Reply by Edward Hernandez September 24, 20212021-09-24
The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id 
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...
And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:
> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from > breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...
And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorrectly formatted USENET posting on Thu, 23 Sep 2021 20:05:50 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <siimmu$rqk$4@dont-email.me>.
Reply by John Doe September 23, 20212021-09-23
Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo 

A case in which the Court issue a preliminary injunction preventing New
York from enforcing COVID-19 related occupancy limits on religious
services because of their burden on religion. 


-- 
Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

> X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:d8e:: with SMTP id q14mr6865121qkl.409.1632427203696; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:00:03 -0700 (PDT) > X-Received: by 2002:a25:2cc2:: with SMTP id s185mr8300358ybs.196.1632427203455; Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:00:03 -0700 (PDT) > Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail > Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design > Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 13:00:03 -0700 (PDT) > In-Reply-To: <ebac975b-c31b-47fe-bcb4-826f3c55317dn@googlegroups.com> > Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=24.55.84.254; posting-account=I-_H_woAAAA9zzro6crtEpUAyIvzd19b > NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.55.84.254 > References: <ebac975b-c31b-47fe-bcb4-826f3c55317dn@googlegroups.com> > User-Agent: G2/1.0 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Message-ID: <f3492507-7006-4495-8e4b-1e3fef247d4cn@googlegroups.com> > Subject: Re: OT - COVID and Right to Life > From: Rick C <gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> > Injection-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 20:00:03 +0000 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > Lines: 26 > Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:646303 > > I've been reading of religious exemptions to requirements for vaccination in jobs. I'm not sure that is a good idea. I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) there have been examples of religiously sanctioned behavior that remains prohibited by law or to force behavior that is required by law. There are also examples of counterpoints. > > In Wisconsin v. Yoder the court ruled that the state's interest in providing education was not significant enough to override the individual's religious beliefs. > > In United States v. Lee, the court ruled the religious belief interests of workers and employers was not significant enough to allow exclusion to contributing to the Social Security system. > > I think the degree of distinction in these two cases shows the line is drawn such that a religious exemption to receiving a generally safe vaccine which can help prevent the deaths of hundreds of thousands or even millions of US citizens would not be allowed. I'm pretty sure a rate of death of 1,700 per day is adequate to show a significant interest by the state in mandating vaccinations to everyone medically capable of receiving them. > > -- > > Rick C. > > +- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging > +- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209 > >
Reply by Rick C September 23, 20212021-09-23
I've been reading of religious exemptions to requirements for vaccination in jobs.  I'm not sure that is a good idea.  I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) there have been examples of religiously sanctioned behavior that remains prohibited by law or to force behavior that is required by law.  There are also examples of counterpoints.  

In Wisconsin v. Yoder the court ruled that the state's interest in providing education was not significant enough to override the individual's religious beliefs.  

In United States v. Lee, the court ruled the religious belief interests of workers and employers was not significant enough to allow exclusion to contributing to the Social Security system.  

I think the degree of distinction in these two cases shows the line is drawn such that a religious exemption to receiving a generally safe vaccine which can help prevent the deaths of hundreds of thousands or even millions of US citizens would not be allowed.  I'm pretty sure a rate of death of 1,700 per day is adequate to show a significant interest by the state in mandating vaccinations to everyone medically capable of receiving them. 

-- 

Rick C.

+- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by Rich S September 20, 20212021-09-20
(I've thought about addressing this for some time, so here goes... hope it won't cause "flames")

I love SED for its keen, expert electronic insights. period. I'm not expert-enough to post much, 
but certainly do care about these topics.

I skip over all the off-topic stuff. Usually. But in this thread I detect the "meta-subject".

"What is the real purpose of this discussion group?"

Because mostly the same old buddies tend to post here, its developed into a social media circle.
And you feel comfortable straying off or far off topic. There's no moderator to stop such actions.
 
So SED is not managed, it's reflecting the personality of this "collective personality". 

As such I have to ignore the crankiness and embrace the expertise, as I would with some 
other co-worker ;-)

While it would be nice if we could heal ourselves, there is no significant pressure to do that.
No "HR Department", calling you into the hot seat.

cheers, Rich S.
Reply by Edward Hernandez September 18, 20212021-09-18
The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id 
<sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>:

> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post...
And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>:
> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from > breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS...
And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another incorectly formatted USENET posting on Sat, 18 Sep 2021 15:13:32 -0000 (UTC) in message-id <si4vmr$1o1$1@dont-email.me>.
Reply by John Doe September 18, 20212021-09-18
I've never seen such devotion in a droid...

-- 
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> wrote:

> Path: eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!aioe.org!HQqjtrwtWYY0cW+c5n/Byw.user.46.165.242.75.POSTED!not-for-mail > From: Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> > Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design > Subject: Re: COVID and Right to Life > Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:23:42 -0000 (UTC) > Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server > Message-ID: <si2tge$1ub2$4@gioia.aioe.org> > References: <ebac975b-c31b-47fe-bcb4-826f3c55317dn@googlegroups.com> <shh6u6$1l6e$1@gioia.aioe.org> <4c2cec1c-218b-45bb-83f5-16acc40a1987n@googlegroups.com> <si2go3$604$4@dont-email.me> > Injection-Info: gioia.aioe.org; logging-data="63842"; posting-host="HQqjtrwtWYY0cW+c5n/Byw.user.gioia.aioe.org"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@aioe.org"; > X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.9.2 > Xref: reader02.eternal-september.org sci.electronics.design:645440 > > The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id > <sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>: > >> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post... > > And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id > <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>: > >> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from >> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > CLUELESS... > > And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another > incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 16:45:56 -0000 > (UTC) in message-id <si2go3$604$4@dont-email.me>. > >
Reply by September 17, 20212021-09-17
John Doe <always.look@message.header> wrote in
news:si321i$sos$2@dont-email.me: 

> Rick C wrote: > >> Rick C wrote: > >>> In the case of abortion it comes down to at which point in >>> development you declare a fertilized egg to be a person. There >>> is no unarguable point to draw that line. I've heard some claim >>> it should be as late as 13 years after birth. > >> Interesting that none of more rational right wing-nuts have >> bothered to address this thread. > > Rational people thought you were kidding. > > Rational people expected it to be labeled "OT". > > Rational people are by definition not "nuts". >
That succinctly rules you out as a member of that class. Rationality and being a right wing nut are mutually exclusive.
Reply by John Doe September 17, 20212021-09-17
Rick C wrote: 

> Rick C wrote:
>> In the case of abortion it comes down to at which point in development >> you declare a fertilized egg to be a person. There is no unarguable >> point to draw that line. I've heard some claim it should be as late as >> 13 years after birth.
> Interesting that none of more rational right wing-nuts have bothered to > address this thread.
Rational people thought you were kidding. Rational people expected it to be labeled "OT". Rational people are by definition not "nuts".
Reply by Rick C September 17, 20212021-09-17
On Friday, September 10, 2021 at 11:05:30 PM UTC-4, Rick C wrote:
> It would seem there are very similar concepts involved in the idea of a woman's right to choose vs. a fetus' right to life and being forced to wear a mask and take a vaccine to reduce the spread of a deadly pandemic. > > Individual freedom vs. harm to others. > > In the case of abortion it comes down to at which point in development you declare a fertilized egg to be a person. There is no unarguable point to draw that line. I've heard some claim it should be as late as 13 years after birth. This is why the issue has raged for such a long time with no clear resolution other than an arbitrary decision in the US some 50 years ago based on the viability of the fetus outside the womb. > > In the case of COVID it would seem to be a pretty clear matter of an overwhelming good to the population at large with virtually no chance of harm resulting from vaccines and literally no harm from wearing masks. I believe the chance of harm from getting a vaccine is about the same as a month of driving in the US. This is much like the tiny additional risk from radiation of granite counter tops or tanning in the sun even with sunscreen. > > I can get why there is debate about abortion. I don't get why many of the same people who want to take away the right to choose feel it's OK to impose their will on other's health by promoting the spread of a deadly disease. > > What am I missing?
Interesting that none of more rational right wing-nuts have bothered to address this thread. I guess the contradiction is clear, even to them. -- Rick C. -+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging -+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209
Reply by September 17, 20212021-09-17
Edward Hernandez <dtgamer99@gmail.com> wrote in
news:si2voi$112p$1@gioia.aioe.org: 

> The John Doe troll stated the following in message-id > <sdhn7c$pkp$4@dont-email.me>: > >> The troll doesn't even know how to format a USENET post... > > And the John Doe troll stated the following in message-id > <sg3kr7$qt5$1@dont-email.me>: > >> The reason Bozo cannot figure out how to get Google to keep from >> breaking its lines in inappropriate places is because Bozo is > >> CLUELESS... > > And yet, the clueless John Doe troll has itself posted yet another > incorectly formatted USENET posting on Fri, 17 Sep 2021 20:50:50 > -0000 (UTC) in message-id <si2v3a$vso$2@dont-email.me>. > >
He posts a bunch of bullshit. PEASE STOP following around him declaring such, because then YOU are posting unneccessary bullshit into the group as well. We do not need the clutter, and we alredy know about the putz and do not need daily announcements about just how stupid he is. Doing so takes you down to his level. So STOP IT.