Constitutional Right To Peacefully Assemble Latest 'Victim' of Govt COVID-19 Crackdown

[freyasman]

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

They have no choice?

Somebody is forcing them to get out in public and expose themselves to contamination?

.

Oh right. Because contaminated people have more right to freedom than vulnerable people, vulnerable people must curtail their freedom If they want to live. You made my argument.

SOME have greater rights to freedom. It is an inherently selfish mindset. The opposite would be a willingness for me (not vulnerable) to accept some temporary curtailment of my freedom in order to protect the more vulnerable among us Who still need to venture out to get groceries.

Oh bullshit.....

I must reduce myself so I am on par with the weakest and most frail?

Kiss my ass....

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

 

[freyasman]

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.”

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.

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.

You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?

That kind of temporary?

Where is that in the Bill of Rights? I must have missed it.

Where was anyone anywhere given the authority to tell me I can't?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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).

That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.

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????

.

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.

There are private aircraft, buses, and trains for that sort of thing.

Really????
Gee, I didn't already know that.


(Did the sarcasm come through clearly? Because I wouldn't want anyone to miss it.)

That sarcasm flat out destroys your pathetic attempt at logic. Care to try again?

 

[freyasman]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

That attitude is a good way to get people to want to drown you.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.”

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.

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.

You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?

That kind of temporary?

Where is that in the Bill of Rights? I must have missed it.

Where was anyone anywhere given the authority to tell me I can't?

So you would go swimming at a beach that had been closed due to a sewage spill or medicl waste that washed ashore?

 

[freyasman]

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).

That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.

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????

.

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.

There are private aircraft, buses, and trains for that sort of thing.

Really????
Gee, I didn't already know that.


(Did the sarcasm come through clearly? Because I wouldn't want anyone to miss it.)

That sarcasm flat out destroys your pathetic attempt at logic. Care to try again?

It's still not the original point, and aren't those airlines and buses privately owned anyway?



Why the fuck can no one ever address the main point?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

That attitude is a good way to get people to want to drown you.

I take your continued attempts to deflect from the question that you have surrendered the discussion as your loss.

 

[freyasman]

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.”

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.

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.

You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?

That kind of temporary?

Where is that in the Bill of Rights? I must have missed it.

Where was anyone anywhere given the authority to tell me I can't?

So you would go swimming at a beach that had been closed due to a sewage spill or medicl waste that washed ashore?

If I chose to, yeah....

And I wouldn't blame what happened as a result on anyone else.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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).

That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.

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????

.

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.

There are private aircraft, buses, and trains for that sort of thing.

Really????
Gee, I didn't already know that.


(Did the sarcasm come through clearly? Because I wouldn't want anyone to miss it.)

That sarcasm flat out destroys your pathetic attempt at logic. Care to try again?

It's still not the original point, and aren't those airlines and buses privately owned anyway?



Why the fuck can no one ever address the main point?

No. They are public conveyances. You lose. Have a nice life!

 

[Pogo]

1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?

I think the courts have consistently said...no.

Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.

.

In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.

In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...
Because why? I don't get it. Why?

Yet another strawman, in that not ALL working people are affected and no one but the infected and sick have to stay home.

But for the remainder minus the melodrama, because this

 

[freyasman]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

That attitude is a good way to get people to want to drown you.

I take your continued attempts to deflect from the question that you have surrendered the discussion as your loss.

What discussion?
You have yet to offer anything, except whiny bullshit.

Go away, grow up, and come back and try again later.

 

[freyasman]

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).

That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.

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????

.

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.

There are private aircraft, buses, and trains for that sort of thing.

Really????
Gee, I didn't already know that.


(Did the sarcasm come through clearly? Because I wouldn't want anyone to miss it.)

That sarcasm flat out destroys your pathetic attempt at logic. Care to try again?

It's still not the original point, and aren't those airlines and buses privately owned anyway?



Why the fuck can no one ever address the main point?

No. They are public conveyances. You lose. Have a nice life!

Except, not really.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

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.”

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.

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.

You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?

That kind of temporary?

Where is that in the Bill of Rights? I must have missed it.

Where was anyone anywhere given the authority to tell me I can't?

So you would go swimming at a beach that had been closed due to a sewage spill or medicl waste that washed ashore?

If I chose to, yeah....

And I wouldn't blame what happened as a result on anyone else.

So, you go swimming at a polluted beach and I get sick and die, is that not the same as your disregarding COVID-19 precautions since doing so will possibly kill me?

 

[freyasman]

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).

That's a shitty argument in favor of allowing TSA to grab my scrotum.

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????

.

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.

There are private aircraft, buses, and trains for that sort of thing.

Really????
Gee, I didn't already know that.


(Did the sarcasm come through clearly? Because I wouldn't want anyone to miss it.)

That sarcasm flat out destroys your pathetic attempt at logic. Care to try again?

It's still not the original point, and aren't those airlines and buses privately owned anyway?



Why the fuck can no one ever address the main point?

No. They are public conveyances. You lose. Have a nice life!

And you're still ignoring the original point.

 

[freyasman]

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.”

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.

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.

You mean temporary like TSA screenings at airports? When you're trying to exercise your right to travel freely?

That kind of temporary?

Where is that in the Bill of Rights? I must have missed it.

Where was anyone anywhere given the authority to tell me I can't?

So you would go swimming at a beach that had been closed due to a sewage spill or medicl waste that washed ashore?

If I chose to, yeah....

And I wouldn't blame what happened as a result on anyone else.

So, you go swimming at a polluted beach and I get sick and die, is that not the same as your disregarding COVID-19 precautions since doing so will possibly kill me?

How are you going to die from it?

 

[Marion Morrison]

1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?

I think the courts have consistently said...no.

Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.

.

In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.

In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...
Because why? I don't get it. Why?

Yet another strawman, in that not ALL working people are affected and no one but the infected and sick have to stay home.

But for the remainder minus the melodrama, because this

View attachment 323919​

Go fuck yourself, you asshat leftist douche. All working people, the ones you look down your nose upon.

"Nonessential workers" that are anything but, and all others as well.
Motherfucker! My childhood friend that sold me on that blue cheese burger when she was a waitress at that place.

I hated that fucking burger, but she's still my friend. You want to take her job?(from her, you're not trying to fill her shoes, cuntboy) Wtf is up with that?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

That attitude is a good way to get people to want to drown you.

I take your continued attempts to deflect from the question that you have surrendered the discussion as your loss.

What discussion?
You have yet to offer anything, except whiny bullshit.

Go away, grow up, and come back and try again later.

My grandson and I both have compromised immune systems. I have an agenda I will admit as I have acute liver failure and my grandson has leukemia. I asked my doctor what could be done if I caught the COVID-19 virus Do you know what my doctor told me would be best? She said, "Die quickly. That will free up a respirator".

Grow up? I was probably an adult before you were a hard place in your daddy's pants.

Have a nice day!

 

[Pogo]

1. Do my constitutional rights give me the right to put other people in danger?

I think the courts have consistently said...no.

Whether or not your rights put others "in danger" is irrelevant. There must be an injury/harm, not the risk of harm.

.

In that case Typhoid Mary had every right to continue working in the food industry.

In this case, all working people in America are Typhoid Mary and must stay home and get evicted and lose their jobs...
Because why? I don't get it. Why?

Yet another strawman, in that not ALL working people are affected and no one but the infected and sick have to stay home.

But for the remainder minus the melodrama, because this

View attachment 323919​

Go fuck yourself, you asshat leftist douche. All working people, the ones you look down your nose upon.

"Nonessential workers" that are anything but, and all others as well.
Motherfucker! My childhood friend that sold me on that blue cheese burger when she was a waitress at that place.

I hated that fucking burger, but she's still my friend. You want to take her job?(from her, you're not trying to fill her shoes, cuntboy) Wtf is up with that?

So you ATE the blue burger. That explains your posts.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

And...freedom. What I am hearing is SOME people’s freedom is more important than other people’s. So that SOME people can freely exercise their freedom...people who are more vulnerable, should restrict theirs. Kind of hypocritical.

People who are more vulnerable may CHOOSE to restrict their own freedom.

Surely, you see the difference, right?

I thought you and I had common beliefs. I thought you were a real liberal.

.

No.

They have no choice if they want to live. Their freedom means less to you than yours.

If you can't swim, don't go in the water..... but you don't get to demand that I stay out of it.

If you going swimming caused me to drown, you are damn sure I am going to support closing the pool.

If you can't swim, how did my swimming cause you to drown?

.