White Sox lawsuit.

[caulfield12]

8 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

Nice Copy/Paste.  I wish we had the same sorts of hands off of my body approach to women's health care, but then the same people go back to pretending to be "pro-life".

That was my next post but didn't want to go there...the contradiction is too obvious, however.

Also not such a surprise with a 95%+ male dominated board 

[DoUEvenShift]

58 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Ron sure knows how to stir the pot here!

To be fair it's not that hard. Being the board troll is an easy gig these days

[ron883]

1 hour ago, southsider2k5 said:

Maybe he should stick to podcasting and announcing.  Or is that not a thing anymore?

He's a man of many talents. He's also a top comedian. Forgot to include that. 

[SkokieSox]

1 hour ago, caulfield12 said:

So if you had/have children in a public school...or private for that matter, you're against teachers and fellow students being tested for MMR, too?

Because last I checked, every teacher has to pass this test to enter a classroom.

https://bookabloodtest.com/products/occupational-health-mmr-testhttps://bookabloodtest.com/products/occupational-health-mmr-test

 

I’m against forced mandates requiring injections. 

[Chick Mercedes]

7 hours ago, SkokieSox said:

I’m against forced mandates requiring injections. 

Don’t join the Army

[SkokieSox]

On 3/9/2026 at 3:31 PM, southsider2k5 said:

Nice Copy/Paste.  I wish we had the same sorts of hands off of my body approach to women's health care, but then the same people go back to pretending to be "pro-life".

It’s not much of an argument to ignore the points being made. Red Herring 

[southsider2k5]

59 minutes ago, SkokieSox said:

It’s not much of an argument to ignore the points being made. Red Herring 

It's really not.  Not allowing people to opt into killing other people is a hallmark of civilized society. 

[WestEddy]

1 hour ago, SkokieSox said:

It’s not much of an argument to ignore the points being made. Red Herring 

What's even being argued here? Jacobsen vs. Massachusetts gives the government the authority to mandate vaccines. The public health is a much greater concern than a person's fear of needles. 

[SkokieSox]

33 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

It's really not.  Not allowing people to opt into killing other people is a hallmark of civilized society. 

No evidence that’s the case. And freedom is the hallmark of a civilized society. 

[SkokieSox]

25 minutes ago, WestEddy said:

What's even being argued here? Jacobsen vs. Massachusetts gives the government the authority to mandate vaccines. The public health is a much greater concern than a person's fear of needles. 

You’ve missed the point entirely 

[WestEddy]

5 minutes ago, SkokieSox said:

You’ve missed the point entirely 

You said this:

 Supporting vaccines or social safety nets doesn’t automatically mean supporting government-mandated medical interventions.

Unless you changed to another point, I really didn't. It doesn't matter who supports government mandated vaccinations. The government has the right to mandate them in the case of an emergency, which the COVID pandemic certainly was. 

[SkokieSox]

9 hours ago, southsider2k5 said:

It's really not.  Not allowing people to opt into killing other people is a hallmark of civilized society. 

That’s emotionally charged, not a serious argument. 

[SkokieSox]

9 hours ago, WestEddy said:

You said this:

 Supporting vaccines or social safety nets doesn’t automatically mean supporting government-mandated medical interventions.

Unless you changed to another point, I really didn't. It doesn't matter who supports government mandated vaccinations. The government has the right to mandate them in the case of an emergency, which the COVID pandemic certainly was. 

You make a weak claim, people obviously have a right to refuse based on the exemptions allowed under the constitution. People’s freedom don’t get circumvented based on alarmist public health sentiments. And suggesting a fear of needles is driving that is unserious and just meant to be condescending. 

[caulfield12]

9 minutes ago, SkokieSox said:

That’s emotionally charged, not a serious argument. 

You're also against seat belts, bicycle/motorcycle helmets, speed limits?

Environmental protection mandates?

Or just anything related to an injection?

What about an energency injection after possible HIV blood transmission?

[caulfield12]

The second decision, Zucht v. King in 1922, arrived at a similar conclusion. San Antonio, Texas, excluded students from public and private schools who were not vaccinated for smallpox. This included the challenger in the case, Rosalyn Zucht. Her attorneys argued the vaccine policy violated Zucht’s 14th Amendment due process rights. Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in the Court’s decision that “long before this suit was instituted, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, had settled that it is within the police power of a state to provide for compulsory vaccination.”

According to the Congressional Research Service’s most-recent analysis, the general principles in Jacobson and Zucht form the basis for modern vaccine mandate policies, even though the Court’s interpretations of the 14th Amendment have changed since 1922.

[SkokieSox]

59 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

You're also against seat belts, bicycle/motorcycle helmets, speed limits?

Environmental protection mandates?

Or just anything related to an injection?

What about an energency injection after possible HIV blood transmission?

Health interventions are a choice. I would lump in seatbelts and helmets, because the liability rests with the individual.

Speed limits are not health measures, no strong feeling there.

No mandated injections. 

[SkokieSox]

57 minutes ago, caulfield12 said:

The second decision, Zucht v. King in 1922, arrived at a similar conclusion. San Antonio, Texas, excluded students from public and private schools who were not vaccinated for smallpox. This included the challenger in the case, Rosalyn Zucht. Her attorneys argued the vaccine policy violated Zucht’s 14th Amendment due process rights. Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in the Court’s decision that “long before this suit was instituted, Jacobson v. Massachusetts, had settled that it is within the police power of a state to provide for compulsory vaccination.”

According to the Congressional Research Service’s most-recent analysis, the general principles in Jacobson and Zucht form the basis for modern vaccine mandate policies, even though the Court’s interpretations of the 14th Amendment have changed since 1922.

There’s plenty of unconstitutional decisions on the books, doesn’t make it right. My point wasn’t whether the US thinks it can mandate or not, it’s that they shouldn’t. Freedom allows for personal choice. 
 

And since the covid vaccines were brought up, there’s strong evidence they’ve done more harm than good. You still can’t get a PI that describes everything in them. It was experimental. Definitely should not have been mandated. 

[southsider2k5]

11 hours ago, SkokieSox said:

No evidence that’s the case. And freedom is the hallmark of a civilized society. 

A million dead people IS the case.  Civilization literally was established to stop people from killing each other.  Modern civilization established that killing people by neglect is still killing people.  It's why everyone over a certain age got a measles and smallpox shot, ending the hundreds of millions of deaths over history from those.  Well we had until people started taking health advice from quacks and drug addicts.

[SkokieSox]

23 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

A million dead people IS the case.  Civilization literally was established to stop people from killing each other.  Modern civilization established that killing people by neglect is still killing people.  It's why everyone over a certain age got a measles and smallpox shot, ending the hundreds of millions of deaths over history from those.  Well we had until people started taking health advice from quacks and drug addicts.

Take all the vaccines you want

[WestEddy]

3 hours ago, SkokieSox said:

You make a weak claim, people obviously have a right to refuse based on the exemptions allowed under the constitution. People’s freedom don’t get circumvented based on alarmist public health sentiments. And suggesting a fear of needles is driving that is unserious and just meant to be condescending. 

And the government has the right to isolate those people to protect the public health. 

I had a friend die of COVID during the pandemic. Calling America's reaction to the pandemic "alarmist" and braying about the Constitution is condescending. 

[caulfield12]

If you were here in Wuhan at Ground Zero your story might change.

Everyone knows someone that died, even in a city of 13 million.

Remember stories of the funeral homes never stopping with the ashes/bodies burning for weeks?

Dr. Li Wenliang, the original whistleblower on the threat Covid originally posed (from my wife's alma mater, in fact) was from our neighborhood in Wuchang.

Wuhan was basically locked down/sacrificed for 2 1/2...well, almost three full years in order to protect the rest of the country.

I ended up getting multiple Chinese vaccines as well as the Pfizer one and seasonal flu shot in order to fly on an airplane/return to the US when my mom almost died from sepsis.

Four months later, she died in a nursing home from Covid in the Quad Cities while awaiting a hospice transfer....and I couldn't even go back again until the following summer for a funeral/memorial mass because I'd already missed three weeks of teaching at the beginning of the semester in Sept/Oct.

Edited Wednesday at 04:45 PM by caulfield12

[southsider2k5]

1 hour ago, WestEddy said:

And the government has the right to isolate those people to protect the public health. 

I had a friend die of COVID during the pandemic. Calling America's reaction to the pandemic "alarmist" and braying about the Constitution is condescending. 

Especially considering the first freedom listed in the Declaration of Independence is quite literally LIFE, which is THEN followed by Liberty and Happiness.  And if you don't think Thomas Jefferson put that first for a reason, you don't know Jeff.

[SkokieSox]

6 hours ago, WestEddy said:

And the government has the right to isolate those people to protect the public health. 

I had a friend die of COVID during the pandemic. Calling America's reaction to the pandemic "alarmist" and braying about the Constitution is condescending. 

Covid killed many people, sorry for your loss. But that doesn’t give credibility to the vaccine rolled out. Something bad happening doesn’t give you or the government control of someone’s freedoms or autonomy.

[SkokieSox]

5 hours ago, caulfield12 said:

If you were here in Wuhan at Ground Zero your story might change.

Everyone knows someone that died, even in a city of 13 million.

Remember stories of the funeral homes never stopping with the ashes/bodies burning for weeks?

Dr. Li Wenliang, the original whistleblower on the threat Covid originally posed (from my wife's alma mater, in fact) was from our neighborhood in Wuchang.

Wuhan was basically locked down/sacrificed for 2 1/2...well, almost three full years in order to protect the rest of the country.

I ended up getting multiple Chinese vaccines as well as the Pfizer one and seasonal flu shot in order to fly on an airplane/return to the US when my mom almost died from sepsis.

Four months later, she died in a nursing home from Covid in the Quad Cities while awaiting a hospice transfer....and I couldn't even go back again until the following summer for a funeral/memorial mass because I'd already missed three weeks of teaching at the beginning of the semester in Sept/Oct.

Sorry for your loss… that’s a terrible experience to lose your mom like that.

But I standby that you shouldn’t have been required to take those vaccines to see her, or for any reason. 

[caulfield12]

4 minutes ago, SkokieSox said:

Covid killed many people, sorry for your loss. But that doesn’t give credibility to the vaccine rolled out. Something bad happening doesn’t give you or the government control of someone’s freedoms or autonomy.

You don't pay taxes, either?

Kind of joking...but I'm not sure if this sounds more libertarian or just anti-govrrnment/authority in general?

Edited Wednesday at 09:58 PM by caulfield12