Jump to content

COVID 19 GLOBAL


grayray

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, lazarus said:

There is no constitutional right to carry a disease, travel freely, or be required to prove absence of a heath condition.

That's not an answer to any of the remarks I made.  If you're conceding the point, just say that and we can stop wasting time.

Edited by Rompho Ray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rompho Ray said:

That's not an answer to any of the remarks I made.  If you're conceding the point, just say that and we can stop wasting time.

Voting is a constitutional right.  It varies in application by state.

The requirement for other types of IDs in the context of COVID-19 -- referenced in a previous post -- is not protected by a specific constitutional right, however distasteful for many.

Follow along if you can.

Edited by lazarus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lazarus said:

Voting is a constitutional right .

For US citizens, as your own source correctly stated.

1 minute ago, lazarus said:

The requirement for other types of IDs in the context of COVID-19 -- referenced in a previous post -- is not protected by a specific constitutional right, however distasteful for many.

Reference the "previous post" so I can follow your scatterbrained "thought" process.

1 minute ago, lazarus said:

Follow along if you can.

I've refuted everything you posted, so I'm satisfied so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Horizondave said:

I would also hazard a guess (just a guess) that 19 NHS workers dying is not a normal situation occurring as part of their duties when dealing with their patients.

to be fair they could have acquired it in the community rather than whilst working....much more work required to seperate correlation from causation

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mrmango said:

From what I remember, the US Constitution says no such thing.

The right to vote for American citizens is stipulated in several places, such as the 26th Amendment.  The fact that the right is circumscribed by requirements such as citizenship and age implies that some proof of the Constitutional requirements would be permissible. 

Unfortunately, liberals can only read the parts of the Constitution they like.  The parts they don't like apparently look like some version of "blah blah blah blah", or perhaps sound in their minds like the grownup voice trumpet sound from the Charlie Brown cartoons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, lazarus said:

Not necessary.

SEC. 2. No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.

source: https://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=true&doc=100&page=transcript

 

First, that is a statue, not a constitutional guaranteed right

Second, the law has nothing to do with voter law. It protects unequal treatment of people with different races and colors.

You cannot say that all blacks must have ID's but whites do not need them, but saying that everybody, regardless of race, must have one is ok. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mrmango said:

First, that is a statue, not a constitutional guaranteed right...etc.

As usual for liberals, the part that he DIDN'T emphasize is the important part:  on account of race or color.  Requiring an ID to vote would only be contrary to this statute if, for example, only minorities were asked for an ID (as you pointed out).  This is of course an idiotic notion, accounting for why liberals claim it.

Anyway, absent "lazaarus" returning from the dead yet again with some reason why this exchange is on-topic, I'm done with it.  

Edited by Rompho Ray
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Thai Spice said:

Go sleep, I asked mods already to delete or move all this Yankee shit.

Bonne nuit.

 

At this time I will leave it here but any more political comment in here then you will have ignored my warning 

  • Thumbs Up 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The moving finger writes; and, having writ, moves on:
nor all thy piety nor wit shall lure it back to cancel
half a line, nor all thy tears wash out a word of it.
-- Omar Khayyam

I guess Omar never posted on an internet forum!

 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, fygjam said:

The moving finger writes; and, having writ, moves on:
nor all thy piety nor wit shall lure it back to cancel
half a line, nor all thy tears wash out a word of it.
-- Omar Khayyam

I guess Omar never posted on an internet forum!

 

i dont think Omar had another section to put it in ..for fear of...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Rompho Ray said:

It's true that contact with animals exposes people to these viruses and bacteria.  However, your immune system is supposed to be able to handle contact with unknown antigens, and in fact it probably does that quite regularly.  It's statistical, there are plenty of viruses "normally" floating around in our world that some folks get sick from and others don't.

IMO, part of the problem is that people these days have been trying to live in an antiseptic world.  They clean their living space with germ-killers, and douse themselves with hand-sanitizers and antiseptic soaps.  That makes your immune system weak and sluggish to respond to challenges. 

If people hadn't all tried to live in hospital operating theaters their entire lives, would the virus be as bad as it has been?  I suspect not.

would make less sense to you too if you read up on the design of the virus, and how it differs from other flus etc in the way it attaches itself to us.  you can google it, and then maybe understand how this has got out of control.  lots of really clever people, not you or I or some twat with a youtube channel, have explained it very clearly.

  • Like 3
  • Great Info 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ivan the terrible said:

to be fair they could have acquired it in the community rather than whilst working....much more work required to seperate correlation from causation

That is a fair point to make although reading the details of the majority of those who died it appears most were believed to have caught the disease directly from contact with covid 19 patients. Only a few did not have direct contact with covid 19 patients. 

I think though it highlights how dangerous this virus is as most of these sadly deceased were wearing protective gear.

Having 9 bus drivers die of covid 19 could also highlight close contact while doing their job although, yes, of course they could have caught the virus elsewhere.

Reality is though that people should understand that any contact, close or nearby to a covid 19 infected person is an unwanted situation. I feel more comfortable when at home than when I am working and I do deliver goods to hospitals as part of my job so being out and about gives us more chance of catching the virus.

Every day NHS workers are placed in a situation where not only are they in the vicinity of covid 19 patients many of them are expected to maintain direct contact with them even if they are wearing PPE.

They have always been heroes  to me but more so right now.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Great Info 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...