Alan Dershowitz Claims Americans Have No Constitutional Rights To Refuse To Be Vaccinated - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15093345


His argument is actually that 'you have no constitutional right to infect others.' This is very different argument than 'you have no constitutional rights not to be vaccinated.' This guy is so full of shit.

Shouldn't anyone saying that you have to take this vaccine because you could infect others first have to prove that you can infect others?

And how does he or anyone else know that if someone gets a coronavirus vaccine that it will prevent him from contracting the virus and transmitting it to someone else?
#15093362
maz wrote:
This guy is so full of shit.



Yes, but...

The law seeks to balance competing rights and interests.

If the interests of society are strong enough, they could override the interests of an individual that doesn't want treatment.

The question then becomes where is that threshold, when can society demand compliance.

"Because government exists to both promote the general welfare and preserve individual rights, issues can, and do, arise when the two aims come into conflict.

Throughout our nation’s history, we have grappled with difficult questions relating to the government taking private property for public use, privacy, security, religion, the right to bear arms and a wide variety of other social, political, and economic issues.

How are we to draw the line in each instance? Classical republicans, such as Cicero and the ancient Romans, would stress promoting the needs of the community above individual liberty. On the other hand, natural rights philosophers like John Locke would emphasize maximizing the individual rights of life, liberty and property.

“More fundamental rights may receive more robust judicial protection, but the strength of the individual’s liberty interests and the State’s regulatory interests must always be assessed and compared. No right is absolute.” Justice John Paul Stevens"

https://www.greensburgdailynews.com/opinion/balancing-individual-rights-and-the-common-good/article_476dea13-d9d0-55a6-895c-bd746513e814.html
#15093396
maz wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bz6U9TJ-hQ0&feature=emb_title

His argument is actually that 'you have no constitutional right to infect others.' This is very different argument than 'you have no constitutional rights not to be vaccinated.' This guy is so full of shit

Obviously, that specific right is not in the constitution, but as an individual I can still refuse to volunteer to be get a certain vaccine. Of course, the government has more power than the individual and can come and get me and force a vaccine on me. At the present, I have no intention of taking a new vaccine for covid-19 and plan on resisting, so I can let the other willing people be the guinea pigs.
#15093486
maz wrote:And how does he or anyone else know that if someone gets a coronavirus vaccine that it will prevent him from contracting the virus and transmitting it to someone else?


Why are you assuming that this undeveloped vaccine will work differently from other vaccines?

Are you assuming that it won't protect the unvaccinated (which... duh)? Or that vaccinated people will infect each other?
#15093493
Alan Dershowitz is probably right but having a law and enforcing it are two different things.

Ultimately it will presumably be left up to the states, as Trump has let states make all the decisions here. So commiefornia and New York, maybe some other places, are going to call for mandatory vaccinations with an experimental RNA or DNA-altering compound while other states will not have to do it.
#15093851
Wulfschilde wrote:
Alan Dershowitz is probably right but having a law and enforcing it are two different things.

Ultimately it will presumably be left up to the states, as Trump has let states make all the decisions here. So commiefornia and New York, maybe some other places, are going to call for mandatory vaccinations with an experimental RNA or DNA-altering compound while other states will not have to do it.



By the time we get a vaccine or a treatment, Biden will be prez, and people will be breaking the doors down to get the vaccine.

I'm only referring to the sane 90%.
#15093858
Ideally people who refuse to be vaccinated can be blacklisted from buildings that are open to the public. Most likely this would involve the development of a vaccination database and the legal requirement for businesses to inspect, say, a health ID card that is proofed against forgery.

And really, it should be a requirement for participating in society. I can even appreciate that people would have very nuanced reasons for refusing, but in my view it is apparent that if you don't want to be vaccinated, you are presumably self-sufficient and should be able to thrive away from everyone else.
#15093860
Donna wrote:Ideally people who refuse to be vaccinated can be blacklisted from buildings that are open to the public. Most likely this would involve the development of a vaccination database and the legal requirement for businesses to inspect, say, a health ID card that is proofed against forgery.

And really, it should be a requirement for participating in society. I can even appreciate that people would have very nuanced reasons for refusing, but in my view it is apparent that if you don't want to be vaccinated, you are presumably self-sufficient and should be able to thrive away from everyone else.


It's already against the law for students entering the public school system in all states to lack some of the mandatory vaccines.

As such, I don't see how Dershowitz is wrong. Maybe the feds won't show up to vaccinate you, but States can deny several public services to people who refuse compulsory vaccination.
#15093861
Donna wrote:I can even appreciate that people would have very nuanced reasons for refusing, but in my view it is apparent that if you don't want to be vaccinated, you are presumably self-sufficient and should be able to thrive away from everyone else.


Your average anti-vaxx person would try to empty their septic tank directly into the local water source in response to a "Please don't litter" advertisement because rightwing thought is a personality disorder and not a coherent ideology.
#15093864
SpecialOlympian wrote:Your average anti-vaxx person would try to empty their septic tank directly into the local water source in response to a "Please don't litter" advertisement because rightwing thought is a personality disorder and not a coherent ideology.


QFT. It's a combination of chronic brain cell death from past or current substance abuse and emotional resentment, manifesting as pathological anger and sexual ennui. Sometimes there are father/mother issues in the picture.
#15093920
I think anti-vaxx has been grossly over-represented on the internet. Quite the coincidence now that we have a hotly debated "pandemic" that is being used to push an experimental form of a vaccine...
#15093922
They shouldn't force you to be vaccinated. It doesn't matter anyways, because anyone vaccinated can't be infected by the unvaccinated. If they want to risk death, let them. Darwinism in action.
#15093939
Unthinking Majority wrote:They shouldn't force you to be vaccinated. It doesn't matter anyways, because anyone vaccinated can't be infected by the unvaccinated. If they want to risk death, let them. Darwinism in action.

I agree. Give me liberty or give me death - Patrick Henry.
#15094079
In this case, Dershowitz is almost right. On the one hand, I don't know any clause of the Constitution granting the federal government the right to require you to take a vaccine, with the exception of mandatory vaccinations of people joining the military services (including the National Guard). On the other hand, I don't know any clause of the Constitution that denies the states (where the police power lies in the US system) the right to require mandatory vaccinations. The only clause I think would be applicable in the latter case is the 1st Amendment's Freedom of Religion clause and even there, as @Ter implcitly pointed out, there is nothing preventing state and local governments as well as private businesses from requiring vaccinations for use of facilities or hiring, etc. At least for the more dangerous diseases.
#15094108
I hope the government does impose compulsory vaccination. People don't really give a shit if their kids' vaccines are unsafe but I suspect that when the government and big corporations and billionaires start forcing vaccines on everyone then people will start getting real interested in just how safe and effective vaccines have actually been proven to be. Enough people read those IOM reviews of vaccine safety and the jig is up for the lying scumbag babbitt fucks.
#15094324
Yeah we got rid of polio, but are vaccines worth it?

I'm a person who thinks they're very smart and I have a lot of stupid questions. Also, I will never Google anything, it's your job to educate me.

Sure, I could get my idiot spawn vaccinated against chicken pox. Or they could get it the natural way at a pox party. Getting shingles later in life will make them better people.

When I first heard this I was like... wut? :eh: […]

Denying the visa of international students that g[…]

@Pants-of-dog I think I have explained it quite […]

@wat0n 1. The causes of organised crime need […]