-->
@sadolite
We've been over this. Ordinances in the interest of public health are lawful. Ignorance to scientific principals and stubborness does not supercede law.
My body my choice
Posts
Total:
160
-->
@sadolite
..."All will eventually be exposed and they will die or they wont."...
If when they are exposed, they have had an appropriate anti-body or vaccine, the chance of anyone dying is significantly decreased.
And even if the anti-body or vaccine it is not the specific one for covid19, it may reduce symptoms.
Laws due process mattern but laws and due process change and can vary all over the world and in all of those cases, what is just as important, ---and you seem to lack--- is rational, logical common sense regarding covid19 exposure before such anti-body and vaccines are available.
Again, your ego is the problem here, as it is with the orange-bad-man and his orange-bad-followers whose religion is live free with no mask or die trying. Ego based silliness.
-->
@dustryder
"Ordinances in the interest of public health are lawful." Yes they are, when due process has been used and the legislature approves them. A unilateral decree by an individual is neither.
-->
@ebuc
" laws and due process change and can vary all over the world" Since when are my civil rights and liberties dictated by other countries?
There is no national law in America requiring citizens to wear face masks.
There are no state laws in America requiring citizens to wear face masks.
There are “executive orders” … which are not laws.
There are “government recommendations” … which are not laws.
There are “health and safety guidelines” … which are not laws.
"The international lockdown is based upon the idea that there is a new distinct virus SARS-CoV2 which is spreading, infecting and causing the disease known as “COVID-19.” However, the virus itself has never been isolated nor thoroughly proven to be causing the disease.
The fact is that the coronavirus fails Koch’s postulates.
“What are Koch’s postulates?”
Robert Koch (1843-1910) was a German scientist who identified the specific causative agents of tuberculosis, cholera and anthrax. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in 1905. Before he died, Koch established 4 criteria to identify the causative agent of a disease. These criteria (“Koch’s postulates”) have become a “gold standard” for determining the existence of an infectious agent and for isolating and verifying what is causing a disease.
They are as follows:
1. The microorganism must be identified in all individuals affected by the disease, but not in healthy individuals.
2. The microorganism can be isolated from the diseased individual and grown in culture.
3. When introduced into a healthy individual, the cultured microorganism must cause disease.
4. The microorganism must then be re-isolated from the experimental host, and found to be identical to the original microorganism.
Firstly, SARS-CoV2 (allegedly causing the disease COVID-19) has not been shown to be present only in sick people and not in healthy ones. There are countless cases of people having this virus with absolutely no symptoms. So it FAILS postulate #1. And since it fails postulate #1, it also FAILS postulate #3.
Secondly, SARS-CoV2 has never been isolated. Proper isolation must be done with equipment such as electron microscopes and cannot be achieved through CT scans (which the Chinese were using) or the PCR test (more on this in Assumption 3 below). So it FAILS postulate #2. And since it fails postulate #2, it also FAILS postulate #4, since re-isolation cannot take place if isolation has never occurred."
"The most common test for COVID-19 is the “Polymerase Chain Reaction” (PCR) test, which is able to replicate DNA sequences billions of times. This test has SERIOUS problems.
The PCR test was developed as a manufacturing technique, not as a diagnostic tool, and it is qualitative not quantitative.
“What exactly does that mean?”
This means that the PCR test can only tell you if a virus is present or not, but it cannot tell you in what quantities. Most importantly it cannot make any accurate assessment about whether the virus is actually causing the disease.
Heck, even the CDC itself admits that a positive PCR test does not mean the virus is causing the symptoms you may have!
These are the actual words of the CDC:
“Positive [test] results are indicative of active infection with 2019-nCoV but do not rule out bacterial infection or co-infection with other viruses. The agent detected may not be the definite cause of disease. … Negative results do not preclude 2019-nCoV infection and should not be used as the sole basis for treatment or other patient management decisions. Negative results must be combined with clinical observations, patient history, and epidemiological information.”
What? Huh?
If the scientific “gold standard” COVID-19 test (the PCR) doesn’t even provide proof that the virus causes the disease, why is everyone rushing around like a headless chicken?
The PCR test doesn’t identify or isolate viruses, doesn’t provide RNA sequences of pathogens, offers no baseline for comparison with patient samples, and cannot determine an infected from an uninfected sample. That is staggeringly useless and scientifically meaningless!
The reality is that we have no idea how many people actually have COVID-19. The CDC cannot “confirm” something for which there is no accurate test."
"When it comes to the COVID-19 “death count,” authorities worldwide are counting the deaths in a way that makes no sense, whatsoever.
Here’s why:
If someone dies after testing positive for parasitic infection, they are not listed as a “PARASITE-19” death…
If someone dies after testing positive for fungal infection, they are not listed as a “FUNGAL-19” death…
If someone dies after testing positive for herpes virus, they are not listed as a “HERPES-19” death…
But if someone dies after testing positive for Coronavirus, they ARE listed as a “COVID-19” death…
Does anyone see a problem here?
The sleight of hand is achieved by counting those who died with the Coronavirus as dying from the Coronavirus, even though the CDC admits that a positive PCR test does not necessarily mean it’s the cause of the symptoms or death.
This one trick alone is responsible for vastly skewing the numbers and turning the “official” death count into a meaningless charade bereft of any practical value."
"Since the Coronavirus is really nothing more than an RNA sequence, it’s far more pervasive than we have been told, and there are far more asymptomatic people than we have been told.
The more we test, the more cases we will find. It’s basic mathematics."
"It’s interesting, depending upon the country, the Coronavirus is able to “travel” different distances. For instance, in China, Denmark, and France, the “social distance” rule is 1 meter. In South Korea, it’s 1.4 meters. In Australia, Belgium, Germany and Spain, it’s 1.5 meters. In the USA it’s 6 feet (1.8 meters), while in Canada and the UK, it’s 2 meters.
Hmmm. That’s not exactly “scientific” is it?
Over long periods of time, social isolation can increase the risk of a variety of health problems, including heart disease, depression, dementia, and even death. A 2015 meta-analysis determined that chronic social isolation increases the risk of mortality by 29%."
"Most people are more likely to wind up “6 feet under” due to almost anything else under the sun other than COVID-19.
According to Daniel Horowitz:
“For the first time, the CDC has attempted to offer a real estimate of the overall death rate for COVID-19 and under its most likely scenario, the number is 0.26%. Officials estimate a 0.4% fatality rate among those who are symptomatic and project a 35% rate of asymptomatic cases among those infected, which drops the overall infection fatality rate (IFR) to just 0.26% — almost exactly where Stanford researchers pegged it a month ago.”"
Now you can choose to dismiss all of these facts and you are free to dis prove any of them. But you must prove your source is some how more superior and credible. The bottom line is this, after reading all of this, in my opinion based on scientific credible facts, Lock downs and wearing masks is not necessary and the lock downs are doing far far far more harm than good in terms of human suffering.
8 days later
-->
@WaterPhoenix
"Stop being a hypocrite", the art of debate
-->
@Seljii
okay
-->
@sadolite
Amazing. Every word of what you just said is wrong.
-->
@sadolite
1. The microorganism must be identified in all individuals affected by the disease, but not in healthy individuals.
Yes, if someone does not experience symptoms they can still spread and have the virus. The virus is identified in all people that have the virus, but is not present in those who don't. I'm pretty sure you don't understand that "identified" is not the same as "shown symptoms".
2. The microorganism can be isolated from the diseased individual and grown in culture.
You can insult my sources with your so-called "smart" mind. But all it takes is a simply google search to find out that you were in fact wrong.
3. When introduced into a healthy individual, the cultured microorganism must cause disease.
Do you not understand that having symptoms and having the virus are different things? If someone has the virus, it doesn't necessarily mean that all the symptoms that they have are caused by the virus. This is just common sense. And yes, people who are introduced with the novel coronavirus do in fact get the disease.
4. The microorganism must then be re-isolated from the experimental host, and found to be identical to the original microorganism
Nothing to refute after I refuted your false claim in (2).
-->
@sadolite
Stating facts about the PCR test. Most of it is true
Most of it is true, but the logic is false. The PCR test lacks in most abilities, but it has one which tells you if the virus is present. This, as pointed out by sadolite makes the test completely useless. Well, no. If the virus is present, you know that either you had the disease or you have the disease right now. Both result in a two week quarantine. This is not the most efficient way of doing things, but it prevents the spread of the disease.
In essence, it doesn't matter whether the virus gives you the disease or not (and yes it does actually give you the disease) you can still spread it so STFU, stay at home, and wear a mask.
-->
@Barney
Seljii seems pretty sus of being sadolite's multi-account. He has only posted one thing, which is in response to what WaterPhoenix said about sadolite. And, the account has been created today. Check it out?
-->
@BearMan
Oh Ok if you say so. You googled a source So I guess that proves every word wrong. Just remember we get are information from the same place.
-->
@sadolite
No, you get information from bogus anti-masker sites. You also make up quotes from your own head. Please do not associate my sources with yours.
"My body my choice" is not a anti-masker slogan. Most people choose to have a mask on their face.
Saying "My body my choice" is anti-mask is like saying "My country my rules" Is an anti-environment slogan.
period.
the thing the opening post and others are forgetting, is that they favor abortion bans, AND no mask responsibility. they too could then be said to be inconsistent, because they want to protect the unborn with restrictions on people, but not protect other people with mask restrictions. so you need to be at least consistent. maybe prochoice people should be quicker to support mask freedoms. but so too should prolife people be quicker to support mask mandates. what's the superior position? we should protect life, whether it's unborn or other people fearing a virus. that's consistent, and the best argument.
Well, This slogan could be to be any interpretation. You can wear mask, or you can not.
Your right to do as you please ends when it impedes on others rights to life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. Not wearing a mask results in such an outcome, as does abortion.
7 days later
-->
@sadolite
So lets hear how people reconcile forcing people to wear masks. It's my body and my choice. It is many peoples opinion that aborting human life is murder. The argument in favor of abortion is "My body my choice" If you are wearing a mask and believe you are protected by wearing it, why do I have to wear one? It is your opinion that my not wearing one some how puts your life at risk. I don't want to wear one "My body my choice" Please reconcile. I would like to point out that by deciding to have a baby it does affect other peoples lives so forget that argument.
I read this opening post and I thought - Man i wonder how many this will trigger? And then I read through the posts and I found the responses worse than the religious ones on this site - and then I thought to myself - this is really one of the religious issues of our times.
I think because it is a religious position that therefore it is impossible to reconcile and will not enable constructive or helpful discussion to take place.
People do not really want to think that what they are doing is inconsistent with what they use to justify their own positions typically.
I take the view that "my body, my choice" relies upon a fundamental private property right. It says I own my body. Which if anybody knows anything about property rights and the normal understanding of a bundle of rights - means that I have right to do with my body anyway I like, I can kill fetuses' in my body, I can kill myself. I can use my body like a prostitute - I can have sex whenever I want to - - typically however in economic thinking -and assuming our body is owned by us - is an economic principle - this would assume that we can destroy our own property, buy or sell it or transfer it.
This last word, transfer, harmless at it looks is why EVERY state in the world states that people do not own their own bodies - they say - there is no property in human life. And the reason is simple- transfer as harmless as looks is actually "SLAVERY". We cannot transfer our human body to someone else - we are not allowed to sell our body - except on certain conditions.
This means my friends that the entire argument or premise of "my body my choice" is redundant. The owner of our body is not ourselves - it is the STATE. Now before you keel over and say what a load of rubbish. Who determines whether we slavery is abolished or not? The STATE. Who determines whether abortion is legal or not? The STATE. Who determines whether euthanasia is legal or not? The STATE. Who determines whether we should wear a mask? The STATE. It is not science. It is not religion. It is not us - even if we have no intention of harming someone or not.
We are all owned by the STATE. We do what they say and we will continue to do so - because they tell us so. They own us. We have given them - not even sold them - just given our body to the STATE. And most of us don't even care. That is ok.
And if you disagree with me - that is fine. Totally your prerogative. Just go and break the law and see what happens? Who makes the law? Who enforces the law? Who has to obey the law?
Hence why this question really is a trigger? And why the STATE does not really care?
-->
@ebuc
3} a fetus is organism of the mother, so she chooses what to do with that organism, not you.
Well stated.
The guiding principle here is INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY.
Vaccine status is private personal medical information.
Medical prescription (of hydroxychloroquine and zinc) is private personal medical information.
Pregnancy status is private personal medical information.
THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT HAS NO AUTHORITY TO MANDATE PPE OR CHURCH CLOSINGS OR ANY OTHER PEACEFUL PUBLIC GATHERING.
BEWARE OF ANY "TEMPORARY" "EMERGENCY" "POWERS" THAT VIOLATE YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS.
-->
@Tradesecret
I take the view that "my body, my choice" relies upon a fundamental private property right. It says I own my body. Which if anybody knows anything about property rights and the normal understanding of a bundle of rights - means that I have right to do with my body anyway I like, I can kill fetuses' in my body, I can kill myself. I can use my body like a prostitute - I can have sex whenever I want to - - typically however in economic thinking -and assuming our body is owned by us - is an economic principle - this would assume that we can destroy our own property, buy or sell it or transfer it.
The guiding principle here is INDIVIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY.
-->
@Tradesecret
We are all owned by the STATE. We do what they say and we will continue to do so - because they tell us so. They own us. We have given them - not even sold them - just given our body to the STATE. And most of us don't even care. That is ok.
YES. WE ARE LIVING IN A POLICE STATE. CIVIL RIGHTS ARE A LIE. PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE A LIE.
-->
@MisterChris
Your right to do as you please ends when it impedes on others rights to life, liberty or pursuit of happiness. Not wearing a mask results in such an outcome, as does abortion.
Even before COVID-19(84) there has never been any shortage of infectious diseases (and or other "impediments to life").
Deadly diseases can spread anywhere on the planet at any time. The risk is never Zero. PPE and "social distancing" and the suspension of CHURCHES and other peaceful gatherings would be suspended FOREVER, according to your "impedes on others rights to life" STANDARD.
By purchasing avocados, you are contributing directly to regional warlords who kill countless innocents.
By purchasing diamonds, you are contributing directly to regional warlords who kill countless innocents.
By purchasing chocolate, you are contributing directly to regional warlords who kill countless innocents.
We routinely and habitually "impede on others rights to life, liberty and or pursuit of happiness".
This is nothing new.
-->
@n8nrgmi
but so too should prolife people be quicker to support mask mandates.
AND CHURCH CLOSINGS.
-->
@BearMan
No, you get information from bogus anti-masker sites. You also make up quotes from your own head. Please do not associate my sources with yours.
Click to watch 46 seconds - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG-CyQ9jtdg
-->
@3RU7AL
3ru7al, the pregnant woman is not the same issue and I'm surprised you conflate two seperate issues,
1} individual sorverignty choice of what to do with my body as long as I'm not causing other individuals harm or threatening them,
2} potential or real threat to others by not attempting to slow the spread of a deadly virus, until governments and medical society feel they have the pandemic under control.
......"The masks were called muzzles, germ shields and dirt traps. They gave people a “pig-like snout.” Some people snipped holes in their masks to smoke cigars. Others fastened them to dogs in mockery. Bandits used them to rob banks.
..More than a century ago, as the 1918 influenza pandemic raged in the United States, masks of gauze and cheesecloth became the facial front lines in the battle against the virus. But as they have now, the masks also stoked political division. Then, as now, medical authorities urged the wearing of masks to help slow the spread of disease.
....And then, as now, some people resisted.
....In 1918 and 1919, as bars, saloons, restaurants, theaters and schools were closed, masks became a scapegoat, a symbol of government overreach, inspiring protests, petitions and defiant bare-face gatherings. All the while, thousands of Americans were dying in a deadly pandemic."
This is not to say that banana republic deaths ans injustices, or avacodo deaths injustices etc dont deserve warranted attention, they are more complicated and not a direct threat to peoples of those countries who eat their product.
Covid19 is a potential direct threat if exposed to someon one who is infected.
3ru7al, are you serious and anti-masker? These anti-maskers remind me of ciggerrate commerical from 60's of a Taryton brand smoker with a black eye and their motto is ...'I would rather fight then switch'....to another brand and so dumb cause irrespective of the brand, ciggerrets is going to mame and kill you.
-->
@ebuc
Something is killing people, and a mask is not going to save you.
It's "security theater".
AND IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF GOVERNMENT JURISDICTION.
IN THE SAME WAY THEY CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO LEAVE THEIR HOMES IN A NATURAL DISASTER.
THEY CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS, BUT MANDATORY =/= RECOMMENDATION.
AND,
You'll notice that masks may reduce the range of a sneeze, but thousands of virus particles bypass and penetrate the mask AND linger in the air for hours, regardless of whether you wear a mask or not.
And if you're not sneezing, it makes no difference.
-->
@3RU7AL
It's "security theater".
Yes thats correct governement is a security theater amongest many other things, all sum-total to a secure, heahlty and prosperous nation. Whats wrong with that?
AND IT'S BEYOND THE SCOPE OF GOVERNMENT JURISDICTION.
Says who? And why do you think its "beyond governement jurisdiction?
IN THE SAME WAY THEY CAN'T FORCE PEOPLE TO LEAVE THEIR HOMES IN A NATURAL DISASTER.
Again a differrent scenario and set of circumstances with differrent resultant potentials.
You'll notice that masks may reduce the range of a sneeze, but thousands of virus particles bypass and penetrate the mask AND linger in the air for hours, regardless of whether you wear a mask or not.
3R, if you seriously dont think masks make a signifcant retarding of the spread of covid19, then you not recognizing factual truths. N.Y. hospital workers are one set of proofs.
-->
@ebuc
Show me the data you have on the efficacy of the general public wearing random pieces of cloth over their faces.
Most of the spread is going to be on doorknobs and faucet handles and television remote controls, not from sneezing.