Religious exemption

a reply to: dawnstar

Your disagreement involves weather the covid epidemic justifies the measures the govt has taken to control the epidemic.

My disagreement does. My point, however, is that there are those who do object on religious grounds, and there is no way to determine with any accuracy whether they are sincere or not. How can one dispute what another believes? People even change religions regularly. Perhaps I became religious just in time for the vaccination mandates, then a few years later changed my religion again? Who is to say? Who knows my thoughts? Therefore, if we wish to maintain the 1st Amendment, a personal statement of faith must be all that is required to attain a religious exemption.

And that means a mandate would have no teeth.

So which is more important to you: the freedoms enumerated in the 1st Amendment that date back to the beginning of the country, or a vaccine mandate that is already admitted by the manufacturers to being ineffective?

TheRedneck

a reply to: monkcaw

Having recently learned about the use of aborted fetal cells being used in the preliminary safety testing of various medications and all of the covid shots, I'm concerned about the future implications of being on record with a religious exemption.

Can and would a government, like the US, honor the religious beliefs of those who wish religious exemption from the covid vax, based on its testing and development using technology that relied on aborted fetal cells. And then proceed to deny future treatment based on the previously used exemption?

Seriously, like there's a list of medicines and vax, that aren't compatible with certain declared religious exemption? And somehow medical precedent is set that "honoring the religious beliefs" of a particular patient must be upheld before considering treatment?

Or a declaration must be made in retraction of the previously stated religious exemption to get the treatment?

How many times can it toggle back and forth?

Would and can medical industry find a new way to develop and test medicines that comply or adhere to different religious structures? At what cost? Like a Kosher, Halal, or Christian approved formulation and testing?

Knowing that the medical industrial complex operates on a for-profit basis, I doubt it. What are they gonna do start buying fresh miscarriages?

I think the use of religious exemption is a slippery slope that might be eventually financially abused by big Pharma.

a reply to: TheRedneck

I believe if you read the hobby lobby court decision, they say the the justices aren't in a position to judge the merit of what one claims to be a personal belief. But, the 1st amendment also says the govt cannot exault. One persons beliefs above another, one religion above another. So, how are you gonna handle it when some doctor defies one of these abortion bans for a young incest victim claiming his religious right to act compassionately towards the young girl? Or doctors in those hospitals who refuse to allow pregnancy terminations because their religious beliefs clash when the hospital expects the dr. to just wait it out and let the women suffer in a prolonged miscarriage that has no chance of producing a viable baby?

We no longer all believe in must what the one little community church is teaching. While some are complaining about having to bake gay wedding cakes, there are churches performing gay weddings. And, many of us have just ventured off and formed our own belief systems when we found that the mainstream religions didn't meet our needs, or worse were harmful to us. It wouldn't be just the mandates that would have no teeth, many laws wouldn't either.

You know, the words of the first amendment may have been written down at the birth of our country, but, were the slaves extended that freedom? Were women free to follow their own concious? I don't think so. I think some were, depending on weather their husbands chose to extend it to them. It wasn't till enough of those who were granted that freedom extended it to those other groups that the legal system changed to include those other groups. And, since religion has a strong foundation in tradition, they are prone to be far behind. Far enough behind it seems that they still strive to deny others the same rights they claim they need protection from themselves.

And, it is your opinion that the vaccine and masks are ineffective. If you mean that a vaccinated person still has a chance of contracting covid and passing it on to others, yes that is true by what I have read. But that vaccinated person has less chance of having severe symptoms, less chance of hospitalization, less chance of death. The vaccine is very effective when it comes to that. And, the less covid patients filling your hospital's icu unit, the better you or someone you care about can get the quality of care you might need, for whatever reason. I mean with all the crying that went down about how the dems Obama are were bringing in death panels, it seems that it is republican insanity that has helped bring them in.

a reply to: dawnstar

I believe if you read the hobby lobby court decision, they say the the justices aren't in a position to judge the merit of what one claims to be a personal belief.

That is indeed my point

But, the 1st amendment also says the govt cannot exault. One persons beliefs above another, one religion above another.

True.

So, how are you gonna handle it when some doctor defies one of these abortion bans for a young incest victim claiming his religious right to act compassionately towards the young girl?

I'm not sure if I have heard of a religion that requires one to perform an abortion. Aren't we talking about the opposite: government (or by proxy an employer) forcing one to take actions? A religious belief here is not compelling someone to take an action; it is preventing them from being forced to take an action which they deem spiritually damning.

Or doctors in those hospitals who refuse to allow pregnancy terminations because their religious beliefs clash when the hospital expects the dr. to just wait it out and let the women suffer in a prolonged miscarriage that has no chance of producing a viable baby?

I have heard these arguments before, and they are as fantastical now as they were then. No one is seriously saying that a non-viable fetus which is proving physically dangerous to the mother cannot be aborted. We simply call that "medical exemption."

The abortion argument centers more around late-term abortions where the fetus is healthy and poses no physical danger to the mother.

We no longer all believe in must what the one little community church is teaching. While some are complaining about having to bake gay wedding cakes, there are churches performing gay weddings. And, many of us have just ventured off and formed our own belief systems when we found that the mainstream religions didn't meet our needs, or worse were harmful to us. It wouldn't be just the mandates that would have no teeth, many laws wouldn't either.

That is my point. One is not held to a legal standard by what one particular religion teaches in one particular church building. The Bible, for instance, has many sections that are open to some interpretation. In addition, and I can't believe I am having to repeat this again, religion is more than sitting in a church listening to a preacher. It is a personal relationship with God (or whatever deity one chooses and whatever one chooses to call said deity). It is not a social club, although many churches double as a sort of social club. There are no legal by-laws.

And no laws are to be passed which interfere with one's own religious beliefs anyway. So what laws would have no teeth if the mandates were struck down for religious reasons? Are they even legal?

You know, the words of the first amendment may have been written down at the birth of our country, but, were the slaves extended that freedom?

I reject that argument completely. There are no slaves in the USA; there have not been slaves in the USA for almost 150 years! There is no one alive who ever knew someone who was a slave! ENOUGH WITH THE SLAVERY!

There are countries in the world where slavery exists. The fact that you are trying to demonize a country which does not have slavery while ignoring those who do have slavery means your argument on this point is insincere at best.

Were women free to follow their own concious?

They are now.

This is the year 2021. Women have had the right to vote for quite some time, and are afforded equal protection under the law. The women's rights movement won (and rightly so). It's over. Done. Finito. History cannot be changed, no matter how badly it may offend you; I strongly suggest you start living in the present.

since religion has a strong foundation in tradition, they are prone to be far behind. Far enough behind it seems that they still strive to deny others the same rights they claim they need protection from themselves.

You just contradicted yourself. Is religion the personal relationship with a deity as you claimed in the beginning of this post, or is it only an organized group obeying specific opinions of a preacher? I say the former; you seemed to agree before, but now you seem to say the latter.

And, it is your opinion that the vaccine and masks are ineffective.

It is my opinion that masks are ineffective. It is not my opinion that masks cannot be worn safely by some people. That is a cold, hard fact. I am one of them.

It is the opinion of the pharmaceuticals that manufacture the vaccines, and the governments that make these mandates, that the vaccines are ineffective. I simply agree with them. If a vaccine does not prevent a disease, it is ineffective. That is by definition. Perhaps it is a proactive treatment as you claim, but that does not make it a vaccine.

The simple fact is that even those with the vaccine can catch the disease, spread the disease, become hospitalized with the disease, and yes, die from the disease. There may be a statistical advantage from the vaccine, but thus far I have not seen one. Therefore, it would appear that any statistical advantage the vaccine confers is minimal at best, else it would be noticeable. I personally know of three people who have been vaccinated and yet were hospitalized with a severe case of the disease. I know of one who was not vaccinated, but hospitalized (and she had other issues besides the Chinese virus). That does not tell me that that the vaccine is effective in preventing hospitalizations.

If one is vaccinated against tetanus, for example, one need not be concerned about getting tetanus. I'm sure, in the history of the world since that particular vaccine was developed, there have been a small handful of people who were vaccinated against tetanus who caught it anyway; that is not my point, and any explanations that this one person twenty years ago was in such a breakthrough group are strawmen arguments. One has a high level of assurance after taking that vaccine that they will not contract tetanus. In contrast, the breakthrough rate for the Chinese virus vaccine is literally astronomical, to the point that being vaccinated is not even recognized as protection against the virus by most mandates.

Those are facts, not opinions.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

You can't think of any laws that prevented people from taking an action that they felt they were religiously obligated to take? What about all that griping about the govt trying to restrict worship services during the pandemic?
Some may feel that god would wish for them to feed the poor if they have the means.. while by what I read, some cities have written laws banning such.
And, some doctors may feel that it is wrong to allow women and children to suffer needlessly if they have the ability to prevent that suffering while hospital rules and state laws are there to block them from doing so.

And, well I pity the poor county employee that tries to tell me that I have to do anything about my over grown yard.. it is cruel treatment to the plant life to cut it down!
We all believe a little differently. Just because some of us have a few odd beliefs doesn't mean they are less worthy of consideration as the most common ones. So, if hospitals can leave women to suffer for hour or days miscarrying, allowing sepsis to set in and force children to have children, well, I can let my lawn become a jungle, you can say no to vaccines and masks, and the guy down the street can worship his gorgeous poppy plants as his god and share their mind altering fruit with his congregation I guess.

a reply to: balanc3

All good questions, and I agree, the exemption is a slippery slope. I do feel that we are really just identifying ourselves for future hardships like you have theorized. Religious exemptions, imo, are temporary or transitional, they might keep you working a little longer before the financial reset plans they have really have religious people facing tough decisions. I'm very curious how many religious exemptions will be handed out too. So far I've heard of none.

a reply to: dawnstar

You can't think of any laws that prevented people from taking an action that they felt they were religiously obligated to take?

Again, I think you have things reversed. The vaccine mandate does not keep someone from taking an action; it forces someone into an action they do not want to take. There's a difference.

What about all that griping about the govt trying to restrict worship services during the pandemic?

Those weren't laws. They were never passed by any legislative body. They were mandates, and they were just as wrong as the vaccine mandate.

Some may feel that god would wish for them to feed the poor if they have the means.. while by what I read, some cities have written laws banning such.

Whoa, wait... I need an example of a law that prohibits giving people food based on their income. I mean, I really need an example! I have never heard of such a thing!

And, some doctors may feel that it is wrong to allow women and children to suffer needlessly if they have the ability to prevent that suffering while hospital rules and state laws are there to block them from doing so.

Here again, I need an actual example of such a law. Are you talking about assisted suicide laws? If so, I would hope you would understand that there are two sides to that issue.

And, well I pity the poor county employee that tries to tell me that I have to do anything about my over grown yard.. it is cruel treatment to the plant life to cut it down!

Well, who decided you would live in town? I'd bet you made that decision. Who decided that you had to have grass in your yard? Again, I'd be willing to bet that you were at least complicit in that. Were you aware that you are required to trim grass inside the city limits? I bet you were... so if that is an issue, why not move out to a rural area where no one cares how high your grass is?

See? I can be as silly as you can.

We all believe a little differently. Just because some of us have a few odd beliefs doesn't mean they are less worthy of consideration as the most common ones. So, if hospitals can leave women to suffer for hour or days miscarrying, allowing sepsis to set in and force children to have children, well, I can let my lawn become a jungle, you can say no to vaccines and masks, and the guy down the street can worship his gorgeous poppy plants as his god and share their mind altering fruit with his congregation I guess.

Yeah, but that's not how it works, and you know that.

You also know that hospitals are not sitting around making women suffer through a miscarriage. They are not ignoring sepsis (well, I know a couple that might, but that's another thread). You can let your yard become a jungle, just not where there are city ordinances against it (no one but me has any say over how high my grass gets). And the guy who likes his poppies? I say more power to him! That's some more laws that need to be unwritten.

But as for me and my saying no to something that could harm me physically? Yeah... don't be the poor fellow trying to mask me by force. That will be a sucky day, trust me. Same for the guy that's going to force me to have a vaccination. That's an action being taken against me, not an action I want to do but am being forbidden to do so by law.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: monkcaw
a reply to: balanc3

All good questions, and I agree, the exemption is a slippery slope. I do feel that we are really just identifying ourselves for future hardships like you have theotorized. Religious exemptions, imo, are temporary or transitional, they might keep you working a little longer before the financial reset plans they have really have religious people facing tough decisions. I'm very curious how many religious exemptions will be handed out too. So far I've heard of none.

A religious exemption to this global vaccination mandate is not to protect one's personal religious beliefs, neither is it a strategy to avoid receiving a vaccination to protect the greater community. (not that it is a vaccination anyway as it does not confer immunity)

Another way of evaluating an exemption is to think in terms of acceptance of it. The idea of exemption being a "slippery slope" is fear-based motivation. It is a very political way of thinking - that these agencies are so powerful that they will somehow later punish me for daring to obstruct their agenda. That it will turn around to bite me, so better to hold my tongue and roll up my sleeve(s).

A religious exemption to me means to protect something that is not the domain of belief but of reality. What it is has no economic value so therefore is not considered by these intrusive agencies. Actually, I shouldn't be saying this. The Dalai Lama should be!

Poets and mystics have tried their best to convey what this precious reality; a purity of consciousness, is. It is something powerful and at the same time fragile. It has often been depicted as a thousand petalled lotus. A fragile flower born on the surface of a tranquil lake where it spreads it's perfume. But the roots of the lotus are anchored in the mud. It means that the higher form of being has it's origins in the lower.

I am saying this because the idea of church and state is a persistent meme of separation of the physical and the spiritual. They are not two worlds apart.

Even the symbol of Hippocrates, the caduceus, a staff with two snakes coiled around it, is the official insignia of the Public Health Service. It is originally a mystic symbol. Each crossing of the snakes represents a chakra. It is also similar to the double helix spiral of DNA.

What is the message from the highest agencies which are behind this great global reset?

1.) The pandemic is a great opportunity.

(no biggie, they probably said that about the plague too)

2.) There will be no return to the old normal.

3.) "The Fourth Industrial Revolution, finally, will change not only what we do but also who we are. It will affect our identity and all the issues associated with it: our sense of privacy, our notions of ownership, our consumption patterns, the time we devote to work and leisure, and how we develop our careers, cultivate our skills, meet people, and nurture relationships. It is already changing our health and leading to a “quantified” self, and sooner than we think it may lead to human augmentation."

4,) To redefine what it means to be human.

They plan to play snakes and ladders, fooling with "the code".

Sooner or later we will wake up feeling something has been lost. That something is: potential.

And not to mention the global tracking accomplished by their response to their pandemic:

"One of the greatest individual challenges posed by new information technologies is privacy. We instinctively understand why it is so essential, yet the tracking and sharing of information about us is a crucial part of the new connectivity. Debates about fundamental issues such as the impact on our inner lives of the loss of control over our data will only intensify in the years ahead. Similarly, the revolutions occurring in biotechnology and AI, which are redefining what it means to be human by pushing back the current thresholds of life span, health, cognition, and capabilities, will compel us to redefine our moral and ethical boundaries."

We this....we that.....us this....us that. Who d' hell are they? They are not concerned with a revolution against them, only we the people should be concerned and prepared for a revolution in biotechnology which will redefine us.

I just want to dig in the garden

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: TzarChasm

There's only one reason to be afraid. It's because these devout believers are more convinced of the deadly vaccine than they are of guardian angels protecting the innocent.

No one wants to die, but everyone dies. Adam and eve saw to that, not God. We were given life by God Himself, and it is only natural and proper that we should seek to preserve that gift. But as to how we preserve it through faith, Jesus Himself admonished Satan during His temptation that one should not test God.

Matthew 4:5-7

Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,

And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.

Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

In simple terms, I trust God to handle anything that happens to me despite my best efforts to not have bad things happen to me. I do need to, nor do I wish to trust God while choosing to do something that I know could kill or harm me simply to prove God. If I have a need to make God prove Himself to me by putting myself in danger every so often, that is not faith. It is a demand for proof, which is the opposite of faith.

However, your post brings up another question I have for you: should a person be forced to do something they believe to be dangerous? That doesn't even have religious overtones.

TheRedneck

There was no adam and eve 23andme put that crap to rest.......if we all came from adam and eve as the bible says we would all have the same dna.......and i can tell you my wife and i dont did 23andme and dont share any dna at all.....so there you have it no adam and eve

a reply to: holydarkness

You are free to believe as you choose. So am I. That's the whole point.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: TzarChasm

The same argument can be made for any devout believer who subscribes to the process of being evicted from your mortal avatar and ascending to some lofty alternate dimension.

Interesting. Do you believe that wishing to avoid death is evidence of a lack of religion?

TheRedneck

Possibly a lack of faith/trust in your own religious beliefs?.

a reply to: HilterDayon

This is a good one all the newspeak that adds up to 666 The is only one religious exemption and we all know what that is.
www.bitchute.com...

a reply to: TheRedneck

The concept of religious exemptions are based on the right to worship and act, or not act according to our own personal beliefs. So does it really matter if it is preventing you from taking an action you feel obligated to do or taking an action you feel you shouldn't do? And, the mandates are supported by the law if there are laws that grant the dept. of health or other govt entity to invoke them if needed.

Example of a law that prohibits feeding the poor.. How about this? The Texas law that prohibits anyone except approved individuals or govt employees to give a drink of water while they are standing in line to vote? Ya think watching some little old lady collapsing from heat exhaust when you are carrying an extra bottle of water that would help her would clash with some people's moral compass?

No, I wasn't talking about assisted suicide. I was talking about laws already being enforced that cause doctors to send pregnant women home when they are miscarrying with the baby already entered into the birth canal. I am talking about the newest TX heartbeat law that even the spokesman for the Texas right to life seems to admit will remove options in the management of of miscarriages making the care less effective.

Link

I am talking about forcing 9, 10, 11, and 12 year olds to become mommies because some poor excuse of a man just had to take advantage of their innocence.

And, if I lived in a town, I would have said city employee, not county. And I would probably had the city griping before now. But, I don't live in the city. I live in the area between cities, otherwise known as the more rural areas. Where we live at, those rural areas are governed by the county govt and have county codes and code enforcement. I am just lucky that I live in a we don't give a f..ck what you are doing neighborhood so we are left alone. Of course we really don't care what they are doing either. But, let's take your argument into consideration for a moment. If a medical care provider doesn't feel they should be participating in abortions, maybe they should avoid working in the maternity wards of hospitals. And, if certain groups of hospitals feel they just shouldn't allow them in their hospitals, maybe they shouldn't have maternity wards or accept emergency patients who are having miscarriages. And, maybe, just maybe, they shouldn't have hog wild in buying out so many of our hospitals!
Maybe if police and others who are in positions that require them to have contact with large numbers of people feel that the govt or their bosses shouldn't be able to take the recommended measures to protect the health of the public or coworkers, they just shouldn't be in the career they are in. But, let me ask you something. My health started deteriorating about the same time as covid hit. For reasons I don't Care to go into, I have yet to go to the dr. There has been maybe two times I have been further than my mailbox in the past year. My sons have been the only ones I have been in contact with, the only ones who have been in my home. None of them are bar hoppers, big party goers, social lightning bugs. So, my chances of coming into contact with covid is pretty slim I figure. my chance of spreading it or whatever else I may have, to others, nill.
I am sorry, but I don't care if a bunch of cops come with search warrants, if they can't take measures to prevent exposing me to their possible covid germs, they won't be entering my home without a fight!

a reply to: dawnstar

I am sorry, but I don't care if a bunch of cops come with search warrants, if they can't take measures to prevent exposing me to their possible covid germs, they won't be entering my home without a fight!

The more I hear and see from those areas where they have dug in their heels about the mandates, that is exactly what they are coming for. They want a fight.

It is sheer bullying, terrorizing, forced compliance, intimidation. Their goal is complete control.

I live in the country and I am an old lady.

I know I can't fight an armed war, but I can resist. I will not comply.

Knock me down, lock me up. Call me what makes you feel you are superior, mighty, and more intelligent than me.

Shun me, execute me. I will not comply.

We have reached the point where the die has been cast. There is no one hesitant left. We have all decided, whether we want to be honest with ourselves or not.

You are either going to take it, and you are just waiting it out because you want to make yourself believe you fought the good fight, or you are not going to take it, knowing that you are stepping into the fire. I am committed in my decision. Like many I am long past the the need for explanations or excuses.

I just say "no". A simple, quiet "no". Drop the mike, as they say, and walk away.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

It seems to me that the bullying, terrorizing, forcing is coming from the right just as much, if not more as it is coming from the left though.
But well, my position is beginning to be unless you are my immediate family, just go away and leave me alone. I am not harming anyone, don't believe my sons are bothering anyone either. Go away and live your lives however you want. Heck, for all I know I might be a covid haven and those little germs are just growing, reproducing, and mutating away. But, what can I say, I have been told so many times from the right that they shouldn't have to pay my medical Bill's, that we should have planned better, blah, blah. I warned yas then that this day would come. That suddenly, they govt and public would want to give me some free medicine because they were afraid of those nasty germs I might be harboring. Well, yous didn't want to help me when it would of mattered so maybe everyone should just be happy I ain't out running around spreading whatever germs I might be harboring all over the place? But, force me to allow an unmasked, unvaccinated group of cops or anyone other grou into my safe space, those antimaskers antivac peeps might find me sitting in the next school board meeting they decide to disrupt chainsmoking cigs and coughing and hacking till I pass out!
As long as i am left alone, there won't be a problem.

a reply to: dawnstar

Example of a law that prohibits feeding the poor.. How about this? The Texas law that prohibits anyone except approved individuals or govt employees to give a drink of water while they are standing in line to vote?

Oh, puh-leeze! You twist a law, that is there to stop people from illegally coercing votes, into some version of not feeding the poor? You are seriously grasping at some straws here.

There is a difference between a voter line and a soup line.

I was talking about laws already being enforced that cause doctors to send pregnant women home when they are miscarrying with the baby already entered into the birth canal. I am talking about the newest TX heartbeat law that even the spokesman for the Texas right to life seems to admit will remove options in the management of of miscarriages making the care less effective.

You know, I don't like that law either. But every time more sensible laws get passed, someone comes along and shoots them down. So this is what you get when you refuse to look at the bigger picture. Heck, laws that did nothing more than require a physician performing an abortion to be connected to a hospital, which meant substandard doctors were excluded and women had to go to professionals, have been shot down. And you complain about the health problems with this law when you opposed laws that required better health conditions for the mother? Again, puh-leeze!

You do realize that if body autonomy is shot down over this vaccination mandate, there goes your whole abortion argument as well, right? That whole thing, including Roe v. Wade, is based on body autonomy.

And none of this has to do with religious exemption for a vaccine. It's just more shifting the goal posts to find something to argue over. I entered into a discussion with you to discuss the topic, not to start a discussion over abortion or voter integrity.

If a medical care provider doesn't feel they should be participating in abortions, maybe they should avoid working in the maternity wards of hospitals. And, if certain groups of hospitals feel they just shouldn't allow them in their hospitals, maybe they shouldn't have maternity wards or accept emergency patients who are having miscarriages.

You know, you are treading awfully close to an exposed nerve here. Maternity wards are for live babies, not dead ones. How many times have you walked by a maternity ward and stopped to look at all the little corpses lying there? You haven't.

Miscarriages happen. That's a fact of life. They are not an abortion. An abortion is the deliberate killing of a fetus. Figure it out.

And, maybe, just maybe, they shouldn't have hog wild in buying out so many of our hospitals!

That's another thread, but on this point I will agree. Hospitals should be there to help the sick and injured, not as some profit well. That's a lot of our medical industry problems.

As to your situation, I find it quite odd that you can live in a rural area (which sounds a lot like mine) where people don't butt their noses into other people's lives, and yet say it is OK for both the government or an employer to butt into other people's lives to the point of telling them what medicine to take! Pick a position, willya... either let people live their lives in freedom as they choose or don't.

I get it: you're scared of the virus. OK, a lot of people are. Maybe I should be, but I'm not. Like you, I have a few -minor- health issues now... minor as in my heart don't work right! Eight heart attacks... eight!... and some doctor with a needlepoint fetish and a fancy circular saw that sliced me open like a watermelon and sewed the thing back up the best he could.

And I have not changed one damn thing about my life over this damn virus... not one thing. I still go where I need to go, do what I need to do, see friends, interact with people... and I am still here. Now, if you believe you are in so much danger of dying from this virus, I will thank you for isolating yourself. Please take care of yourself as you see fit. But by all that is Holy, you WILL allow me to do the same!

I am sorry, but I don't care if a bunch of cops come with search warrants, if they can't take measures to prevent exposing me to their possible covid germs, they won't be entering my home without a fight!

The same thing applies to me when someone tries to force me to take medicine that my doctor has advised against. You wanna see a fight... try that. I'll make your fight look like some 2-year old crying for their mommy.

Same goes for anyone trying to mask this old redneck. I can't wear 'em anymore; not enough blood flow as it is. Putting a face mask on me is no different than putting a gun to my head and pulling the trigger. And I didn't get this nickname by putting up with such.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
Ya, well I got lazy, water, food, only difference is the amount of time you can go without it. But here... it seems the supreme court agrees with me, laws that prohibit a person from feeding a starving person interfers with my 1st ammendment right.
Link

An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy. Miscarriages can occur quickly, or be long and drawn out. If the prospect of a successful birth is null, doctors will opt to expedite the miscarriage along, thus, unless the pregnancy is far enough along, their action is killing the baby as long as it has a heartbeat.
But, ya.. you are griping for bodily autonomy.. claiming a religious right to it.. ok.. then we all should have the same right to bodily autonomy as well as the same right to act according to our own beliefs. But, quite frankly, you sound as though you would be deserving of a medical exemption when it comes to masks... well, I am sorry but as long as women are being sent home multiple times in as many days and collapsing on the er floor as they try to send her home the third time while she is miscarrying and women are running around texas with babies in their birth canal. And let's not forget about the 11 and 12 year old kids forced to become mommies. I really think the idea of bodily autonomy and mandates, religious freedom and health exceptions are pretty much shot to hades anyways.
Ya know in the bible where lists the fruits of the spirit and it says:
Against which there is no law? One of those fruits is compassion. Regardless of what that Georgia law had as far as it's intention, I do believe if it is being enforced it would be prohibiting a person from being compassionate to a person who might be having serious medical problems from heat and lack of water. Same with the florida law about feeding the homeless that was shot down. There are probably many more examples. I went with the abortion issue because in that one you have the possibility of both sides claiming religious protections really. Which well when it got to that point, I don't know what the answer is really.
By the way, I don't really think it is that compassionate to force a person to get a vaccine that they may be afraid to take either.

And, by the way, I am not afraid of dying.. I am just a stubborn witch (wordplay is your friend) who is tired of the happy horsecrap and finds it enjoyable to help the whirlwind of chaos travel once the horsecrap puts it into motion.

a reply to: dawnstar

But here... it seems the supreme court agrees with me, laws that prohibit a person from feeding a starving person interfers with my 1st ammendment right.

And that is a good thing IMO. I'm not sure that actually falls under the 1st, but it is a human right nonetheless.

An abortion is the termination of a pregnancy.

A miscarriage is only an abortion if dying from old age is a murder. No, do not go trying to redefine words. An abortion is a deliberate act performed by a person to intentionally terminate a pregnancy by killing the child. Go back to that Texas law, or any of the many laws that have been passed against abortion. How can there even be a law against a miscarriage? The very concept is as ridiculous as a law against dying from old age.

As long as you are calling miscarriages abortions, you are purposely setting yourself up for an argument. That's not the way things work.

And I am plenty familiar with miscarriages, thank you very damn much.

By the way, I don't really think it is that compassionate to force a person to get a vaccine that they may be afraid to take either.

I happen to think it is absolutely wrong, and completely unconscionable. Even lying in the hospital in the middle of a heart attack, heading to emergency surgery, I wanted to know what the doctors were prescribing and why. I damn sure want to know now when there is no emergency, and I will decide what is injected into me and what is not.

And, by the way, I am not afraid of dying.. I am just a stubborn witch (wordplay is your friend) who is tired of the happy horsecrap and finds it enjoyable to help the whirlwind of chaos travel once the horsecrap puts it into motion.

Just stirring the pot, eh? Well, if you are that callous toward your fellow human beings that you would delight in creating more misery than we already have, I believe our conversation is over. That is antithetical to everything I believe in.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
Actually, before around the 1980s, the medical community were calling them spontaneous abortions but, I am not calling the miscarriage an abortion but rather talking about the treatment options available for the miscarriage.
Link

Outside of the wait and see approach, at least wait till there isn't a heartbeat approach, the options are the same as the procedures that are abortions. And if you had read the other link I shared with you, you will see that Mr. Seago from the texas right to life seems to consider them the same thing.. at least while the baby has a heartbeat. And, well, thanks to the crazy way the law is written, what people like mr Seago think is more important than what judge thinks since the law is not clear and any dr who takes a chance on it might find themselves having to take their case,up to the supreme court and he probably doesn't have the kind of supply of dark money flowing in that those right to life groups do and has no possibility or recouping the costs even if he wins the case. And, weather it is giving a thirsty person a drink of water or intervening to prevent unnecessary pain and suffering during a miscarriage one may have to tune out that spirit and block that fruit from being made manifest in the world. So ya, I see it as a 1st ammendment issue far more than I accept that masks are against religious values because we are all made in the image of god and it is a sin to hide that image behind a mask. Religions, including christian, tried to hide women's faces with burkas, veils, heck, just keep them in the tents for centuries.

Creating misery, huh? I am sorry but a few words now and then on a stupid forum isn't gonna create much of anything? And,gee, when I say that women should just start saying no to their husband's sexual advances, ya it might cause a little misery somewhere for the one whose wife actually listens but well... it is something that is said by so many pro lifers on these boards.. you should of had the sex if you didn't want a baby. Or how the right kept saying that if the people weren't making enough money to live they should just find another job... now they are complaining no one is taking those crappy low paying jobs. What a shame. I live with my three adult sons. Two, well I will hold my tongue and just say they are trumpian conservatives. I got sick of them arguing with me about this crap and complaining about me watching cnn and racheal maddow. So now, I just mostly watch old time westerns and,whatever other shows I can find on you tube. And, I get it in stereo, coming from both side of the house, day and night, far right bullcrap!! You go right ahead and blame me for spreading misery if you want. But, as I see it, more blame should be placed on the danged politicians and their talking heads on tv who just keep stirring the pot and making people angrier and angrier. Bible thumpers who either don't believe what they are preaching or just missed the part in the bible where is says telling lies is a no no. But, well, I offered one son one of my bibles to read, really wish he would instead of listening to the self proclaimed prophets spouting utter garbage, but nope he passed it by. Oh well, there is five of them sitting in my bookshelf waiting for him to choose to pick one up I guess.
In the meantime, chaos is my friend. It clears everything out of life leaving you to sort thru the destruction and deciding what is worthy of keeping and what isn't. It may be a painful process but it has it's rewards in the end. And, like I said.. I didn't start the whirlwind I just got tired a long time ago trying to hold things together while it comes through time after time toppling it all over. Afraid of death??? Lol, it is the final frontier and I sure the heck ain't gonna accomplish anything more here!