Quote (kenw @ 24 Dec 2020 04:03)
If you are not a part of the at risk group, you'll most likely be OK, which is unfornate. Superspreaders like you wouldnt even quarantine yourself if you had it because your freedom will be violated - what a joke . There's a special place in hell reserved for you, but for now , the agonizing pain of your messiah getting replaced will do.
What an odd claim. You accuse people of being super spreaders without any evidence whatsoever. Why?
I've been highly critical of lockdowns and mask mandates from day 1. Yet I've quietly observed all mask mandates and lockdowns from day 1. Have you?
Quote (kenw @ 23 Dec 2020 19:52)
Fighting for a cause albeit dumb > ego massaging rallies and a lot were wearing masks as opposed to muh freedom rallies at least. A vast majority were peaceful protestors but the few bad apples marred the main goal of the movement .
It's strange to an extreme to claim that it's okay for rioters to "fight" for a cause, albeit stupid, and in so doing, spread not only the virus, but actively loot, burn, and murder. Yet denounce actual peaceful protests over martial law measures.
The first amendment does not mention riots or protests. The First Amendment provides the right to peaceably assemble. There's no reason provided for the assembly. So whether it's a peaceful protest over lockdowns, or assembling at a restaurant to celebrate a holiday, or at a vineyard to celebrate a wedding, your right to assemble is guaranteed.
What is it called when aspects of the Bill of Rights (such as the First Amendment) are suspended without due process, and enforced via civil defense forces (such as police)? Martial Law. Literally. So, let's stop attempting to claim that perfectly peaceful assemblies to protest unconstitutional martial law is not "fighting for a cause" while criminal rioting is somehow "acceptable". The very argument is not merely ignorant, it's absurd.