Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Dershowitz: Forced Vaccinations are Constitut


F3SS

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Vaccination. 

OK, so why did you place cure in quotes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

OK, so why did you place cure in quotes?

To stop it escaping off the edges of the page ! 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, and then said:

That's one of the diverse possibilities of potential overreach that are covered by 2A.  

Also, I find it interesting that such a mandate by government would be considered well founded and for the good of the nation.  How far are we away from another demand from a government that we receive an identifying mark or we aren't allowed to buy or sell?  Sound familiar?

Yes it does and that is why it surprises me so that Dershowitz would say what he did.  Are we sure he actually said it?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, and then said:

Christians have known this was coming for a LONG time.  Choices will have to be made and if one chooses on the side of allowing government control for the sake of comfort or employment then there is no going back from that

I know there are choices coming.  You keep thinking it will be from a bogy- man government.  I think it will come from multi-national corporations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Anti body tests would be more acceptable than vaccination... and mandatory vaccination for something like Coronavirus that at the end of the day isn't as serious for the whole population as they make out.... is definitely NOT acceptable..

imo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Tatetopa said:

Yes it does and that is why it surprises me so that Dershowitz would say what he did.  Are we sure he actually said it?

 

he is on a video saying it in the OP link...

I don't know much about him... but I guessing that he is a Political Globalist breaking cover... :D....^_^...

to try and familiarize the public with the concept and justify - mandatory forced vaccination...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, bee said:

 

he is on a video saying it in the OP link...

I don't know much about him... but I guessing that he is a Political Globalist breaking cover... :D....^_^...

to try and familiarize the public with the concept and justify - mandatory forced vaccination...

 

He's a famous Lawyer (of the stars?) who as of late has been a regular FOX contributor and largely a defender of Trump's policies though I'm unsure if he actually supports Trump himself. Supposedly he is responsible for advising Johnny Cochran to have OJ infamously try on the glove in court. How's that for a claim to fame? Otherwise I don't know much either but I'm sure there's a wealth of info about him out there. Don't see how he can take this stance though. Perhaps he has an Epstein file and was told to force a narrative?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, bee said:

 

Let's just remember that Coronavirus is not as serious as the fearmongers (with an agenda) want to make out...

Yes it's a nasty virus bur 80% of those who get it will have it mild to moderate... of the other 20% the elderly and those with underlying health conditions are most at risk and in the wider scheme of things the death rate isn't through the roof.... all the measures taken like Lockdown were supposed to be to SLOW DOWN the spread so the Hospitals could cope... but it created the perception that it was more dangerous than it is...

IMO... a mandatory vaccine is not needed.... but there may be something else going on with all this ??? Maybe bringing in nano chipping of the human population... through the back door...

 

 

Bee you are forgetting that those that get the disease are not necessarily as healthy as they were before the disease.

It causes strokes in younger people. The lung damage can be permanent. And I am not referring to the elder or impaired. It kills children. It can cause heart and kidney disease in younger people.

People still pretend that it only affects those people over there, but that is not the case. The more we see of this disease the more it is realized that this disease is more far reaching than people expect it to be.

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Gromdor said:

Sounds like another pro-choice/pro-life argument.    Do people have freedom to chose what to do with their bodies or should the government step in to preserve the lives of others?

 

It's not what anyone wants to do with their own bodies. It is the threat to the community.

There are people that cannot be vaccinated. If people are not vaccinated then they threaten those people. The unvaccinated are a threat to immuno-compromised. They are a threat to babies.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

Hmm.. I'm a little bit confused by this. 

If you have a group of people - say at a school, or a workplace. If some elect NOT to get inoculated against a specific virus, then what is the harm ? THEY will be vulnerable to the virus, but their (inoculated) colleagues would be immune. Hence even if the non-inoculated people get the disease, they won't be able to spread it to the inoculated people. They can only spread it to their fellow non-inoculated colleagues ? 

So where is the public risk ? 

There is the health risk to those that cannot be vaccinated.

There is the economic risk to the community by potentially incurring costs those that get sick cannot cover.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, bee said:

I don't know much about him... but I guessing that he is a Political Globalist breaking cover... :D....^_^...

to try and familiarize the public with the concept and justify - mandatory forced vaccination...

Well he has always been a staunch conservative and defended President Trump during impeachment.    He is a Constitutional scholar and like  many others on the boards, thinks the Constitution should be followed to the letter.

It is a s surprising to me as Donald Trump Jr.  endorsing Joe Biden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Well he has always been a staunch conservative and defended President Trump during impeachment.    He is a Constitutional scholar and like  many others on the boards, thinks the Constitution should be followed to the letter.

It is a s surprising to me as Donald Trump Jr.  endorsing Joe Biden.

So what's your stance. Do you disagree agree with him or not? You've made every case to compel but haven't taken a stance on a mandate?

Personally I don't think it would be mandated. Not in America and especially not under Trump. The flu kills how many hundreds of thousands in a decade yet no one bats an eye at anyone who chooses not to get a flu shot. It ain't going to happen but the conversation is interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, F3SS said:

So what's your stance. Do you disagree agree with him or not? You've made every case to compel but haven't taken a stance on a mandate?

Personally I don't think it would be mandated. Not in America and especially not under Trump. The flu kills how many hundreds of thousands in a decade yet no one bats an eye at anyone who chooses not to get a flu shot. It ain't going to happen but the conversation is interesting.

Trump won't, and I don't think the Democrats would either.  It might be legal under the Constitution, but it wouldn't be smart.

I remember polio epidemics when I was a kid.  There were two kids in my 3rd grade class on crutches from that.  The vaccine wiped it out.  Same with smallpox a couple of  generations ago.

Those are not viral diseases though. When and if a good vaccine for the  corona virus  family of infections  gets developed, a future government may figure it is worth a try especially  if one comes along with a 10-20% fatality rate.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

don't people who had the virus and recovered  already have antibodies in them, and  are not  able to infect?so why should they get a vaccine?   big pharma is who i trust the least, actually no, gvmnt is who i trust the least, big pharma is right behind them

Edited by aztek
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Yes it does and that is why it surprises me so that Dershowitz would say what he did.

I don't know but I agree that it sounds very "out of character" for him.  He's a Leftist, politically but more than that he has always been about civil rights under law and I don't see compulsion in such an area to be consistent with that.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, stereologist said:

Bee you are forgetting that those that get the disease are not necessarily as healthy as they were before the disease.

It causes strokes in younger people. The lung damage can be permanent. And I am not referring to the elder or impaired. It kills children. It can cause heart and kidney disease in younger people.

People still pretend that it only affects those people over there, but that is not the case. The more we see of this disease the more it is realized that this disease is more far reaching than people expect it to be.

 

 


There are complications that can occur from regular flu and I expect this new one is no different... 

There is a question mark regarding if it is man made in a lab and if so there may be different complications - but even so..

We have to keep the whole thing in perspective - 

I think I had '''it''' in December last year - and I also think it swept through the town where I live at the end of last year (from talking to people in haphazard chats).... everyone here is more or less the same as ever,,,

I really do believe the whole thing is being hyped up too much... 

(although it IS a nasty virus and should be treated as such...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, F3SS said:

He's a famous Lawyer (of the stars?) who as of late has been a regular FOX contributor and largely a defender of Trump's policies though I'm unsure if he actually supports Trump himself. Supposedly he is responsible for advising Johnny Cochran to have OJ infamously try on the glove in court. How's that for a claim to fame? Otherwise I don't know much either but I'm sure there's a wealth of info about him out there. Don't see how he can take this stance though. Perhaps he has an Epstein file and was told to force a narrative?


exactly.... :ph34r:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

5 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

Well he has always been a staunch conservative and defended President Trump during impeachment.    He is a Constitutional scholar and like  many others on the boards, thinks the Constitution should be followed to the letter.

It is a s surprising to me as Donald Trump Jr.  endorsing Joe Biden.

 

20 minutes ago, and then said:

I don't know but I agree that it sounds very "out of character" for him.  He's a Leftist, politically but more than that he has always been about civil rights under law and I don't see compulsion in such an area to be consistent with that.  

 

is he a 'staunch conservative' or a 'Leftist'.... ?..... :) ..... 

or maybe a bit of a chameleon... 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find it a fascinating psychological phenomena, this freedom to do what I damn want, no matter how dangerous, and damn the rest of society...

You guys are happy to take all the benefits of society, but apparently fell asleep at school when they discussed things like smallpox and polio, and the more general concept of herd immunity....

And even more fascinating is the fact that apparently no-one read these words in the OP:

Quote

They should give you an alternative. The alternative is to live in your home

Seems fair to me.  You want your God_Given Freedom to carry some disease around that can kill those who have not got a fully developed immune system, eg babies and young kids, the elderly, the sick?  Then I need the freedom to *know* that you are selfishly dangerous, so please write that in bold letters on your forehead in big letters.  And yeah, stay home.

Edited by ChrLzs
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

23 minutes ago, ChrLzs said:

Seems fair to me.  You want your God_Given Freedom to carry some disease around that can kill those who have not got a fully developed immune system, eg babies and young kids, the elderly, the sick?  Then I need the freedom to *know* that you are selfishly dangerous, so please write that in bold letters on your forehead in big letters.  And yeah, stay home.

 

so what's wrong with having an antibody test... ?..... as an alternative to a vaccine (that may or may not offer the recipient and others protection)..

and as for the rest of your post which is the usual wild eyed moralizing and shaming... I'd just like to observe that you are an Authoritarians / fascist's dream subject.. ..

and one of  the first to be blindfolded and put up against the wall...protesting.. '''but but... I'm on your side.... I believed everything you said...I supported you and your cause......'''

.....................BANG

it's fun being unrestrained  haha... I see the attraction of just letting it all hang out like you do in your posts..:D

:innocent:

 

Edited by bee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bee said:

 

is he a 'staunch conservative' or a 'Leftist'.... ?..... :) ..... 

or maybe a bit of a chameleon... 

 

Or maybe he's a centrist. Such people do exist, you know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Peter B said:

Or maybe he's a centrist. Such people do exist, you know.

 

yeah I know.... I'm one of them.... floating voter - centrist...

:tu:

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2020 at 4:19 AM, bison said:

Not everyone can receive a vaccine. Infants and those with compromised immune systems, typically can not.

Doesn't that depend on whether or not the vaccine contains live virus?

(Flu vaccines for infants don't)

 

Edited by acute
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2020 at 1:19 PM, bison said:

Not everyone can receive a vaccine. Infants and those with compromised immune systems, typically can not  They are vulnerable to acquiring a disease from those who could, but do not receive a vaccine. These persons may have a disease, but not yet have symptoms, so would not know to isolate themselves, so as not to infect others.

Freedom is not an absolute. Living in society involves small limits on freedom, and certain responsibilities. We are not free to drive recklessly, or with excessive speed, or while intoxicated, or otherwise endanger others. Vaccines are tested thoroughly before they are used widely. The risks from which they protect us are far greater than that from receiving a vaccine.   

 

6 minutes ago, acute said:

Doesn't that depend on whether or not the vaccine contains live virus?

(Flu vaccines for infants don't)

 

Perhaps worth concentrating on the point Bison was responding to: for any vaccine, there will be some people who can't have it, for whatever reason. Those people rely on others being vaccinated to minimise the chance of catching that disease.

Have a look at your local vaccine schedule for children - until they've had each vaccine they're vulnerable to the disease the vaccine protects against.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bee said:

 

 

so what's wrong with having an antibody test... ?..... as an alternative to a vaccine (that may or may not offer the recipient and others protection)..

and as for the rest of your post which is the usual wild eyed moralizing and shaming... I'd just like to observe that you are an Authoritarians / fascist's dream subject.. ..

and one of  the first to be blindfolded and put up against the wall...protesting.. '''but but... I'm on your side.... I believed everything you said...I supported you and your cause......'''

.....................BANG

it's fun being unrestrained  haha... I see the attraction of just letting it all hang out like you do in your posts..:D

:innocent:

 

I have no idea what all that waffle was.  

As for your definition of 'fun', do you have kids, Bee?  You get back to me, when a friend or family loses their child's life when antivaxxers manage to drive vaccinations down so low in a suburban region that a carrier of whooping cough infected their innocent, too-young-to be effectively immunised baby.  Whooping cough was effectively eliminated years ago, and would have remained so but for the incredible stupidity and selfishness of new-age-hippy-antivax morons.

Do smarmy icons make that right?  Frankly, it sickens me.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.