Despite what the Supreme Court has just said? Wouldn't that make you a law breaker! Yes it would! You do not go by the Supreme Court and the United States Constitution and the Bill of Rights. You can't outlaw firearms because of the Bill of rights, and our current rulling by our Supreme Court. To not obey them would be evil, which is what democrats do. True there are some rinos who do the same. That you are not with the law abiding is clear as day.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Poll: Majority Americans Regret Taking Covid Vaccine
- Thread starter Revmitchell
- Start date
????
Given the topic, anti-vax means opposed to the covid vaccination. "Anti" means opposed or against. Vax is short for vaccination. The topic involves the SARS-CoV-2 (covid) disease and vaccine.
You are obviously ignorant of my position. You should ask rather than assuming and making a fool of yourself.
I am opposed to forced vaccinations. I only mentioned that the military changed regs in 2019 to allow for forced vaccinations (rather than simply being discharged, they can force a vaccination). I never said I supported the change.
?????
This post shows you do not read posts, you just respond in ignorance.
I do not support making owning firearms illegal. Why on earth do you think otherwise?
My comment was that IF the law prohibits gun ownership - which would belong to Congress, not the SCOTUS (as the SCOTUS does not make laws) - then I would obey the law (as it does not contradict God's commands...I am a Christian above a gun owner).
Your post is foolish. I say that I would obey the law as long as it does not contradict God's commands. You say that is me being a "law breaker".
I assume English is your second language?
I don't know if there were any in WW2, but there were in the 1st Century under an oppressive Roman government. They were called "Christians."
You are a law breaker because of our great Supreme Court's decision about firearms. Any law made against them is illegal. For you to not obey the Supreme Court and go along with a democrats law saying otherwise then you break the highest law of the land.
They have interpreted the Second Amendment. They have made a ruling. Perhaps cnn didn't tell you about it. The Bill of Right are Supreme here, no matter what your democratic law breakers decide.
That is a foolish claim.
First, the SCOTUS is not the highest law of the land. It is the highest court, but it makes no laws.
Second, the SCOTUS never interpreted the US Constitution to state that I must own a firearm.
Third, I said that I would obey the law, not that I would disobey the law. This is a hypothetical implying that the law changes (Congress passes a law and the SCOTUS affirms it constitutional, or the SCOTUS comes to interpret the 2nd Ammendment differently, etc.).
Yours is a foolish post. You are taking a liberal stance of misrepresenting the words of others, and doing it poorly.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Everyone I know who got the vaccine wishes they hadn't looking back on it.
Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
Really? Seen Biden lately?
Though a few cities have passed laws requiring firearms ownership
5 American cities that require you to own a gun
Talk about a violation of a person's civil rights! These cities should be sued and publicly shamed for their enforcement that everyone must own a killing tool.
Well...you probably know only hard core individualists who hate government so that wouldn't surprise me. Since I live in a big city and have friends from right wing conspiracy theorists to liberal progressives, I have a view from much of society. I have no one that wishes they had made a different decision, on either side of the debate.
I believe the vaccine is one of personal conscience and I don't begrudge a person either way. Follow your conscience and entrust your life to God.
the "military" has always had forced vaccinations. Its not new. In fact the force all kinds of medical procedures.
This seems logical to me. However, a Congress that would eliminate private ownership of firearms and mandatory confiscation would, IMO, be a Congress that would already be mandating practices (unrelated to firearms) that are anti-biblical and usurping God's authority, such that I'd already be resisting such anti-biblical laws.
(Such an elimination/confiscation law would IMO be far more likely to be enacted despite 2A rather than by excising 2A from the Constitution. Gaining majorities in House and Senate would be a tough task, but far easier than gaining majorities in 38+ state legislatures.)
It’s just a matter of time before everyone will regret taking the experimental vax:
Source:
Who Dr. Shmuel Shapira is:
Professor Shmuel Shapira, MD, MPH, served as director general of the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) between 2013 and 2021, where he led Israel’s efforts to develop a Covid vaccine.
Dr. Shapira is also the founder and head of the Military Medicine Department of the Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine and the IDF Medical Corps. In addition, he is a Senior Research Fellow at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at Reichman University in Israel.
So he's no lightweight chiropractor anything.
Apparently he suffered a physical injury after tgetting his 3rd jab:
Last week, Twitter censored Prof. Shapira—who was “physically injured” after his third Pfizer vaccine—and forced him to remove a post which said: “Monkey pox cases were rare for years.
Twitter Censors Top Scientist Who Links Covid 'Vaccines' to Monkeypox - RAIR
Here is the reference Shapira made.
https://twitter.com/shmuelcshapira/status/1548282864575213573
Shapira shared the tweet from Dr. Julie Ponesse, an 'Ethics Scholar' with a PhD in ethics and ancient philosophy. She is Canadian and was a professor of ethics and Ontario's Huron University Collage.
She was fired for failure to comply with vaccine mandate:
Fast forward to September 16, 2021 when I received a “termination with cause” letter after I questioned, and refused to comply, with my employer’s vaccine mandate. I was dismissed for doing exactly what I had been hired to do. I was a professor of ethics questioning what I take to be an unethical demand. You don’t have to look very hard to see the irony.
Do Not Give Up Your Rights ~ Dr. Julie Ponesse's Speech ⋆ Brownstone Institute
She wrote an entire book about the ethics of covid-19 vax mandates called 'My Choice'.
My Choice
Source:
Who Dr. Shmuel Shapira is:
Professor Shmuel Shapira, MD, MPH, served as director general of the Israel Institute for Biological Research (IIBR) between 2013 and 2021, where he led Israel’s efforts to develop a Covid vaccine.
Dr. Shapira is also the founder and head of the Military Medicine Department of the Hebrew University Faculty of Medicine and the IDF Medical Corps. In addition, he is a Senior Research Fellow at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT) at Reichman University in Israel.
So he's no lightweight chiropractor anything.
Apparently he suffered a physical injury after tgetting his 3rd jab:
Last week, Twitter censored Prof. Shapira—who was “physically injured” after his third Pfizer vaccine—and forced him to remove a post which said: “Monkey pox cases were rare for years.
Twitter Censors Top Scientist Who Links Covid 'Vaccines' to Monkeypox - RAIR
Here is the reference Shapira made.
https://twitter.com/shmuelcshapira/status/1548282864575213573
Shapira shared the tweet from Dr. Julie Ponesse, an 'Ethics Scholar' with a PhD in ethics and ancient philosophy. She is Canadian and was a professor of ethics and Ontario's Huron University Collage.
She was fired for failure to comply with vaccine mandate:
Fast forward to September 16, 2021 when I received a “termination with cause” letter after I questioned, and refused to comply, with my employer’s vaccine mandate. I was dismissed for doing exactly what I had been hired to do. I was a professor of ethics questioning what I take to be an unethical demand. You don’t have to look very hard to see the irony.
Do Not Give Up Your Rights ~ Dr. Julie Ponesse's Speech ⋆ Brownstone Institute
She wrote an entire book about the ethics of covid-19 vax mandates called 'My Choice'.
My Choice
From Dr Malone today letting you know about the latest expensive ‘offering’ being touted as being used by Biden……who continues to test positive.
SARS-CoV-2 (the cause of COVID-19) is an RNA virus, just like HIV is an RNA virus. RNA viruses evolve very rapid and have a lot of genetic mutations. And just like HIV, the COVID-19 virusevolves so quickly that it evolves right out from under single “mechanism of action” (single agent) drug therapy. When a patient begins taking Paxvovid, it appears that the drug keeps many of the viruses from reproducing. Because some of the new mutations happen to have a certain level of resistance to the drug, some viruses do survive. Because of COVID-19’s speedy evolution, the virus responds to selection pressures quickly. So, viruses that happen to survive the drug are favored and then resistant virus strains evolve within the patient. When a patient is immunosuppressed and doesn’t clear the virus (as seems to be happening with Paxvovid), then this evolution has a longer runway to evolve before the virus is cleared by the body. These new strains are then spread through out the population. So, other people can contract the escape mutant resistant lineage. A new variant is born.
When HIV single dose therapies failed, physicians soon realized that basic evolutionary theory leads to a solution from this dilemma. That is evolution of resistant viral strains can be delayed by prescribing a multi-drug therapy. That is why so many early, multi-drug treatment docs used drug cocktails.
So why is it, that the FDA, knowing this - did not chose to exclude immunocompromised individuals from using the drug?
Severely immunocompromised patients can experience prolonged periods of SARS-CoV-2 replication, which may lead to rapid viral evolution. There are theoretical concerns that using a single antiviral agent in these patients may produce antiviral-resistant viruses. Additional studies are needed to assess this risk. The role of combination antiviral therapy or a longer treatment duration in treating severely immunocompromised patients is not yet known.
Right now, patients consuming the Pfizer drug as a single agent therapeutic are increasing the risk of spawning resistant escape mutant variants. If you want a case example of how this works - just look to President Biden and his current treatment plan. That is, round three of the current treatment plan. That is two and a half weeks of having circulating virus in his body. That virus is busy evolving to escape the drug and/or his vaccine.
Now, what we learned also from HIV is that the virus mutates so rapidly, that it evolves so quickly, that it evolves right out from under vaccines - particularly in immunosuppressed patients, who do not rapidly clear the virus. Then vaccine escape mutants are generated with are resistant to the vaccine. So, the fact that Paxlovid is prolonging the virus in the body can only lead to more vaccine escape mutants.
One might think that Pfizer and Moderna wanted to prolong this outbreak…
Naw, that would be too cynical, even for them, right?
SARS-CoV-2 (the cause of COVID-19) is an RNA virus, just like HIV is an RNA virus. RNA viruses evolve very rapid and have a lot of genetic mutations. And just like HIV, the COVID-19 virusevolves so quickly that it evolves right out from under single “mechanism of action” (single agent) drug therapy. When a patient begins taking Paxvovid, it appears that the drug keeps many of the viruses from reproducing. Because some of the new mutations happen to have a certain level of resistance to the drug, some viruses do survive. Because of COVID-19’s speedy evolution, the virus responds to selection pressures quickly. So, viruses that happen to survive the drug are favored and then resistant virus strains evolve within the patient. When a patient is immunosuppressed and doesn’t clear the virus (as seems to be happening with Paxvovid), then this evolution has a longer runway to evolve before the virus is cleared by the body. These new strains are then spread through out the population. So, other people can contract the escape mutant resistant lineage. A new variant is born.
When HIV single dose therapies failed, physicians soon realized that basic evolutionary theory leads to a solution from this dilemma. That is evolution of resistant viral strains can be delayed by prescribing a multi-drug therapy. That is why so many early, multi-drug treatment docs used drug cocktails.
So why is it, that the FDA, knowing this - did not chose to exclude immunocompromised individuals from using the drug?
Severely immunocompromised patients can experience prolonged periods of SARS-CoV-2 replication, which may lead to rapid viral evolution. There are theoretical concerns that using a single antiviral agent in these patients may produce antiviral-resistant viruses. Additional studies are needed to assess this risk. The role of combination antiviral therapy or a longer treatment duration in treating severely immunocompromised patients is not yet known.
Right now, patients consuming the Pfizer drug as a single agent therapeutic are increasing the risk of spawning resistant escape mutant variants. If you want a case example of how this works - just look to President Biden and his current treatment plan. That is, round three of the current treatment plan. That is two and a half weeks of having circulating virus in his body. That virus is busy evolving to escape the drug and/or his vaccine.
Now, what we learned also from HIV is that the virus mutates so rapidly, that it evolves so quickly, that it evolves right out from under vaccines - particularly in immunosuppressed patients, who do not rapidly clear the virus. Then vaccine escape mutants are generated with are resistant to the vaccine. So, the fact that Paxlovid is prolonging the virus in the body can only lead to more vaccine escape mutants.
One might think that Pfizer and Moderna wanted to prolong this outbreak…
Naw, that would be too cynical, even for them, right?
Yep. In Kennesaw GA (a suburb of Atlsnta) the crime rate dropped.
This brings up a good point.
If required by law to own a gun, would you be obedient to that law?
No, you misunderstand the change in the regulation.
In the past the military could "force" vaccinations but could do nothing if one refused except discharge the member.
In 2019 this changed. They can use actual force to administer vaccinations.