@bi4smooth said in Because the science says so:

You stupid twit, the German doctors who did experiments on prisoners didn't claim that Science told them this was the right thing to do, they used the human prisoners to conduct scientific experiments... experiments that were known to be fatal to the subjects and were little more than "morbid curiosity" and complete disregard for the value of human life.
Scientists in the US did not tell the President to experiment on people, or to indiscriminately kill people "for the curiosity about it"... they operated on a basis of "save as many as we can" - showing GREAT regard for the value of EACH human life...
Again, your educational background (or lack thereof) is ASTOUNDING!

You will twist anything to validate your comments.

Yup - my analysis was as twisted as a ruler - and your understanding of history is on par with, I'd say, my understanding of sub-particle physics!

Which is to say: you can spell it (well, sometimes!)

By the way, a person who is retarded has a defective brain. A person who is nearsighted has defective eyes. A person who is deaf has defective ears. By calling that woman "retarded", my intent was to offend her. If she really was retarded, she would have an excuse for her behavior. I don't go up to people who are actually retarded, and call them retarded. I go up to people who are acting like assholes (not to offend any assholes) and point out that they are behaving as if they are retarded. Now, simmer down, and go watch a guy get fucked up the ass by two cocks.. such as Mark Zuckerberg.

You stupid twit, the German doctors who did experiments on prisoners didn't claim that Science told them this was the right thing to do, they used the human prisoners to conduct scientific experiments... experiments that were known to be fatal to the subjects and were little more than "morbid curiosity" and complete disregard for the value of human life.
Scientists in the US did not tell the President to experiment on people, or to indiscriminately kill people "for the curiosity about it"... they operated on a basis of "save as many as we can" - showing GREAT regard for the value of EACH human life...
Again, your educational background (or lack thereof) is ASTOUNDING!

You will twist anything to validate your comments.

Do you realize how misogynistic your post was.

The word retard is like calling you a fag.

OK, dearie.

@bi4smooth

Your heroes in 1930's Germany used science to justify a lot of what they were doing.

.

You stupid twit, the German doctors who did experiments on prisoners didn't claim that Science told them this was the right thing to do, they used the human prisoners to conduct scientific experiments... experiments that were known to be fatal to the subjects and were little more than "morbid curiosity" and complete disregard for the value of human life.

Scientists in the US did not tell the President to experiment on people, or to indiscriminately kill people "for the curiosity about it"... they operated on a basis of "save as many as we can" - showing GREAT regard for the value of EACH human life...

Again, your educational background (or lack thereof) is ASTOUNDING!

Your heroes in 1930's Germany used science to justify a lot of what they were doing.

.

@bi4smooth

It's the "follow the science" twats that pass these crackhead laws.

It's the same people that used "science" in 1930s Germany.

Your knowledge and understanding of history is astounding! ... In a negative, "you don't really understand SHIT" way... Let me guess, the last time you actually studied 1930's Germany was in your teens and you barely scraped by with a D in the class...

It's the "follow the science" twats that pass these crackhead laws.

It's the same people that used "science" in 1930s Germany.

Your beloved Great Uncle, by his own words and deeds, proved that he is in fact the dictator.

Let me guess, you believe that gay people in Texas (and elsewhere) should have been totally celibate until the Supreme Court ruling decriminalizing gay sex.

That said, you claim that "science says so" is just plain dumb... idiotic dumb...

Science didn't tell those Aussies to pass that dumb law... Science just said "get people vaccinated. It saves lives"

Idiot lawmakers decided one way to convince people to get the shot is to make their access to alcohol dependent on it... dumb logic, but that wasn't science's position... science didn't say HOW to get people vaccinated, only that it was needed!

@geobear40

I think he's saying to punish the business for following the corrupt law.

Laws are laws - you don't "fight" a law by ignoring it, you fight a law by protesting it, and working to elect representatives to CHANGE the law...

So - if I'm reading you right, you're not just an authoritarian (when Trumpty Dumpty is in power), but you're an anarchist when he's not!

Yer a reel prowd Merikan!

No. If people choose the anti-social posture of refusing to vaccinate (without medical reason), then they should take responsibility for their actions, rather than whining about discrimination. There is no parallel with Hitler.

What is anti-social about choosing to not be vaccinated?

People who choice not to be vaccinated are taking responsibility for their actions. Why should you care if you are vaccinated and boosted and masked (even triple masked) you are safe. Let them be responsible for themselves and you be for yourself.

There are parallels to Hitler is so must as the government is taking control (restricting freedom) in an authoritarian way. There is no science behind any of their claims. John's Hopkins study shows that lockdowns and stay at home orders didn't help stop the spread of Covid. The CDC claims that the only effective mask is N95 or KN95 to stop the spead.

When will the Liberals give up. They have been wrong at every turn. They need to "put on their big boy pants" and say they were wrong and undo all these draconian rules that have no bases in Science.

I think he's saying to punish the business for following the corrupt law.

How does making a minimum wage employee re-shelve all those products have to do with getting back at the control freak government?

You can leave the thread if you like.

Typical liberal attitude, you can demonize and insult your enemies, but get butt hurt when it's done to you.

@eobox91103

NO. You, people, are happy to force things on others just like the Nazis.

There's no point to continuing this thread, when all that remains is childish name-calling.

NO. You, people, are happy to force things on others just like the Nazis.

Funny how you get butt hurt because I brought up a bunch of liberals who violate their own laws/rules after you brought up Boris and now you are complaining that it's no longer an "intelligent" conversation.

Typical liberal.

Didn't Hitler do something like you support? Certain people had laws passed against them, while others didn't.

No. If people choose the anti-social posture of refusing to vaccinate (without medical reason), then they should take responsibility for their actions, rather than whining about discrimination. There is no parallel with Hitler.

Umm, you brought up Boris, but totally forgot to mention the people on your side

This is not about "sides." I was hoping that this thread might actually bring about intelligent discussion of the issues at hand...but I was wrong. This topic has become useless.

Didn't Hitler do something like you support? Certain people had laws passed against them, while others didn't.

I do love the Nuremberg Defense (I was just following orders) that the people on your side love to use as an excuse for your cuntish behavior, as we saw with the LUSH incident and many others.

Umm, you brought up Boris, but totally forgot to mention the people on your side, so I helped you with that lapse. Boris has as much to do with the discussion as the ones I mentioned.

The biggest Nazis are the biggest violators of their own rules. And YES, that includes Boris. Unlike the others, Boris had the decency to reverse the covid crap.

@eobox91103

What does driving too fast have to do with being able to (or not) buy booze? Banning dangerous driving is not the same as banning certain people from buying certain products.

The topic of this thread was government regulation/overreach. My point, which I thought would be obvious, was that governments impose laws and regulations with the intention of protecting people--and that people accept that in many cases like speed limits and traffic signals.

The WA ban does seem odd. One approach might have been to ban the unvaxxed from entering a food store/market at all--but that would be going much too far: An unvaccinated person, no matter how idiotic and dangerous he or she may be, still has the need to buy food. I think the argument could be made, though, that such person does not have a need to buy alcohol.

What did Biden do?

It's amazing to me how some people have to bring up Biden and the "durned Libberulls" when they're not part of the discussion topic. But I agree that politicians--left, right, center, up, and down--do not always follow the rules. Resolving that problem is the task of the voters.