And with this decision all faith in SCOTUS dies

Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by Ghost1958, May 30, 2020.

  1. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    Just going to toss this out to think about.
    Some are making the point that gov can violate the freedom of religion protected in the bill of rights.
    Besides the fact that there is no provision for that in the COTUS let's take another tac.

    Arguing that circumstances such as virus allows the gov to wholesale shut down religious gatherings because some may be asymptomatic etc and transmit the virus during a service has a correlating argument used by anti RTKABA forces.

    It goes something like this .
    We must disarm the general public because you never know when someone may snap and start shooting people.
    And we all poo poo that as hogwash.

    Yet just as somd have the virus, some DO snap and shoot one to 30 folks out of the blue . Or in individual arguments etc.

    Gov shutting down patently constitutionally protected rights on whims such as this virus are no less a violation of the BOR than a general disarmament would be using the very same arguments that as gun owners we say are stupid.

    As I said liberty is not free or safe.
    Either the BOR and COTUS apply in all instances or they dont apply in any and we may as well shred the thing out of panic instead of adhering to it.

    Now I have some chores to do.
    towboater likes this.
  2. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    Haven't seen anyone claim that, in the discussion.

    Let's take a simple example. Since a liberty is, basically, a person's "property." It's his/hers, unless taken or whittled-down to a nub. It's to be protected, if the BOR means anything. Consider someone's 100x100ft property, which abuts the neighbor's 100x100ft property. But Property B's owner decides to swipe 10ft from his neighbor, moving his property line 10% in. In fact, Property A's owner has now had 10% of his property stolen and is in possession of only 90% of the original property.

    Similarly, basic liberties function much like that. Take a part of it or flat disallow it, one's left with less than they had previously ... or, even with nothing.

    With one's liberty to make music, stealing someone's access to instruments, ability to play a recording, ability to sing a song, etc., would all take liberty from that person. Which, unless booming across the neighborhood to inflict upon others, does nobody else harm or injury. Yet, we still have "noise abatement" ordinances that don't seek to constrain a person's noise-making ability, but rather seek to protect others' right to be free from unwarranted and unreasonable levels of noise.

    With one's RKBA liberty, stealing someone's access to arms, access to ammo, access to buying/selling, and all the rest, does indeed steal from the liberty via decreasing the ability to exercise it, constraining one's ability to obtain the tools to exercise it, getting in the way of one's ability to buy/sell/trade with others so one can be armed as one sees fit, etc. (The exercise of which impedes nobody else and steals nobody else's liberties.) Yet, we still have assault, battery, robbery and murder statutes covering exactly the sort of liberty overstep that should exist: protecting others' right to be safe from unjustifiable attack while not impeding another's liberty to be armed.

    With one's liberty to live one's life unimpeded without cause, one has every right to handle becoming sick as one sees fit. "Taking two aspirin and calling me in the morning," which is fine. "Gutting" it out via sleep and fluids. Getting lots of fresh air. Consuming mass quantities of high-nutrient fruits, whatever. None of which impede anyone or threaten injury upon anyone. Until a person goes out and mingles with others. Do so knowingly, and one butts up against laws and ordinances covering others' right to be free from malicious spreaders of contagion (ie, the HIV carrier that deliberately and knowingly seeks to infect others through unprotected sex). Similarly others have every right to expect a modicum of protection against those known to be contagious, and such laws/ordinances exist to cover that threat.

    With one's religious liberty, as with most any other liberty one can think of, stealing someone's choice of religiousness does indeed take from that person's liberty. As does forcing a person underground for "verboten" beliefs. And other variations on the theme of State dictation on religious expression. None of which is impeded with health laws. And, no exercise of which exempts a person from also avoiding impeding the liberties of others ... which includes the right to be free from deliberate contagion spreading.

    Now, that being said, absolutely I agree with the idea that forcible shutdown of "church" services is grossly unconstitutional. However, demanding close-proximity with zero precautions be disallowed ... that's something else. Which is what many states implemented, during this thing.

    Sadly, most states seemingly went much further and effectively disallowed any congregating at all, any services at all, any group functions whatsoever, irrespective of precautions taken. Which I believe to be ludicrous and unnecessary, given what effective precautionary measures could be taken while still allowing a service to exist, a gathering over a larger space to occur, etc. (With tech options, it's hard to believe no alternatives could be rapidly put into place to allow nearly full liberties without impeding a service, so long as airborne and surface and proximity guards could remain in place.)

    Point is, no amount of one liberty absolves a person from adherence to constraints against impinging upon others' liberties. They're co-equal in importance. One doesn't trump the other, in that sense. They both exist, like the property line between Property A and B's plots of land. And BOTH must be respected and honored. Only way to do that is, well, to do that.

    In the case of religiousness: don't disallow services, but require a minimum medically-justifiable standard of healthy gathering to ensure people's other liberties are also upheld and not taken from them.

    In the case of the RKBA: don't disallow being armed, or access to arms, but require one be held accountable for gross negligent use of such arms that harms others, etc., via the A&B/robbery/murder statutes.

    In the case of "loud" noises: don't disallow playing music, having a party, or anything like that, but require a certain standard of behavior that doesn't steal the right to be free of unreasonable and unjustifiable levels of noise by others who have equal right to their space too.

    You're right. Liberty's a messy thing, sometimes, viewed from a certain perspective. To those disliking the liberties of others, it's often downright uncomfortable. Yet, both parties have their liberties and rights, and in practice those of both parties must be respected and upheld. One doesn't trump the other.
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020

  3. Ghost1958

    Ghost1958 Well-Known Member

    Good points

    I may be a tad bit misunderstood due to stating my opinion badly.
    No there is no violation of liberty to forcibly quarantine a known contagious person. Or even prosecute one who intentionally passes a pathogen to another.

    Just as theres no violation for locking up violent criminals .

    The infringement on individual liberties has come in spades with this virus.

    Restricting people not known to be sick from
    1. Freedom of travel.
    2. Freedom of religion
    3. Freedom to make a living .
    4 Freedom of how to dress, mask no mask.
    5.Freedom of association.
    6 Freedom to assemble.
    7. Even the freedom to decide how close to stand to a friend.

    The list goes on.

    If someone had the virus and wont quarantine the yeah quarantine them.

    If they are not known to have it leave them the hell alone. People do have the ability to think for themselves.

    When my wife was living with lung cancer we were masks to her treatments because her immune system was non existent. The beginning of is doing that was BEFORE this virus scare .
    As I said people have common sense without gov overreach. They can and do think and take care of themselves without being herded like 3 yr olds.

    As much as I wish there were there is no right to not get sick or not to die.

    I'd rather live free a month than under the tyranny we have been subjected too a decade. At this point I refuse to mask, social distance, or anything out of the ordinary way I live.

    We have given up our basic liberties to a socialist element because of blind fear of a over hyped flu bug no more dangerous than any other disease and wildly less than dangerous than most.

    We are losing our freedom to tyrants in the name of " public safety" over cowardice before an overblown flu bug.
    Nmwabbit likes this.
  4. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    ^ This.

    Basically, ^that's about the only way to avoid threatening or impinging upon a person's free exercise of their liberties.

    As with criminals, it makes zero sense constitutionally or legally to go after everyone with some blanket edict, in the hope of roping-in criminals too. Unjustifiable, that.

    And so it is with contagion. If it cannot be showed, beforehand, a person actually IS contagious, then it's hard to claim that person's impinging upon another, let alone harming another. No proof? No "crime." As with everything else when accusations are leveled, particularly accusations based on bare fear and little else.

    I'm with you. There should be zero infringement as a "blanket" proscription on everyone. It cannot be justified.

    We got ourselves in a serious crack, when we had zero means of testing, zero means of tracing contacts, zero means of handling an even moderate "overload" of a regional hospital system (in terms of PPE, staff, equipment). Got everyone's knickers in a wad over fear of what could occur, so they dumped on everyone ... Constitution be damned. (Wasn't the correct approach, IMO, despite the risk of "overload," though that's a debatable point.)

    Hopefully the lessons will get learned, here. Though I suspect many of the lessons will get shoveled under in favor of profits and the next quarterly report. Same ol', same ol', and to hell with the risks to "overloading" the system despite failures in prep.
    ellis36 and Ghost1958 like this.
  5. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    g66enigma, there you go into random generalizing...

    "Plenty of contagious pathogens survive on surfaces..."

    "Early on..." [thats historical rhetoric, not germane and how myths are perpetuated!]

    sorry i was discussing "the topic virus covid 19:

    cdc, last reviewed 1 june 2020.

    "COVID-19 is thought to spread mainly through close contact from person-to-person.

    We are still learning about how the virus spreads and the severity of illness it causes.

    It may be possible that a person can get COVID-19 by touching a surface or object that has the virus on it and then touching their own mouth, nose, or possibly their eyes. This is not thought to be the main way the virus spreads, but we are still learning more about how this virus spreads."

    so the validity for testing per se, especially since there is not a treatment protocol at all, unless it migrates into pneumonia?
  6. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    It's a discussion. It ebbs and flows, as any discussion does. And we cope with it.

    Not everyone needs everyone's homework done for them in all posts. That's not how discussions go. And we cope with that.

    The CDC/NIH, the Mayo Clinic, the Cleveland Clinic, Harvard Medical School, to name a few ... numerous places around the country are centers for research and studies into the epidemiology of viruses and how long they have been found to survive in a variety of conditions, on surfaces, etc. The information's within reach of everyone, just a browser search away.

    Nope. It's part of the reported record since January when news and research results began coming out regarding SARS-CoV-2. No myth. Documented record, and documented news-reported results (from such studies/evals).

    In short: it's branded a "novel" coronavirus because it's new and the range of its effects is as yet not fully understood. Was known when it first hit, hence they called it that. Is appreciated just how accurate that designation was, now, given how apparently innovative this thing really is. (The apparent mysterious inflammatory skin condition many children are experiencing, for example; or the ability to seemingly get reinfected, despite having a store of antibodies.)

    Fact is, a few things were imagined early in the epidemic's cycle. More was found out once testing and lab study of the thing began yielding some results. More was found out once it got past the infuriating initial weeks of "novel" status and began having repeatable results around the world. Clearly it was a SARS-category thing, they knew that soon after it became a known bug out there. What its vagaries were, they had to have experience with it first. Again, all obtainable by anyone desiring to do a few browser searches to see the reported results as the weeks went by. No myth. Actual studies, research results, news reports of those results. (^ That's summarizing the essential state of affairs, BTW, not "random generalizing.")

    Such morphing understanding is germane as it gets, as to how this thing made such a mess, caught countries and hospital systems by surprise.
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
  7. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    sorry g66enigma...when public discussion promote(s) obsolete, "early on" rhetoric as viable, especially from someone who articulates on the subject(s) as well a SME would...

    imagine if Facui, cdc, ad nauseam, constantly regurgitated "early on" data during today's updates verses the actual 'known' facts from current evidential & peer reviewed scientifically obtained research thus keeping j.q. citizens informed to mitigate the ensuing "oh my goodness" decontamination of everything!

    humm SARS Category virus...treatment for this, oh wait...there isn't scientific investigation showed covid 19 was closely related w/no treatment protocol and discovered 2003 and seven years later no vaccine--but the propganda mill states "perhaps" by the end of the year -- perhaps!
    Last edited: Jun 2, 2020
  8. Nmwabbit

    Nmwabbit Well-Known Member

    things to make you say hummm...
    0430 3 jun 2020, CNN world, quote:

    The US should have 100 million doses of one candidate Covid-19 vaccine by the end of the year, Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) and a member of the White House coronavirus task force, said Tuesday. unquote.

    soooo, 100 million doses of vaccine for a country of 328million...

    after trump, congressional leaders, billion/million-aires, and relatives/acquaintances of same are provided their vaccine at no cost or minimal $ -- [none for biden though]

    uh which other privileged citizenry of the remaining 300 Million citizens will be privy to the remaining magick potion concocted by the cash strapped pharmaceutical industrial mega giants?

    decided by lottery? olde people? at risk citizens - decided on ethnicity since people of color are at a very high risk?

    just whom will benefit from this efficacious elixir and what will be the cost ?

    alsaqr likes this.
  9. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    In a nation of 330M, I'm assuming a standard "triage" method: first, go after those with one or more apparent symptoms, and everyone showing any serious symptoms or respiratory distress; as well, likely all front-line people and responders; then, with likely well over 50M packs left, focusing on those clusters and "hot spots" around the country; skipping over those without symptoms, those without any specific respiratory related co-morbidities, and those in places where nearly no or no infections have been recorded. Can't imagine that'd burn through all 100M packs. And it'll take a couple of months, like as not, to simply administer them, by which time another million or two packs will be out there.

    Time will tell, but I don't imagine having "only" 100M test kits in 2020 is all that dire, all things considered.
  10. G66enigma

    G66enigma Well-Known Member

    Excuse me, but synopsis of how the knowledge growth went and how the news releases went is NOT, repeat NOT, promotion of rhetoric. Sorry to disappoint.

    It's was a review, a summary of how the early month or two went, prior to knowing what's known, or fairly strongly corroborated and suspected, now. Didn't "promote" or support any of it. Just summarized it, for purposes of providing context to the points I was making.

    If you've problems with how their rhetoric went, those newsies and those actually promoting those things, contact them.
    Last edited: Jun 4, 2020
  11. partdeux

    partdeux Well-Known Member Supporter

    George is a big govt RINO.
  12. tinbucket

    tinbucket Well-Known Member

    George W is a Globalist. He is a traitor. "The Business of Government is (Global) Business(Men)." In India he said Sending American jobs to India is god for India and Globalism."
    "Don't throw the Constitution up to me again! It's just another G-- D----- Piece of Paper, I'm President."
    Who set up seminars in Spain and across Europe and Asia to induce "Foreign Investment" buy American infrastructure such as Interstates and so on....and on and on and on.
    Oh and he didn't show up for reserves and maintain his flight status because he was not able to navigate. In the Viet Nam war what they did to everyone else that was AWOL like that was to send directly to Nam but Daddy had connections. and on and on
    schnuffleupagus and towboater like this.
  13. schnuffleupagus

    schnuffleupagus Well-Known Member

    Washington is given a HUGE pass for refusing regency.
    He used US troops to quell the Whiskey Rebellion. Where the, primarily Pennsylvanian, distillers were pushing back against taxes on spirits. Spirits are an easier method to get grain to market.
    Washington, as the largest distiller in the New World, benefitted greatly by this tax personally.
    This is a despotic move by Washington overlooked by most folks.
  14. schnuffleupagus

    schnuffleupagus Well-Known Member

    Or practicing faith all by ones self.

    I like John Waynes character, JB Books, "...My church has been the mountains and solitude."