Coronavirus in Massachusetts (Newton: real estate, city hall, lawyer)

[thebruiser500]

Originally Posted by Urban Peasant

Here are the latest rankings from John Hopkins University:


https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/corona...ates-1.5051033


Massachusetts is now #5 and practically every state in the Northeast is in the Top 10 or Top 20. This surge is unrelentless.

Wow it is unrelentless!

[thebruiser500]

Originally Posted by id77

Nobody's human, civil, or Constitutional rights are being trampled, full stop. Mandates exactly like these have been challenged in the past time and time and bleeping time again, using the very system put in place by the Constitution, and that same system has upheld that such mandates are Constitutional time and time and bleeping time again.

George Washington himself ordered a mandatory smallpox inoculation to troops. Congress passed the Quarantine Act (this time for yellow fever) in 1799, signed into law by John Adams (https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.22401000/). More than a few founding fathers were involved in that one, so I think Napolitano knows what they would have to say about quarantines and mandates, but it's not what you or his viewers were hoping.

The mandatory vaccine crowd is acting like the Nazis did. Laying the groundwork for genocide. Nazis defined the jew problem as “public health” issue.

[htfdcolt]

Originally Posted by thebruiser500

The mandatory vaccine crowd is acting like the Nazis did. Laying the groundwork for genocide. Nazis defined the jew problem as “public health” issue.

As sinister and misguided as your comparison is, the fundamental fact is that Jews could not turn themselves into non-Jewish. The unvaccinated can become the vaccinated...for free.

And it's not mandatory, there is a testing / masking alternative.

[redplum33]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJ18L3BmJ5M

[Williepaws]

Originally Posted by id77

Nobody's human, civil, or Constitutional rights are being trampled, full stop. Mandates exactly like these have been challenged in the past time and time and bleeping time again, using the very system put in place by the Constitution, and that same system has upheld that such mandates are Constitutional time and time and bleeping time again.

George Washington himself ordered a mandatory smallpox inoculation to troops. Congress passed the Quarantine Act (this time for yellow fever) in 1799, signed into law by John Adams (https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.22401000/). More than a few founding fathers were involved in that one, so I think Napolitano knows what they would have to say about quarantines and mandates, but it's not what you or his viewers were hoping.

those mandatory vaccine laws had a very dark side too which the pro vaxxers conveniently forget about. Laws can be used for any purpose as history shows. Its not all to protect public health and govt only cares about the health of the people. Hmmm... from history.com :

In a far darker chapter, the Jacobson decision also provided judicial cover for a Virginia law that authorized the involuntary sterilization of “feeble-minded” individuals in state mental institutions. In the 1920s, eugenics enjoyed wide support in scientific and medical circles, and the Supreme Court justices were not immune.

In the infamous 1927 case Buck v. Bell, the Supreme Court accepted the questionable “facts” presented in the lower court cases that a young Virginia woman named Carrie Bell hailed from a long line of “mental defectives” whose offspring were a burden on public welfare.

“The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes (Jacobson v Massachusetts, 197 US 11). Three generations of imbeciles are enough,” wrote Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes in a chilling opinion.

The Buck decision opened the floodgates and by 1930, a total of 24 states had passed involuntary sterilization laws and around 60,000 women were ultimately sterilized under these statutes.

[justyouraveragetenant]

Originally Posted by id77

Nobody's human, civil, or Constitutional rights are being trampled, full stop. Mandates exactly like these have been challenged in the past time and time and bleeping time again, using the very system put in place by the Constitution, and that same system has upheld that such mandates are Constitutional time and time and bleeping time again.

George Washington himself ordered a mandatory smallpox inoculation to troops. Congress passed the Quarantine Act (this time for yellow fever) in 1799, signed into law by John Adams (https://www.loc.gov/item/rbpe.22401000/). More than a few founding fathers were involved in that one, so I think Napolitano knows what they would have to say about quarantines and mandates, but it's not what you or his viewers were hoping.

you are looking at jacobson vs Massachusetts where that case is the most misinterpreted case. they were talking about a fine for the individual that did not want to get the vaccine. big difference versus forcing someone to take a vaccine or not allowing them in restaurants stores, gyms , entertainment venues , and public buildings. coercion is not consent.

we have never required people before covid to get a jab or be banned from all public places. tell me where in history have people been banned from all establishments if they did not get a jab? ill be waiting...


if you can not decide what you put in your own body then you don't own your own body. you don't own anything. i could be forced to take something that could give me cancer in 5 years. we see this with pharmaceutical drugs where years and years later are found to cause serious health problems.

we have never wanted to vaccinate the entire world. medicine is not a one size fits all. there are people because of health problems that can not take this vaccine. Guillain barre syndrome is only one of those conditions. if I take the vaccine and get a serious side effect or die neither I nor my family can sue the vaccine companies because they have 100 percent immunity. there is a vaccine injury court but it's very very difficult to impossible to get compensation from an injury and its made that way on purpose.


you talk about the courts being infallible but there are many cases in history were the courts were downright racist.

here is a interesting case you might not of heard of...

https://www.history.com/topics/black...ssy-v-ferguson

the same court that ruled on jacobson vs Massachusetts ruled on plessy case.

the same court that ruled on jacobson vs Massachusetts ruled for eugenics. eugenics is flat out evil and barbaric.

there are courts ruling against bidens mandate with osha. its 100 percent unconstitutional you can not debate that it is because its a violation of the 10th amendment.

if I own a company and hire only attractive women can I tell them you either have sex with me or you get fired. I AM NOT forcing them to have sex with me.

coercion is not consent.

[justyouraveragetenant]

there was a poll a tv station made on vaccine mandates for Massachusetts. the results the last time I looked was 52 percent was against while 48 was for. if even a lefty state like mass votes against it then it's a sign its wrong.

[bostongymjunkie]

Not to mention the small facts that we're not dealing with a plague here that will wipe out our entire military but a virus with a 99% survival rate. We're also not dealing with a vaccine that stops the spread of this virus. And before some of the resident simple-minds who patrol this thread like it's their own pop-off, pointing out these facts does not make me an "antivaxxer"

[in_newengland]

Originally Posted by bostongymjunkie

Not to mention the small facts that we're not dealing with a plague here that will wipe out our entire military but a virus with a 99% survival rate. We're also not dealing with a vaccine that stops the spread of this virus. And before some of the resident simple-minds who patrol this thread like it's their own pop-off, pointing out these facts does not make me an "antivaxxer"

What percentage of people over age 65 though? You're counting babies, little kids, teenagers who probably don't even get symptoms.

I do think they should emphasize masks more though. We are done with three layers of cotton. It's time for surgical masks covered with a cloth mask or N95s. That's only for a few months probably, until the Pfizer pill treatment is more available to give older people a fighting change. Pfizer said they'd have enough by March.

[bostongymjunkie]

Originally Posted by in_newengland

What percentage of people over age 65 though? You're counting babies, little kids, teenagers who probably don't even get symptoms.

I do think they should emphasize masks more though. We are done with three layers of cotton. It's time for surgical masks covered with a cloth mask or N95s. That's only for a few months probably, until the Pfizer pill treatment is more available to give older people a fighting change. Pfizer said they'd have enough by March.

Well yeah, 80% are people over 65. The comparison was to the smallpox plagues requiring inoculation in the colonial days, not among the groups with COVID. We should be doing more to protect older/higher risk people. But, of course we also cannot mandate people into protecting themselves. Masks appear to be a window dressing except under very limited conditions.