Vaccine mandates on public gatherings.

[JonC]

apparently you don’t agree with him. Cant have it both ways

I agree with Trump on the issue that the vaccines are safe and effective. I agree with Trump that every American should be vaccinated. I agree with the revision of the military policy (Trump Administration) that allows servicemen to be forceably vaccinated or discharged. I agree with Trump that the general public should not be forced to take a vaccine.

I do believe in private ownership and control (of businesses) and I believe in States rights (these two seem to be our biggest disagreement).

 

[Salty]

If it is a state or elected local government rule I have no issue with it. I do not believe the federal government should impose such laws on private companies. But I am all for states rights.

I am all for States/Commonwealth rights - but IMHO - the store should make decisions.
Besides, how is a store supposed to enforce a (store) mask mandate- do we have some 18 year old kid walking around with a bully club? Sure the customer may have a mask on when he enters - but many will take the mask off. --- No place for the govt to make mandates! - one other thing- for the past couple weeks, Syracuse University has hosted home football games. The Dome offfcal policy was masks required except when eating. -The vast majory of Dome spectators were NOT wearing masks. SU officals stated - that they were NOT going to enforce the mask mandate.

 

[JonC]

I am all for States/Commonwealth rights - but IMHO - the store should make decisions.
Besides, how is a store supposed to enforce a (store) mask mandate- do we have some 18 year old kid walking around with a bully club? Sure the customer may have a mask on when he enters - but many will take the mask off. --- No place for the govt to make mandates! - one other thing- for the past couple weeks, Syracuse University has hosted home football games. The Dome offfcal policy was masks required except when eating. -The vast majory of Dome spectators were NOT wearing masks. SU officals stated - that they were NOT going to enforce the mask mandate.

I agree for small businesses, but for large venues (like concerts....things with a broader draw( I think it should be up to the state, better the local government. The reason is it has a greater potential for effecting the community as a whole.

At church we do not require masks. On the sides every row is open. In the middle every other row is closed for those who prefer social distancing.

When my son graduated it was the same way at the high school. They had a section for mask optional and a section requiring masks so that people could attend without feeling unsafe.

 

[Reynolds]

I agree for small businesses, but for large venues (like concerts....things with a broader draw( I think it should be up to the state, better the local government. The reason is it has a greater potential for effecting the community as a whole.

At church we do not require masks. On the sides every row is open. In the middle every other row is closed for those who prefer social distancing.

When my son graduated it was the same way at the high school. They had a section for mask optional and a section requiring masks so that people could attend without feeling unsafe.

You all over the place. Govt should decide here. Businesses decide here. Businesses can't decide if crowd over X size.
Make up thou mind.

 

[JonC]

You all over the place. Govt should decide here. Businesses decide here. Businesses can't decide if crowd over X size.
Make up thou mind.

I do not know how to be more clear.

If you want to start a Marijuana shop you are not free to do do because of state (not federal) laws. States should have the right to government within its jurisdiction.

If the state allows it but the local government has ordances prohibiting you selling pot then you are still not free to do so.

Within the limits of the kaw, however, you should be free to operate your business as you see fit.

What you are talking about is denying American citizens the right to their own property. That is wrong.

If you sell pot within the law and want to have your employees wear purple shoes I should not be able to stop you. If you want to require proof of vaccinations for your customers I should not be able to stop you.

I am saying you do not have the right to take away another man's liberty just to get your way.

 

[Reynolds]

I do not know how to be more clear.

If you want to start a Marijuana shop you are not free to do do because of state (not federal) laws. States should have the right to government within its jurisdiction.

If the state allows it but the local government has ordances prohibiting you selling pot then you are still not free to do so.

Within the limits of the kaw, however, you should be free to operate your business as you see fit.

What you are talking about is denying American citizens the right to their own property. That is wrong.

If you sell pot within the law and want to have your employees wear purple shoes I should not be able to stop you. If you want to require proof of vaccinations for your customers I should not be able to stop you.

I am saying you do not have the right to take away another man's liberty just to get your way.

You are talking about denying American citizens their life. Vaccines killing people.

 

[JonC]

You are talking about denying American citizens their life. Vaccines killing people.

No I am not. I am talking about not denying Americans the right to property.

If I own a club and require proof of vaccination to protect my employees and customers that is my business....because it is MY business. You do not have the right to demand control of my property. And this does not kill anyone.

 

[Reynolds]

No I am not. I am talking about not denying Americans the right to property.

If I own a club and require proof of vaccination to protect my employees and customers that is my business....because it is MY business. You do not have the right to demand control of my property. And this does not kill anyone.

Your demand not to provide a service that may be essential is the problem.

 

[JonC]

Your demand not to provide a service that may be essential is the problem.

You have badly misunderstood. I am not talking about essential services.

I am talking about your call to take away a person's right to property. This is, after all, the first step to socialism....it is indeed a slippery slope.

 

[Reynolds]

You have badly misunderstood. I am not talking about essential services.

I am talking about your call to take away a person's right to property. This is, after all, the first step to socialism....it is indeed a slippery slope.

Ok. Grocery store.

 

[Reynolds]

You have badly misunderstood. I am not talking about essential services.

I am talking about your call to take away a person's right to property. This is, after all, the first step to socialism....it is indeed a slippery slope.

You getting all in left field now. The govt been infringing on my private property rights forever.

 

[JonC]

Ok. Grocery store.

A grocery store is not a large venue. An indoor mall, may be.

 

[JonC]

You getting all in left field now. The govt been infringing on my private property rights forever.

And we have been moving towards socialism. Why speed it up?

 

[Reynolds]

A grocery store is not a large venue. An indoor mall, may be.

@JonC , you advocate that a grocery store owner CAN NOT decide who comes in his store, but a mall owner can decide who comes in his? How you decide that?

 

[Reynolds]

And we have been moving towards socialism. Why speed it up?

You the one doing that.

 

[JonC]

You the one doing that.

No. You are say the people should be able to dictate to men how they run their companies.

You are talking about stripping Americans of liberty.

You do not have a right to shop at a store, but the owner does have a right to run his business as long as it is within the limits of the law.

Having tge people control other people's businesses is a serious step towards socialism

Why not just let America remain a Capitalistic nation? The economy will sort this out without you having to take away people's liberty.

 

[Reynolds]

No. You are say the people should be able to dictate to men how they run their companies.

You are talking about stripping Americans of liberty.

You do not have a right to shop at a store, but the owner does have a right to run his business as long as it is within the limits of the law.

Having tge people control other people's businesses is a serious step towards socialism

Why not just let America remain a Capitalistic nation? The economy will sort this out without you having to take away people's liberty.

With no govt regulation or coercion, the economy will lean heavily toward don't care whether vaxed or not.

 

[JonC]

With no govt regulation or coercion, the economy will lean heavily toward don't care whether vaxed or not.

I doubt it. Most Americans are vaccinated. I think this might be why you are wanting to take away freedoms. Perhaps you believe if you allow men liberty they will not choose what you want them to choose.

 

[Reynolds]

I doubt it. Most Americans are vaccinated. I think this might be why you are wanting to take away freedoms. Perhaps you believe if you allow men liberty they will not choose what you want them to choose.

Are businesses allowed to check any of the other medical records of their customers?
Let the businesses make a free choice. A coerced choice is not free. What part of what I am saying can you not comprehend?

 

[Reformed1689]

And we have been moving towards socialism. Why speed it up?

You and I have very different definitions of socialism.