing new, i certainly have never seen an entire city do it; much less most of the world. to think people will sit and behave for an indefinite undefined period of time and not question why is simply unreasonable.
I think a certain amount of angst is understandable, and I think a LOT of angst about jobs, economy etc is very understandable. But I also think about how people underwent the privations, rationing and inconveniences brought on by WW2, with a sense of community and patriotism. But what I'm seeing is essentially people bitching about inconvenience (and, no, I don't like this either). And I guess the irony is, the people whining are the same people who bitch about others' "lack of patriotism" for not supporting certain policies or making choices based on "convenience.
It's going to end. This temporary suspension of large gatherings is exactly that - temporary. So...I guess my thought is suck it up and make it work knowing it is temporary. I'm more worried about jobs for so many people than I am about not being able to go to a physical church or congregate in crowds. My rights are not being infringed upon if it means temporary measures that preserve lives.
That kind of temporary?
So what?Can you show me (and the court) on this anatomically correct doll where my presence in a public gathering directly resulted in harm coming to you?1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?
I think the courts have consistently said...no.
No?
I didn't think so.
You are responsible for you.
hmmm...perhaps you can take your anatomically correct doll to Idaho where their refusal to adhere to social distancing led to a new hotspot.
You're avoiding the point and I think you're doing so deliberately.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?maybe. maybe people are pretty shallow. but if people have legitimate questions about what we're being told vs. seeing, calling them shallow for asking is simply another form of shaming. you don't believe it, i will call you names.Is anyone getting tired of this rightwing whine fest about "shut downs" and "constitutional rights"?
The shut down sucks, but the whining (and I'm not talking about job loss, a valid complaint) but the whining about not being able to get together in large groups is pretty shallow.
Quarantine is nothing new. Restricting large gatherings is during an epidemic is nothing new. But this level of whining is.
Anyone over 70 probably remembers quarantine during the polio outbreaks...
“But absolutely, when coronavirus hit, the first thing I thought of were those summers in the 1940s, how you couldn’t go to pools, you couldn’t go to the movies, you just stayed home,” says Gray, who as a child lived in Kansas City. “When I was in high school, a wonderful young man got polio. It was just so terrifying for us.”
and while a quarantine may be nothing new, i certainly have never seen an entire city do it; much less most of the world. to think people will sit and behave for an indefinite undefined period of time and not question why is simply unreasonable.
I think a certain amount of angst is understandable, and I think a LOT of angst about jobs, economy etc is very understandable. But I also think about how people underwent the privations, rationing and inconveniences brought on by WW2, with a sense of community and patriotism. But what I'm seeing is essentially people bitching about inconvenience (and, no, I don't like this either). And I guess the irony is, the people whining are the same people who bitch about others' "lack of patriotism" for not supporting certain policies or making choices based on "convenience.
It's going to end. This temporary suspension of large gatherings is exactly that - temporary. So...I guess my thought is suck it up and make it work knowing it is temporary. I'm more worried about jobs for so many people than I am about not being able to go to a physical church or congregate in crowds. My rights are not being infringed upon if it means temporary measures that preserve lives.
That kind of temporary?
Freedom works both ways.hmmm...perhaps you can take your anatomically correct doll to Idaho where their refusal to adhere to social distancing led to a new hotspot.
That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).
Not at all. No right is unrestricted.You're avoiding the point and I think you're doing so deliberately.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?maybe. maybe people are pretty shallow. but if people have legitimate questions about what we're being told vs. seeing, calling them shallow for asking is simply another form of shaming. you don't believe it, i will call you names.Is anyone getting tired of this rightwing whine fest about "shut downs" and "constitutional rights"?
The shut down sucks, but the whining (and I'm not talking about job loss, a valid complaint) but the whining about not being able to get together in large groups is pretty shallow.
Quarantine is nothing new. Restricting large gatherings is during an epidemic is nothing new. But this level of whining is.
Anyone over 70 probably remembers quarantine during the polio outbreaks...
“But absolutely, when coronavirus hit, the first thing I thought of were those summers in the 1940s, how you couldn’t go to pools, you couldn’t go to the movies, you just stayed home,” says Gray, who as a child lived in Kansas City. “When I was in high school, a wonderful young man got polio. It was just so terrifying for us.”
and while a quarantine may be nothing new, i certainly have never seen an entire city do it; much less most of the world. to think people will sit and behave for an indefinite undefined period of time and not question why is simply unreasonable.
I think a certain amount of angst is understandable, and I think a LOT of angst about jobs, economy etc is very understandable. But I also think about how people underwent the privations, rationing and inconveniences brought on by WW2, with a sense of community and patriotism. But what I'm seeing is essentially people bitching about inconvenience (and, no, I don't like this either). And I guess the irony is, the people whining are the same people who bitch about others' "lack of patriotism" for not supporting certain policies or making choices based on "convenience.
It's going to end. This temporary suspension of large gatherings is exactly that - temporary. So...I guess my thought is suck it up and make it work knowing it is temporary. I'm more worried about jobs for so many people than I am about not being able to go to a physical church or congregate in crowds. My rights are not being infringed upon if it means temporary measures that preserve lives.
That kind of temporary?
I like how they claim our right to travel isn't being violated, as long as we waive our rights to refuse a search first.That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).
What are the consequences if I refuse to be frisked and molested?
That same type of bullshit argument was used to prevent gay marriage. There was nothing stopping gay people from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so their right to be married was not violated, RIGHT????
.
Yes. It is peaceable when those people meet FOR THE PURPOSE of worship, not to cause death.So you wanna go back to post 11 AGAIN? It was that good?
OK, I can run this as many times as it takes until it sinks in. Here, horse, this is called "water".
The BASIS of a hypothetical lynch mob (and I didn't say it was racial, did I) is irrelevant here just as the basis of the hypothetical congregation, but apparently you're saying that a lynch mob has the right to peaceably assemble then? Because in either case the outcome is death. The main difference is in the latter it's potentially many more deaths and they're indiscriminate, whereas the lynch mob has its specific target.So the question we're STILL down to is, whether an assembly that results in death as a direct consequence of that assembly, can be called "peaceable".
Do you get the difference, or do I need to further explain.
Your "lynch mob" argument falls right on its idiotic face because the intent of the people assembling is what matters, not the result.
"Intent" is irrelevant. There's nothing in the Bill of Rights about "intent", even in the original Greek. Except for that one bizarre phrase in the Second Amendment. When those people meet, REGARDLESS whether their purpose is worship, a Flaming Dickheads concert, a seminar at Fraud University, or anything else, they do so **KNOWING** that such assemblage ITSELF endangers the public health.
Have you never seen one of these?
Bullshit. If they believe they are all healthy, they do not believe they are endangering anyone.
Arguable, but still not the point being made..... you're ducking.Not at all. No right is unrestricted.You're avoiding the point and I think you're doing so deliberately.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?maybe. maybe people are pretty shallow. but if people have legitimate questions about what we're being told vs. seeing, calling them shallow for asking is simply another form of shaming. you don't believe it, i will call you names.Is anyone getting tired of this rightwing whine fest about "shut downs" and "constitutional rights"?
The shut down sucks, but the whining (and I'm not talking about job loss, a valid complaint) but the whining about not being able to get together in large groups is pretty shallow.
Quarantine is nothing new. Restricting large gatherings is during an epidemic is nothing new. But this level of whining is.
Anyone over 70 probably remembers quarantine during the polio outbreaks...
“But absolutely, when coronavirus hit, the first thing I thought of were those summers in the 1940s, how you couldn’t go to pools, you couldn’t go to the movies, you just stayed home,” says Gray, who as a child lived in Kansas City. “When I was in high school, a wonderful young man got polio. It was just so terrifying for us.”
and while a quarantine may be nothing new, i certainly have never seen an entire city do it; much less most of the world. to think people will sit and behave for an indefinite undefined period of time and not question why is simply unreasonable.
I think a certain amount of angst is understandable, and I think a LOT of angst about jobs, economy etc is very understandable. But I also think about how people underwent the privations, rationing and inconveniences brought on by WW2, with a sense of community and patriotism. But what I'm seeing is essentially people bitching about inconvenience (and, no, I don't like this either). And I guess the irony is, the people whining are the same people who bitch about others' "lack of patriotism" for not supporting certain policies or making choices based on "convenience.
It's going to end. This temporary suspension of large gatherings is exactly that - temporary. So...I guess my thought is suck it up and make it work knowing it is temporary. I'm more worried about jobs for so many people than I am about not being able to go to a physical church or congregate in crowds. My rights are not being infringed upon if it means temporary measures that preserve lives.
That kind of temporary?
Why can't we just LEAVE IT AT THAT and not give even MORE power to an already overpowered government?Anyone who attends the gathering does so at their own risk
In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?
I think the courts have consistently said...no.
.
In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.
How is one comparable to the other?That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.I don’t have a huge issue with that. Why do you? (Show us on your anatomically correct doll where TSA prevented you from traveling).
What are the consequences if I refuse to be frisked and molested?
That same type of bullshit argument was used to prevent gay marriage. There was nothing stopping gay people from marrying someone of the opposite sex, so their right to be married was not violated, RIGHT????
.
Perhaps if we had mandated paid sick leave that wouldn’t be necessary...In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?
I think the courts have consistently said...no.
.
In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.
Because why? I don't get it. Why?
Why can't we just LEAVE IT AT THAT and not give even MORE power to an already overpowered government?Anyone who attends the gathering does so at their own risk
.
I have noticed that I am waaaaay more liberal than those claiming to be "liberal."
Whenever there is any question, you err on the side of freedom.Perhaps if we had mandated paid sick leave that wouldn’t be necessary...In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?
I think the courts have consistently said...no.
.
In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.
Because why? I don't get it. Why?
I am not the one claiming to have answers. How do you balance public safety and individual rights?
By not infringing upon individual and Constitutional rights.Perhaps if we had mandated paid sick leave that wouldn’t be necessary...In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?
I think the courts have consistently said...no.
.
In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.
Because why? I don't get it. Why?
I am not the one claiming to have answers. How do you balance public safety and individual rights?
How will that happen if everyone else is social distancing and taking other precautions?Because this rationale completely ignores the fact that attendees who acquire it at the gathering will spread it to others who did not attend this gathering.
