@wildgrass saidI am writing "gene vaccine" because that is what they are called.
Why do you keep writing 'gene vaccine' like that's a negative thing?
Yes they are. Yes they do.
Do you think I invented the term?
Why do you think it is a negative thing? You created a thread all about how gene therapy is good or at least not bad. It seems to me that you do not believe it yourself. If you did, you would have no problem with me using the term.
Why are there several opinion pieces calling themselves fact checkers claiming the gene vaccines are not gene therapy? Is it because people have a distrust of gene therapy in the form of a vaccine so they tried to convince people it was not true to counter vaccine hesitancy?
Are you condoning lying to counter gene vaccine hesitancy? See my thread "Good Misinformation".
@suzianne saidAnd these same people do not even offer a peep when being asked to remove their shoes at airports before boarding flights.
What gets me is that the same people who say that mask mandates take our freedom away have no problem taking away a woman's freedom to decide what happens to her own body.
I've put this question out several times. Not a single conservative will go near it.
The endless debate on COVID is simple, beyond simple, in fact.
The previous president totally botched the response to the pandemic. Period.
Fauci has now become public enemy #1 amongst conservatives.
Any attempt to get this vaccine under control is being continually sabotaged by some GOP run States, whether be it for blind support for Trumpism or their own political aspirations (DeSantis).
Biden administration has done a good job getting under control.
Trump will be lucky to stay out of jail !! Period !!
Oh, and btw, 1950's America is not coming back.
@metal-brain saidConstitutionally, this has already been decided, 100 years ago. Its got nothing to do with herd immunity, it's a public safety issue. Read SCOTUS below:
"What am I making an excuse for ??
For getting vaccinated ?"
No. Mandates.
There is no logical excuse to mandate vaccines anymore. That will NOT achieve herd immunity. 100% vaccination rates have already failed. Herd immunity is impossible. Get that through your thick skull.
... in 1922.... San Antonio, Texas, excluded students from public and private schools who were not vaccinated for smallpox. .... attorneys argued the vaccine policy violated Zucht’s 14th Amendment due process rights. Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in the Court’s decision that “long before this suit was instituted, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, had settled that it is within the police power of a state to provide for compulsory vaccination.”
A thick skull is one that is inflexible and stubborn, cannot comprehend something that's been part of our history and culture for over 100 years.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/current-constitutional-issues-related-to-vaccine-mandates
@wildgrass saidThat might make sense if the gene vaccine were actually vaccines. The gene vaccines do not meet the definition of vaccines. They do not prevent infection and transmission. They are NOT vaccines.
Constitutionally, this has already been decided, 100 years ago. Its got nothing to do with herd immunity, it's a public safety issue. Read SCOTUS below:
[quote]... in 1922.... San Antonio, Texas, excluded students from public and private schools who were not vaccinated for smallpox. .... attorneys argued the vaccine policy violated Zucht’s 14th Amendment due process rights ...[text shortened]... rs.
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/current-constitutional-issues-related-to-vaccine-mandates
@metal-brain saidThe type of vaccine (or the science behind it) wasn't part of SCOTUS decision in any way. You can read it. If you're saying gene vaccines are sufficiently different from vaccines, you'll make the argument. So far you haven't.
That might make sense if the gene vaccine were actually vaccines. The gene vaccines do not meet the definition of vaccines. They do not prevent infection and transmission. They are NOT vaccines.
Courts give lots of leeway on this for public health professionals to make decisions based on their extensive knowledge of the situation on the ground.
@mghrn55 saidYou fellers sure can pack a post, difficult to grab its tail.
And these same people do not even offer a peep when being asked to remove their shoes at airports before boarding flights.
I've put this question out several times. Not a single conservative will go near it.
The endless debate on COVID is simple, beyond simple, in fact.
The previous president totally botched the response to the pandemic. Period.
Fauci has now become ...[text shortened]... p will be lucky to stay out of jail !! Period !!
Oh, and btw, 1950's America is not coming back.
Oh BTW despite Trump shortcomings (you wanted him to be perfect?), he held sway over a 9 month program to get us all back on our feet. Biden had absolutely nothing to do with it, but not to hear him tell it.
What a loser. Did you hear today’s mis-speak?
@AverageJoe1 I don’t remember a question about taking shoes off at an airport. What is the question exactly and I will answer it.
@AverageJoe1
Never mind, i get the gist.
You see, The government has no right to tell us to take a vaccination. We are talking and speaking into our society, where they have limited constitutional rights in the way of telling us what to do.
But an airport is a FEDERAL FACILITY!!! The govt can tell you to walk backwatds in there.....they own it.
Tell all the conservatives that you apologipfor saying that they would not answer....,.., The answer is so obvious they did not see a reason to do so.
You sre sounding more and more like handy Andy
@averagejoe1 saidIf they told you to walk backwards in airports, you would do it then ??
@AverageJoe1
Never mind, i get the gist.
You see, The government has no right to tell us to take a vaccination. We are talking and speaking into our society, where they have limited constitutional rights in the way of telling us what to do.
But an airport is a FEDERAL FACILITY!!! The govt can tell you to walk backwatds in there.....they own it.
Tell all t ...[text shortened]... s so obvious they did not see a reason to do so.
You sre sounding more and more like handy Andy
Got it. Carry on. 🤣
@averagejoe1 saidIt's an "obvious answer" that is dead wrong:
@AverageJoe1
Never mind, i get the gist.
You see, The government has no right to tell us to take a vaccination. We are talking and speaking into our society, where they have limited constitutional rights in the way of telling us what to do.
But an airport is a FEDERAL FACILITY!!! The govt can tell you to walk backwatds in there.....they own it.
Tell all t ...[text shortened]... s so obvious they did not see a reason to do so.
You sre sounding more and more like handy Andy
"nearly all U.S. airports are owned by state or local governments"
https://airportscouncil.org/advocacy/airport-infrastructure-funding/
@mghrn55 saidYou do got it. You would have to. Libs like yourself, you don’t grasp the concept of Choice... you can choose not to go into the place. Now I KNOW you get it.
If they told you to walk backwards in airports, you would do it then ??
Got it. Carry on. 🤣
“...you would do it then?” Are you sure you are not Handy? You messin with us?
@averagejoe1 saidJoe have you not been paying attention to this thread?
@AverageJoe1
Never mind, i get the gist.
You see, The government has no right to tell us to take a vaccination. We are talking and speaking into our society, where they have limited constitutional rights in the way of telling us what to do.
But an airport is a FEDERAL FACILITY!!! The govt can tell you to walk backwatds in there.....they own it.
Tell all t ...[text shortened]... s so obvious they did not see a reason to do so.
You sre sounding more and more like handy Andy
It's settled constitutional law for over 100 years. I'll repeat the quote again and again, directly from SCOTUS opinions. "... it is within the police power of a state to provide for compulsory vaccination.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/current-constitutional-issues-related-to-vaccine-mandates
@wildgrass saidSo I suppose you would have supported the Dress Scott decision.
Joe have you not been paying attention to this thread?
It's settled constitutional law for over 100 years. I'll repeat the quote again and again, directly from SCOTUS opinions. "... it is within the police power of a state to provide for compulsory vaccination.”
https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/current-constitutional-issues-related-to-vaccine-mandates
@no1marauder saidMarauder, ever the hair splitter. Have at it, you will lose. FAA might just have something to say about the rules of where they send planes in and out of. So, it would be a standoff. I’ll represent FAA, you the local commissioners. I will win, and trials are not even my field
It's an "obvious answer" that is dead wrong:
"nearly all U.S. airports are owned by state or local governments"
https://airportscouncil.org/advocacy/airport-infrastructure-funding/
@eladar saidYou mean the one that was overturned via constitutional amendment in 1868? Of course not.
So I suppose you would have supported the Dress Scott decision.
The authority for governments to mandate vaccines is settled law currently (in other words, what Joe wrote was objectively wrong), and will be until a legal challenge is made or a constitutional amendment is ratified.
The constitutionality of this can be accurately defined. Just throwing the word 'constitution' around willy-nilly isn't helping.