Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[havoc315]

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills. Are you a serious person? Do you understand "rights"?

Considering I studied the Constitution with some of the greatest jurists in our history, yes... I think I do.

To be specific, the Supreme Court has held for over 100 years that there is no "right" to be free from a vaccine.

In the 1905 case of Jacobson v. Mass, the Supreme Court upheld compulsory vaccination. The vote was 7-2.

The precedent has been upheld by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions. Most recently, in 1995, the Court voted 6-3 to allow for mandatory drug testing, citing the Jacobson case.

 

[SamusAranX]

Yes, you are infringing on the rights of others when you create a public health hazard.

But I'll make it simple..... Let's all internalize our choices. Pay for our choices. I choose to do something dangerous, it's my choice -- as long as I'm willing to pay for the consequences.

So, choosing not to get vaccinated will lead to increased public health costs, Medicare costs, etc, to pay for those needing care for Covid.
So make it nice and simple -- If you choose not to get vaccinated, you have to pay an extra tax. May be a few hundred dollars, may be a few thousand dollars, all dependent on the real public costs of continuing the Covid epidemic.

Because why should someone who got vaccinated (or couldn't get vaccinated for legitimate reasons) pay for the people who didn't get vaccinated?

People choosing to eat bad and smoke costs our health care billions already. Yet we don’t take away people’s right(s) to do or not do those things. Even though it’s affecting us.

 

[DisneyNittany]

People choosing to eat bad and smoke costs our health care billions already. Yet we don’t take away people’s right(s) to do or not do those things. Even though it’s affecting us.

As a matter of fact, we closed gyms, but kept fast food places open!

 

[GoofGoof]

Two statements can both be true:
The vaccines are EXTREMELY SAFE and EXTREMELY EFFECTIVE.... They will massively reduce levels of infection and death..

They still are not a 100% impervious protective suit of armor. All the more reason that mitigation must continue until we have both mass vaccination AND extremely low case counts. Yes, likely another couple months or a bit longer.

Why do you insist on doing this? I never said anything about removing mitigation now. My post had nothing to do with mitigation at all. I never said the vaccines were an impervious suit of armor. Every piece of positive news is not a cause to fly off the handle in hysterics.

 

[havoc315]

People choosing to eat bad and smoke costs our health care billions already. Yet we don’t take away people’s right(s) to do or not do those things. Even though it’s affecting us.

We absolutely do make them pay in some cases. For example: Smoking. Insurers charge a premium on health insurance to smokers.

So I'm saying let's apply the same standard to Covid vaccination -- If you choose to smoke, thereby increasing public health costs, you have to pay extra. If you choose not to get vaccinated, thereby increasing public health costs, you have to pay extra.

 

[DisneyNittany]

We absolutely do make them pay in some cases. For example: Smoking. Insurers charge a premium on health insurance to smokers.

So I'm saying let's apply the same standard to Covid vaccination -- If you choose to smoke, thereby increasing public health costs, you have to pay extra. If you choose not to get vaccinated, thereby increasing public health costs, you have to pay extra.

If the insurance companies want to do that, they have that right. What I keep going back to and can't quite understand is why you think you're important enough to demand that and think your government should enforce that?

 

[havoc315]

If the insurance companies want to do that, they have that right. What I keep going back to and can't quite understand is why you think you're important enough to demand that and think your government should enforce that?

No, it's not the insurance company's right. The government regulates how they can price their policies. Remember-- that's a big part of the ACA, they can't charge more for a pre-existing condition. But the government does provide that they can charge more for smoking.

Furthermore, the Supreme Court upheld that the government can indeed impose a TAX on those who choose to forego health insurance.

So the precedent is quite clear -- You can charge more, whether through insurance or through taxation, for smoking, for choosing to skip health insurance, etc.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Can I run into a crowded (pre-covid) theater and yell "FIRE" when, in fact, there is no fire?

You sure can. But there will be consequences.

 

[havoc315]

Except you ignore the fact that it also raises EVERYONES costs for insurance, not just the smokers, bad eaters, etc. etc. Those people also die from those complications. Yet nobody on this forum screaming for 100% vaccinations seems to care at all that Mars, Incorporated continues to pump death-bars out of it's chocolate factories every day.

But again, we try to make the offenders pay for it -- Smokers pay more than non-smokers.

Bad eating is much much harder to internalize for both cultural reasons and pragmatic reasons. But in fact, lots of government laws are indeed aimed at trying to improve public nutrition, reduce obesity.

 

[havoc315]

You're kind of making my point for me. You are, in fact, fine with authoritarianism.

No, I'm fine with our Constitutional Democracy and the system that is in place in this country.

If you think our President, our Supreme Court, our Congress,"authoritarianism," then there is nothing to discuss.

 

[DisneyCane]

Considering I studied the Constitution with some of the greatest jurists in our history, yes... I think I do.

To be specific, the Supreme Court has held for over 100 years that there is no "right" to be free from a vaccine.

In the 1905 case of Jacobson v. Mass, the Supreme Court upheld compulsory vaccination. The vote was 7-2.

The precedent has been upheld by the Supreme Court on multiple occasions. Most recently, in 1995, the Court voted 6-3 to allow for mandatory drug testing, citing the Jacobson case.

68 years later they made another ruling which just might be relevant to a forced vaccination scenario.

Isn't the drug testing case related to testing of minors, not adults?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Not really. Just reporting a fact that millions do not want to be a human experiment. Just ask Hank Aaron and Marvin Hagler.... oh, wait.

Yeah! Let's ask them!

Hank Aaron's cause of death 'natural,' medical examiner says

An investigator with the office confirmed the news with 11Alive on Monday.

www.ksdk.com

Boxer⯠Marvin Haglerâ¯was notâ¯âmurderedââ¯byâ¯the COVID-19 vaccine; he died of natural causes

An Instagram user has falsely claimed in a video that boxing middleweight champion Marvellous Marvin Hagler was “murdered” with a COVID-19 vaccine.

www.reuters.com

 

[DisneyNittany]

No, I'm fine with our Constitutional Democracy and the system that is in place in this country.

If you think our President, our Supreme Court, our Congress,"authoritarianism," then there is nothing to discuss.

I do and have for a long time, regardless of whether they have a R or a D next to their name. Words have meaning.

Also, we are a Republic, or we were supposed to be. Democracy is just two wolves and a sheep deciding what is for dinner. Mob rule isn't much better than a monarchy.

Ok, got it. You think the United States is basically a lesser degree of Nazi Germany. That's sick.

I don't have to think my country is Nazi Germany to be sickened by its past actions of slavery, Jim Crow, War Drafts, Internment Camps, Gay Rights, and many, many countless examples, and so therefore, not trust nor pretend to trust that they're "looking out for our best interests".

Again, there are degrees to everything. Just because we are living in the most advanced time in human history, and in a country that is better than North Korea (or most any other country) doesn't mean we have to accept our government as this beacon on a hill. That's the anti-thesis of the American Experiment.

 

[Tom P.]

Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down statewide mask mandate

Wisconsin's Supreme Court is striking down Gov. Tony Evers' statewide face mask mandate.

www.wisn.com

 

[mmascari]

What is the acceptable number of deaths? I guess I'm not sure where we draw the line.

40,000 a year. Roughly 110 a day nationally.

At least that's my theory on the number of deaths we're willing to live with as a country. It seems to track with other things that kill people every day.

If you've got a different number you prefer, feel free to share it.

 

[havoc315]

I don't have to think my country is Nazi Germany to be sickened by its past actions of slavery, Jim Crow, War Drafts, Internment Camps, Gay Rights, and many, many countless examples, and so therefore, not trust nor pretend to trust that they're "looking out for our best interests".

Again, there are degrees to everything. Just because we are living in the most advanced time in human history, and in a country that is better than North Korea (or most any other country) doesn't mean we have to accept our government as this beacon on a hill. That's the anti-thesis of the American Experiment.

I don't disagree with any of that. In fact, I agree with every sentence that I quoted.
But modern public health laws are not internment camps, slavery, Jim Crow, etc.

 

[Chi84]

Didn't the Republican Senator from Wyoming, Mr. Alan Simpson, once say "Hatred corrodes the container it is carried in"?

Hard to imagine JVP aligning with the anti-vax and anti-mask hordes, especially in a stadium that holds over 100,000 people. If the 95% (or RL 90%) numbers are right, even if all ticket-holders were vaccinated, there would still be 5,000 or so people not protected. And one of them goes to visit their grandparents in the same place others are staying. Problem?

Are the grandparents vaccinated?

 

[DisneyNittany]

I don't disagree with any of that. In fact, I agree with every sentence that I quoted.
But modern public health laws are not internment camps, slavery, Jim Crow, etc.

And while I clearly understand that (well, assuming, since I don't actually know you) that you're coming from a good place and really do believe it's best for society, I just can't agree as it goes against my principles and I find it hypocritical.

I don't like the government (or the majority) deciding what is best for the individual. The rights of the individual should always supersede the convenience of the collective. Otherwise, freedom is a farce.

I get that it can come off as "absurd", but say what you want, I at least am consistent. Hell, I agree life would be easier if we had a altruistic government that set things straight and implemented rules that I personally believed in, but I would never want that because the power isn't always (or maybe ever) in my hands and I don't want my "enemy" to have that same power.

 

[DisneyNittany]

40,000 a year. Roughly 110 a day nationally.

At least that's my theory on the number of deaths we're willing to live with as a country. It seems to track with other things that kill people every day.

If you've got a different number you prefer, feel free to share it.

I don't have a number. It's not up for me to decide nor should it be. That's all I've been trying to say.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down statewide mask mandate

Wisconsin's Supreme Court is striking down Gov. Tony Evers' statewide face mask mandate.

www.wisn.com

Politics at its finest. Don’t need to go to Wisconsin to see this being played out. Where ever the majority is they will turn against the other side. Whether we think it’s a good idea or not, it’s all politics. Local school boards.. countywide.. the house and senate.. up to the Supreme Court. Will we ever think past 2 parties and start doing what’s right for the people and not who’s giving them money?
This is meant in general terms, not to this specific case no matter what side your on.