- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Banning vaccine passports - how is this a conservative / small government stance?
Posted on 6/7/21 at 10:42 pm to Y.A. Tittle
Posted on 6/7/21 at 10:42 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:
Do you suspect there are a whole lot of “private businesses” with a strong philosophical belief in wanting to impose private health decisions upon their customers?
There’s a strong financial incentive for most businesses to not hire women, smokers, the elderly and various other groups whose health/potential health pose financial risk in one way or another.
Many businesses now require their employees not smoke as part of their contract, and if they could legally get away with not hiring many other groups they would.
So to answer your question, yes. And for the record I think vaccine passports are generally a poor idea for both society on the whole and (most) businesses. I do think vaccine requirements should be enforced in specific settings such as healthcare if you’re interacting with patients.
This post was edited on 6/7/21 at 10:44 pm
2
Posted on 6/7/21 at 10:47 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Many businesses now require their employees not smoke as part of their contract,
Is this true? I have seen where there is a health insurance surcharge given to tobacco using employees, but not outright not allowing them to be employed.
Posted on 6/7/21 at 10:47 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
So to answer your question, yes. And for the record I think vaccine passports are generally a poor idea for both society on the whole and (most) businesses. I do think vaccine requirements should be enforced in specific settings such as healthcare if you’re interacting with patients.
I think we are in general agreement then. I have no idea how the earlier part of your post was analogous to what I was asking at all, though.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 1:07 am to East Coast Band
quote:
but not outright not allowing them to be employed.
Roger just made that up. He does that.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 5:44 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Conservatives are getting as bad as progs with this banning shite.
You call it banning. I call it protecting my privacy. Without any rules, there is only anarchy.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 5:49 am to Powerman
quote:
If you're of the opinion that private business should be able to set their own rules then you shouldn't be against them if they want proof of vaccination.
They can set their own rules, but there is a limit to everything. One limit is the invasion of privacy.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 6:13 am to LSUFanHouston
Since bllack people disproportionately refuse the vaccine, vaccine passports are racist
This post was edited on 6/8/21 at 6:13 am
Posted on 6/8/21 at 6:13 am to LSUFanHouston
The simple response is human beings are hypocrites
Republicans are completely ok with big govt when it’s something they support. Drug laws, marriage laws, this, etc
Republicans are completely ok with big govt when it’s something they support. Drug laws, marriage laws, this, etc
Posted on 6/8/21 at 6:18 am to lsupride87
quote:
Drug laws
Should be repealed
quote:
Marriage laws
Requiring a license from the government to get married is an example of government intrusion into private matters.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 6:24 am to TenWheelsForJesus
quote:
They can set their own rules, but there is a limit to everything. One limit is the invasion of privacy.
Yeah I'm a little taken aback at how so many people have inexplicably oversimplified this concept, government regulation of private industry/business. As if we don't acquiesce in countless instances of such, all over the place. And for good reason. And as if this particular example of it is the personal linchpin for whether a person's truly "conservative" or not. All this is is people weighing in with their opinion whether THEY like this particular instance of government regulation.
In the spirit of OP being a Houston person, how about a major hurricane bearing down on that area and suddenly retailers started charging $50 for a gallon of gasoline. Or $5000 for a previously $500 generator. Just let the market do its thing? Yeah right. Or how about every internet service provider coming together and setting the minimum monthly service fee at $500. Free market again? Or should government intervene to penalize price gouging and antitrust law violations?? Again, there are countless examples.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 7:53 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Well, they can.
Legally I don't believe they can. I mean they can technically ask you, but you can just tell them to frick off.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 9:22 am to lsupride87
quote:
ok with big govt
You do realize this is a state making this decision, not the feds. Right? Given the rest of your post I sorta doubt it, but I thought I'd ask.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 10:17 am to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
Requiring a license from the government to get married is an example of government intrusion into private matters.
So, then, there should be no government-sanctioned marriages right? And thus, no laws about who can marry who, right?
Posted on 6/8/21 at 10:18 am to Flats
quote:
You do realize this is a state making this decision, not the feds. Right? Given the rest of your post I sorta doubt it, but I thought I'd ask.
Can states not have attributes of "big government"?
Have you heard of a place called Louisiana?
Posted on 6/8/21 at 10:31 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
So, then, there should be no government-sanctioned marriages right? And thus, no laws about who can marry who, right?
Correct, with the exception of children being allowed to marry
This post was edited on 6/8/21 at 10:33 am
Posted on 6/8/21 at 10:46 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
Can states not have attributes of "big government"?
They can, but it’s an order of magnitude less offensive than when the feds do it, by definition. In any event, for his examples he mentioned 2 issues largely dictated at the federal level so I thought he might be confused. You obviously are if you think this is some gotcha for small(er) government conservatives.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 11:04 am to LSUFanHouston
quote:
So, then, there should be no government-sanctioned marriages right? And thus, no laws about who can marry who, right?
I was responding to the other poster’s belief that conservatives are for regulating marriage. Most conservatives see marriage as a religious institution and free from government interference. What conservatives were against was redefining marriage.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 11:04 am to Flats
After 11 pages I get the feeling that either people are too stupid to understand this particular law/concept or flat refuse to acknowledge it just to be argumentative.
Again I say, if you are not familiar with the background of why rc was going to do this and the reason Florida put a stop to any business or local government doing this then your small government argument is specious and not worthy of consideration.
Florida is protecting its citizens not depriving their freedom. It is exactly what a government should do
Again I say, if you are not familiar with the background of why rc was going to do this and the reason Florida put a stop to any business or local government doing this then your small government argument is specious and not worthy of consideration.
Florida is protecting its citizens not depriving their freedom. It is exactly what a government should do
Posted on 6/8/21 at 11:07 am to thebigmuffaletta
quote:
What conservatives were against was redefining marriage.
I understand where conservatives were against the biblical/religious redefining of marriage.
However, there are many "conservatives" that want government to regulate marriage to between one man and one woman.
That's the "big government" that many like me despise.
Posted on 6/8/21 at 11:08 am to dafif
quote:
Florida is protecting its citizens not depriving their freedom. It is exactly what a government should do
Do their citizens need protecting? From private business decisions that the citizens enter into freely and without coercion?
Assuming they need protection seems pretty nanny-state of you...
Seems an awful lot like when fedgov decides that citizens need protection from being able to travel to Cuba...
This post was edited on 6/8/21 at 11:10 am
Page 11 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News