Really, a stretch? Smallpox had a death rate around 30% at that time. It crippled Boston in 1775\76. Even Ben Franklin lost a son to it. I think it’s a reasonable comparison. At least something to consider when we frame the discussion of freedom vs safety. The founders weren’t ignorant to epidempic. It was more a part of their lives than ours.
1 Like
I mean in the sense of knowledge. You don’t know what the founders would have thought if they were in charge of this crisis with the knowledge we have now. They may have been for different rules for known infected. They may have wanted people arrested who were being tested and then went to large gatherings. I don’t know.
It’s a completely different time in terms of us knowing who may have something and the ability to treat it/we know it’s risks towards infecting others. Armed with the knowledge we have they may have taken just as harsh if not harsher actions against liberty was my point.
But wouldn’t those actions support what I’m saying. If I remember right Washington forced all his troops to do this. Which seems like the government taking away these men’s rights? Pretty sure they didn’t have much of an option. Desert the army and be punished or be forced to do this. Again doesn’t sound like a bunch of freedom to me. Far less than what’s going on with our current situation. Be innoculated or leave and face possible death for desertion. We don’t even punish people who have been tested and while waiting for results to jump and take a swim in the senate’s pool.
Oh I’m not arguing they wouldn’t. Was trying to see if people thought it would be a violation of my rights. My larger point was that most rational people realize that at certain points the health and safety of the nation are going to impact what is done. And most of them are ok with that as long as the situations seriousness warrants it. Obviously that differs by person And by conditions.
Yes, unless you’re keeping it in a manner reckless enough to justify confiscation, or threatening others with it.
Did they force innoculation in the general public? That’s the next debate we will be having.
There were differing opinions then and now. That’s my point. They had experience with all of this stuff and wrote the constitution as it is.
Completely agree with all of this. But I think we may disagree on how much the writing of that document would have been different with today’s knowledge.
I fully believe the document would have been vastly different, but it’s really a moot point. I wouldn’t say what they dealt with then and the manner has any type of similarity in terms of knowledge and view. But yes they had illnesses back then.
1 Like
The founders of the country wrote the constitution before the theory of germs was known. I don’t think you can say they had experience with disease in the same way we do today.
It’s actually pretty wild to look at what doctors used to do and what medical care was only a few hundred years ago. Makes you wonder what medical care will be with another 100 years.
2 Likes
I think it’s fairly safe to assume that no national legislation would have been enacted in response to COVID-19, so I doubt anything would have to be amended. States had the power to do what they wanted in regards to something like this, until the Court got involved by interpreting Amendments meant to ensure the rights of freed slaves as being meant to overrule state laws.
Edit: It’s always forgotten in these debates that the States were basically independent countries with the exceptions of the powers specifically granted to the Federal Government. That’s why it’s wrong to always bring up, “Well, what would the Founding Fathers have done about X, Y, and Z?”
2 Likes
I’m pretty sad with the food industry. I have access to almost every song in the last 50 years, can play video games against kids in Korea, etc. But those fuckers can’t figure out a way for me to have a calorie free peanut butter cup blizzard?
1 Like
Well my point is more that the world is so insanely different than 1776 that attempting to think the process wouldn’t be different is weird.
But ultimately it’s not much of a thing to discuss for a long time because we’re talking about something that can’t possibly be proved one way or the other.
But ultimately people created that document and people create things based on the times they live in and the challenges of the recent past and the foreseeable future
That’s why there’s an amendment process. That’s supposed to be the way to change the Constitution—not holding it at the right angle and waiting for a judge to say the words you’re reading don’t mean what they mean.
I’m aware the process exists. I’m also aware that the founders probably couldn’t have imagined a time when parties would absolutely refuse to work together on anything.
If we didn’t have a two-party system and hyper partisan era we might see some changes. I actually think that’s one thing that would be quite different with 2020 knowledge in 1776.
If we had 2020 knowledge and 1776’s lack of pussies I think we could get a lot done, but I wouldn’t want it to look a whole lot different. I’m totally fine with specifying no private ownership of nukes.
1 Like
I think they designed it to get like this if we get like this
Parties work together on plenty, just reactively rather than proactively, every president gets a crisis it seems
Why would they worry about that? They had States to make decisions. They would’ve had no reason to modify the Constitution. Edit: The Constitution may not have even been ratified, which would have left: Avalon Project - Articles of Confederation : March 1, 1781
Hyper-partisan? That was the reason for the Bill of Rights.
This country was basically designed to be a military alliance between the States, with free travel and trade between them. The Constitution later gave a bit more power to the Federal Government(at least, enforcement-wise).
2 Likes
The actual inventors felt that way.
Sweet
It’s not his bus.
And there’s a difference between getting thrown out off a bus and getting arrested.
When videos surface showing black people being killed or possibly mistreated by police do you have the same type of anger?
Sincere question. I’m not saying that if you don’t have the same anger that you’re wrong, or if you have anger regarding what police are doing now that it’s not right, I just see you sharing a lot of these videos, getting upset about it, and I just genuinely wonder how the things compare in your mind.
Again, this is sincere, and I really don’t care what your views are either way, regarding either situation. I feel a certain way but I don’t care if you agree with me or not.
Not sure what race has to do with it, but it depends on the circumstances.
2 Likes