kong1802
Well-Known Member
I always give you a chance...until this part...
There is absolutely no “freedom to open your bar”...never was a thing...still isn’t.
I always give you a chance...until this part...
There is absolutely no “freedom to open your bar”...never was a thing...still isn’t.
Ok, but again, where is anyone being prevented from traveling?People are so dismissive of mental health.
Come back after you've read all the Supreme Court decisions interpreting and applying it. That's where most of the law is made.
It doesn't say anything about rights to privacy, abortion, or marriage either, but the courts have used the 14th amendment to strike down some laws regarding those (I am not agreeing or disagreeing with those results)I have read the 14th amendment, and I see nowhere in it that says people have a right to travel.
There is still nowhere in this country that states that people are not allowed to travel at all. Nowhere.It doesn't say anything about rights to privacy, abortion, or marriage either, but the courts have used the 14th amendment to strike down some laws regarding those (I am not agreeing or disagreeing with those results)
The right to travel was found in the Privileges and Immunities clause of the 14th Amendment in the Slaughterhouse cases. Interestingly, that case alongside others in the later 19th century is viewed as having rendered the 14th Amendment punchless and little used for years after:
Slaughter-House Cases - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Up s—-s creek?Okay, it’s confused from over the pond again!
If recommendations are being ignored and mandates/laws are unconstitutional where does that leave the USA?
There is still nowhere in this country that states that people are not allowed to travel at all. Nowhere.
You're doing the Lord's work in a thread where people are commenting on an unwritten clause in the Constitution starting with "Me the people," . . .It doesn't say anything about rights to privacy, abortion, or marriage either, but the courts have used the 14th amendment to strike down some laws regarding those (I am not agreeing or disagreeing with those results)
The right to travel was found in the Privileges and Immunities clause of the 14th Amendment in the Slaughterhouse cases. Interestingly, that case alongside others in the later 19th century is viewed as having rendered the 14th Amendment punchless and little used for years after:
Slaughter-House Cases - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
You're doing the Lord's work in a thread where people are commenting on an unwritten clause in the Constitution starting with "Me the people," . . .
One thing that should be noted is that the Constitution covers actions short of absolutely prohibiting something. It is not necessary for a law to absolutely prohibit travel, assembly or speech in order to violate the Constitution.
You’re taking statistics in a vacuum. We need more time to really make comparisons, but you’re basically arguing over who the tallest midget is; none of the states are doing “well” right now. With notable exceptions I’m sureFlorida has basically been flat on cases since Tuesday and averages 43.4 cases per day. Florida is open for business and appears to be at the top of the curve with individual businesses deciding their limits. New York and New Jersey have seen increases, just since yesterday the NY 7 day average of new cases increased from 49.9 to 51.4. That is an increase of over 3% in one day. In the past 2 week Florida has increased 16% while NY has increased 78%. We have all learned more since March and yet today NY may reprt an all time high in daily cases.
Here we go again.Florida has basically been flat on cases since Tuesday and averages 43.4 cases per day. Florida is open for business and appears to be at the top of the curve with individual businesses deciding their limits. New York and New Jersey have seen increases, just since yesterday the NY 7 day average of new cases increased from 49.9 to 51.4. That is an increase of over 3% in one day. In the past 2 week Florida has increased 16% while NY has increased 78%. We have all learned more since March and yet today NY may reprt an all time high in daily cases.
When I have time later I will lay out the legal and constitutional argument. In a nutshell, if a business was opened under a set of laws and regulations, you can't change the rules in the middle of the game unless the business is justly compensated.I always give you a chance...until this part...
There is absolutely no “freedom to open your bar”...never was a thing...still isn’t.
It would be unconstitutional if it was forced. I never suggested anything be forced.So its unconstitutional to isolate everyone, but not unconstitutional to isolate just the vulnerable?
I will lay it out when I have more time but start with the Fifth Amendment that states that no person shall be "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." A temporary stay at home order is no different than temporarily putting somebody under house arrest.Ok, so I just have to ask. Exactly what part of the constitution is being violated by either a temporary stay at home order, or a temporary order to close certain businesses that may spread the virus faster than others? Please be specific.
Oh, exactly how is limiting the number of people in a household violating anyone's constitution rights?
There is no solution. It is an airborne virus. The only way to stop the spread of it without a vaccine is by keeping people isolated from each other. Aside from the illegality and unconstitutional aspects of doing that, it is not practical to do for the length of time it would take. If it was 30 days and problem solved I could get behind it.
The only practical thing to do is try and protect the most vulnerable.
Anecdotal but I've played pretty "fast and loose" when in private settings and so has most of my circle of acquaintances and none have been infected. My anecdote doesn't prove anything, neither does yours.Anecdotal, but I can count the number of close, sustained, unmasked personal contacts I've had since April on two hands easily. I know many other friends and family that can do the same, with no cases of the virus in my immediate circle. The same can not be said for acquaintances I have that have played fast and loose or completely ignored guidance. Masks work. Distancing works.
Following the guidelines, still having a life and contributing to the economy requires adaptation and some sacrifice, but I don’t feel like my constitutional rights are being violated in the slightest. It’s a matter of common sense and humanity. I look forward to returning to traveling and dining out, which are the main sacrifices that have impacted me, but I have a hard time empathizing with the ‘that’s not practical’ viewpoint because these adaptations have been easily achieved by us.
When I have time later I will lay out the legal and constitutional argument. In a nutshell, if a business was opened under a set of laws and regulations, you can't change the rules in the middle of the game unless the business is justly compensated.
It would be unconstitutional if it was forced. I never suggested anything be forced.
Anecdotal but I've played pretty "fast and loose" when in private settings and so has most of my circle of acquaintances and none have been infected.
I am what you might call a "die hard Trumper."
Anecdotal, but I can count the number of close, sustained, unmasked personal contacts I've had since April on two hands easily. I know many other friends and family that can do the same, with no cases of the virus in my immediate circle. The same can not be said for acquaintances I have that have played fast and loose or completely ignored guidance. Masks work. Distancing works.
Following the guidelines, still having a life and contributing to the economy requires adaptation and some sacrifice, but I don’t feel like my constitutional rights are being violated in the slightest. It’s a matter of common sense and humanity. I look forward to returning to traveling and dining out, which are the main sacrifices that have impacted me, but I have a hard time empathizing with the ‘that’s not practical’ viewpoint because these adaptations have been easily achieved by us.
I will lay it out when I have more time but start with the Fifth Amendment that states that no person shall be "be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." A temporary stay at home order is no different than temporarily putting somebody under house arrest.
Wait.. what? iPhone 27? Im spending way to much time in here.Distancing is an effective mitigation...not a cure all.
By why is anyone questioning it? How stubborn and ill informed do you have to be at this point?
Fauci and Birx fought AIDS Frontline when there were zero answers...all suffering....100% fatality rate.
The fact anyone doubts their opinions without background credentials is an embarrassment. Something that’s important to remind everyone...even if a new season of the masked singer is premiering or the iPhone 27 is dropping. But its obviously hard to pay attention.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.