The Libertarian Party just nominated a pro vaccine mandate candidate

I think that objecting to a mandatory vaccine should be a protected right even more than a "religious" objection, because it involves a physical invasion of one's body. Do you think businesses should be able to hire and fire on the basis of circumcision?
Yeah. I don't know why anyone would agree to that, but why not? Who cares?
 
That's a business right, unless it is a nation emergency, and federal supremacy assumes primacy.
Emergency.jpg
 
Nothing tough about it. The hiring and firing decisions of a business should be NONE of the government's concern. Period.

Trumpsters disagree with libertarians. They think the state should make the call. Just like you do. Kumbaya and shit.
Does that include illegal invaders?
 
Well, their symbol is a big giant government statue, after all. Of course they don't have much on their platforms that would be supported by Jefferson, either.
Funny you should say that, they just came up with a new symbol.

From the Bee.

1716870989274.png


WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Libertarian Party has concluded its convention and nominated its latest presidential candidate: a 20-foot-tall, rainbow-colored, glass bong.

The gay, oversized marijuana smoking device edged out candidates RFK Jr., Donald Trump, and Sparklepaws the Transgender Furry to secure the coveted nomination to run for President this November.

"Never has the Libertarian Party chosen a candidate that better represents its values, ambitions, and intellect," said Party Chair Angela McArdle while tripping on the complimentary edibles that were passed out at the convention. "I think it's even possible our beautiful glass candidate could secure up to .03% of the vote this year!"

McArdle's proclamation was met with a chorus of boos from people in the crowd who thought .03% was a little too much, making the glass bong too mainstream for their liking.

The large rainbow-striped, cannabis water pipe is running on a platform of ending the Fed, lowering taxes, and aborting kids, transing kids, giving drugs to kids, and letting unaccompanied kids cross the southern border.

At publishing time, The Libertarian Party had sought to withdraw the nomination after it was revealed their new candidate wasn't interested in eliminating age of consent laws.
 
Nothing tough about it. The hiring and firing decisions of a business should be NONE of the government's concern. Period.

Trumpsters disagree with libertarians. They think the state should make the call. Just like you do. Kumbaya and shit.
Checks and balances, my friend.

Nothing lives in isolation.

Human institutions are all the same, it doesn't much matter what you call them. Government, business, church, heavy metal rock band.

Eventually, institutions preserve themselves, at the expense of the membership - those they supposedly "serve".

Institutional rot is ubiquitous.
 
Yep, he believes businesses can mandate vaccines.

The Libertarian Party is the original Not Ready For Prime Time crew.


Why don’t think believe a business can mandate its employees be vaccined? A business is not the govt
 
Why don’t think believe a business can mandate its employees be vaccined? A business is not the govt
That's irrelevant. To the statist everything they think is "good" should be required, everything they see as "bad", prohibited.
 
dblack is stumbling around because he knows you have no constitutional right to a job.

The employer sets the rules by the law, and the law does not forbid the employer.

You have every right to look elsewhere.
 
dblack is stumbling around because he knows you have no constitutional right to a job.
?? How is that "stumbling around"? You're not just being an idiot again, are you?

The employer sets the rules by the law, and the law does not forbid the employer.

You have every right to look elsewhere.
Yep. Totally agree. But you're a flaming hypocrite on the matter. Shall we discuss labor law?
 
?? How is that "stumbling around"? You're not just being an idiot again, are you?


Yep. Totally agree. But you're a flaming hypocrite on the matter. Shall we discuss labor law?
How am I a hypocrite for pointing out the obvious that some kooks want to ignore?
 
How am I a hypocrite for pointing out the obvious that some kooks want to ignore?
Because (and I'm guessing here, so correct me if I'm wrong), your belief in that principle is fleeting and situational. To wit, what's your view on labor law? Should employers be forced to accept union contracts against their will?
 
Because (and I'm guessing here, so correct me if I'm wrong), your belief in that principle is fleeting and situational. To wit, what's your view on labor law? Should employers be forced to accept union contracts against their will?
You have been corrected.

Union labor contracts are negotiated, and those negotiations can be long and bitter.

Once an employer signs the contract, he has to accept the conditions.
 

Forum List

Back
Top