That was your first mistake.
Donāt take it as a disregard for others that I plan to purposely do none of the things doctors say will help other people.
1 Like
You really suck at humor.
That requires a vaccine. I know science is hard.
That all depends on where you are, and your point of view. You have plenty of rights that were not legally rights under British law. The US is not the entire world.
Does not compute.
1 Like
The Bill of Rights does not contain all of our rights under the law. It puts limits on the government when it comes to those particular rights.
But, according to the Founders, there are inalienable rights. So one could easily argue that not being deliberately exposed to the possibility of contacting an infectious disease is a right. Just like not being exposed to second hand smoke.
Rights are only as good as the government enforcing them. Japanese internment is a pretty good example that your rights are really only privileges that the government gives you, until they decide not to.
Donāt blame the government; the American people were OK with it and some even profited off of it. Itās like blaming the government for slavery. Fear, anger, hatred, hunger, greed, etc., all trump fancy words on a piece of paper.
Not all of them.
IMO, it is why things like the Constitution are important, and people should be angry when the government violates it. The angrier we are about these violations, and vote for people who uphold the Constitution, the closer the privileges get to rights.
Youāre suggesting this as one of your reasons to not wear a mask?
2 Likes
Not enough of them.
People should do and be a lot of things. Itās just easier to defer the thinking and moral responsibility to someone else. Just look at animal shelters. Also, it took a war to end slavery.
Why do that when you can vote for people who will tell you what you want to hear and give you what you want?
1 Like
Because doing what the majority wants without constraint is not a good idea IMO.
I like the idea of creating a government with rules set up, in a way, that when you create the rules you donāt know what your gender, race, sexual orientation, etcā¦ is going to be.
Uhhā¦
The general idea is that if you are creating a system in which you donāt know who your are going to be, that you would most likely create a system in which all people are treated fairly.
I donāt think Iād want folks that lack the mental capacity to know those things to be setting up any system of governanceā¦
Dude! This is great! Can you please let NYC know that theyāre not actually overwhelmed so they can stop paying traveling nurses $10k a week? Haha itās so crazy that they think that. Shoulda listened to you instead!
1 Like
That is your takeaway from that thought experiment? That I think we have the mentally disabled set up the government?
The idea is to make a system in which everyone is treated equally.
Oh! I thought you wanted people that didnāt know their gender, race, and sexual identity to make rules. A government of ālaws, not menā certainly makes sense.
It needs to be a balance. IMO, we need things like the constitution (laws) to ensure we protect the minority. The majority can get some things they want as long as it does not violate the constitution which was set up partially to protect those outside of the majority.
It is why people still have the right to own firearms even though the majority of people want stricter gun control.