Alabama court ruled frozen embryos are children.

I always thought it ridiculous that money can be awarded to anyone in a lawsuit over the death of a non existent child. Far more absurd than your example ..your "view" notwithstanding.

but, yes .. if you are asking if the Judicial system has lost its way .. the answer is Yes !

 

Was the argument from FB not a "my body my choice" argument ? .. in which case not changed .. the Jab violating "my body my choice" .. in the same way as frozen embryo law .. falsehood as justification for law .. be it dressed up as religious belief or utilitarianist belief.

 

I didn't change a damn thing. You were the one acting like only nurses were being forced to take it.

I was just reminding you that the team you blindly follow is the one that tried to force any employer with over 100 employees, to force any employee to take it

 

Yes let's pretend that I'm not specifically referring to the stupid covid vaccine and that's then let's go on and pretend that I want children to die.

I'm not the one that's such a fan of ripping babies out of the womb and pretending they're not human

 

Yeah, Alabama is going to give women the death penalty for a miscarriage. You caught them red-handed. That is precisely what this ruling says.

 

If a private company required vax, that's completely their right. Find another job if you don't agree. And here in Texas, it was Republican governor Abbott that shut down bars, schools, salons, bowling alleys, restaurants, etc.

 

Let me remind you again..... The Biden administration attempted to force private employers Nationwide having 100 or more employees, to force their employees to get the vaccine or be tested weekly.

Now the administration new damn good and well that no private employer was going to eat that cost every week so that was their way of attempting to force Private industry to do their dirty work for them so they could attempt to say that they didn't force anyone to do anything.

But fortunately it was transparent as hell and the court was able to see that and told him to take his dictator ass and go sit down somewhere

 

So you're crying about something that never happened but I list out stuff that DID happen and you ignore?

 

I'm not crying about a damn thing.... I'm pointing out the fact that they did in fact attempt to do so. So it sure as hell wasn't for lack of trying.

There's your fascist dictator in action for you.

 

'Attempting' is much different than Republicans that actually shut down our economy, schools, restaurants, bars, salons, bowling alleys, etc. That's your fascist dictator for you but since he shares your ideology, you're ok with it.

 

Oh yes because no Democrats were crying to shut down the economy and no blue States actually did... The red states were the ones to reopen first even though the Democrats cried about that.

.

 

ain't got no right no such how - any more than has the right to require Cindy to give it up to boss-man in order to keep Job.

Try and splain it to ya one more time .. "my body my choice" -- threatening someone's livelihood = Force - Coercion -= the safety and security of his family put at risk.. a Collectivist Fascist Totalitarian Krystal Nacht accept the Essential Liberty / "my body my choice" violations OR Else .. severe consequences.

"Find another Job if you don't want to blo the Boss" is not a valid argument - not a valid legal nor logical position -- that whole force /coercion thing behind a Gov't mandate .. increasing Gov't Power .. coupled to trampling of Essential Liberty and the founding principle.

 

It's clearly different. People have the right to go to work without some idiot being reckless and exposing them to disease because they don't believe in whatever public health experts told them to do. If they want to stay away from people and go unvaccinated and unmasked, that's when it becomes their body and choice. But when they go out into public, or especially a workplace where other people have to be there to make a living, then they need to take measures to not get other people ill with a potentially fatal disease.

So yes, it's coercive. And appropriate. Maybe the main issue is just your skepticism towards the vaccine. Maybe you'd understand if we were talking about something as lethal as ebola and a vaccine as effective as traditional ones? It's the same sort of thing that leads to forced treatment of people who have TB.

 

If you mean they refused to donate their body, even a part that wouldn't necessarily result in severe long-term consequences for them, (e.g. donating a kidney) to save my life, then yes.

 

If a manager wants you to wear a hairnet to protect the safety and health of his customers, do it or find another job.

 

Correct that folks have the right not to have a reckless idiot expose them to disease -- but, what does this have to do with forcing someone to be exposed to the not uncommon risk of harm from the mRNA Treatment .. since there is no exposure difference between the jabbed .. and the unjabbed in the workplace ?

So no .. there is no difference .. between "Give BJ or lose Job" .. and Be Jabbed .. and face a greater risk of harm than from the BJ -- or Lose Job .. because the Gov't favors forced medical treatment .. at the time still pumping out lies .. long after it was universally recognized - including by the CDC- that the Jab did squat to prevent transmission .. not that one should normally take the political remarks of the CDC without grain of salt .. but in this case you can .. since it was an admission against the political agenda.

Sad commentary .. most of the public duped in one way or another -- into acceptance of Forced Medical Treatment via major propaganda push .. Just like in the early days of the brown shirts .. folks always wonder how the Germans could accept what was happening and not do anything .. it was happened as a series of steps over time .. whittling away civil liberties .. while transferring more power to Gov't .. removing the safeguards put in place by the founders to limit Gov't power.

Sorry to be the necessary illusion pricker -- that now our medical establishment can not be trusted. .. is a painful one that.

 

A nonsensical comparison friend - A hairnet is not a "my body my choice" issue .. no Essential liberty is being violated .. no BJ to the Boss required .. no subjecting oneself to significant risk of harm - taking an experimental medical treatment.

Are you seriously not able to distinguish the difference in Law .. one being an Essential Liberty issue .. the other not. Do you know what essential liberty is .. as opposed to liberty ? This would be helpful for you to understand as I think you are not understanding the difference ?

 

The principle is the same no matter what disease we are referring to. We mandate vacccinations for children…..

 

Vaccinations are manated for children attending the public school system and it's not remotely the same as this new experimental Gene vaccine

 

This doesn't reflect on our science based medicine.

It's an issue of policy.

Yes, at a time when we had doctors, nurses and other first responders coming back from retirement to risk their lives to treat COVID, and dying in record numbers doing so, we have these KARENS complaining that they have the right NOT to be part of the defense of these peoples lives and America at large.

I'm sorry, but that is just flat out disgusting.

 

COVID vaccines are NOT experimental.

Also, vaccinations for "childhood" diseases have been improved periodically.

 

I have no idea how it came to that embryos are children? What gives here? Is it that the woman has to wait the whole nine months for the fetus to be born? Are we saying that the woman's place in the home doing housework or in bed? They shouldn't have tried to ban abortions in the first place. Don't we live in the sign of the times here? What is going on here?

 

Errr - yes it is. Many many jobs require you to abide by workplace health and safety regulations, many of which have significant personal impact ie Pilots are not allowed to take certain medications or fly if feeling unwell
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aip_html/part2_enr_section_1.15.html
But hey! “My body My Choice” eh??

 

It has even more implications because if an embryo is a “person” then any device/intervention that stops the implantation of that embryo could be considered “killing” the baby??

 

You are missing that this ruling has wide ranging impact.

For example, it ends ALL abortions, regardless of time periods.

Strictly speaking, it ends termination of defective fetuses, as that would be euthenasia.

It means that women whose live saving medical treatment that precludes continuing a pregnancy are up for grabs, as the woman's life is no more important that a fetus.


This is NOT just limited to ending IVF, throwing into question the many thousands of frozen embryos that don't even have owners, let alone any possibility of finding a uterus. There are transport companies halting transport of cryogenically preserved embryos in order to evaluate the legal risks involved.

I would be very surprised if companies that provide cryogenic services will continue supplying those services for human embryos, as they would be taking custody of human beings under this rule, and they have no reasonable method of fulfilling that responsibility.