• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

5th Circuit issues temporary halt to Biden vaccine mandate

Fair enough. We can debate the cost-benefit analysis of mandates, as long as we can all recognizes the basic fact that vaccines reduce the spread of disease.
The cost of this is dire. A federal mandate would give the president the right to act unconstitutionally anytime they can justify something is an emergency.

I know people want everyone to get vaccinated and that's okay to want that but throwing away the Republic doesn't seem like a good idea over an illness isn't that dangerous, especially since we didn't do it for illnesses that were far more dangerous.
 
1). If you don't get Covid you can't spread Covid. Vaccine efficacy rates tell us that fully vaccinated individuals are 1/6 as likely to test positive for Covid as unvaccinated .
2). A vaccinated person is less likely to pass on covid, though that effect wanes over time.

Back of the envelope says that vaccinated individuals are at least an order of magnitude less likely to transmit Covid.


Is it? Or is it the point? You or I don't get a say in OSHA safety regulations, and that is a good thing. The entire point of OSHA is that individuals don't get to decide for themselves what's safe for other people.
Its not a workplace safety issue and you know it, its a public health issue.
 
I don't need to study to see if water is wet. Fewer people with the illness results in less spread. Period.
Dont worry Mithros covered for you, next time, bring your evidence not your assumptions.
 
Its not a workplace safety issue and you know it, its a public health issue.
I think it's just an attempt to try and have a de facto mandate. It's outside of the scope of occupational safety.

If we make it into occupational safety and I'm a cashier at Target and one of my customers gives me covid then I can sue my employer.
 
The cost of this is dire. A federal mandate would give the president the right to act unconstitutionally anytime they can justify something is an emergency.

I know people want everyone to get vaccinated and that's okay to want that but throwing away the Republic doesn't seem like a good idea over an illness isn't that dangerous, especially since we didn't do it for illnesses that were far more dangerous.
I think you exaggerate the cost of mandates and downplay the cost of doing nothing. I'll leave it to the court to determine constitutionality, but there is ample precedence for governments mandates to protect public health. Both in this country and (I'm pretty sure) in every other democracy that has experienced pandemics. I'm not aware of any country where vaccine mandates have caused a collapse of democracy. That precedence is at least good enough to make the attempt and force the courts to rule explicitly. If they knock it down, then fine. Not to mention, Biden isn't even doing a direct mandate. If people are so desperate to avoid vaccination, they can find a job that lets them work from home, quarantine as much as possible, and generally take personal responsibility to avoid spreading the disease to everyone else. Or they could opt for the testing option and not have to change their lives in any significant way. Basically, this barely qualifies as a "mandate". It's the most mild/generous scheme to increase vaccination rates that I can think of.

This disease has killed 750000 Americans. That's at the upper end of estimates for the entire civil war. If we continue to pamper the anti-vaxxers, I could see that number climbing to a million dead, maybe more. What's the number where you change your opinion that it "isn't that dangerous"? This disease is dangerous, and it is comparable to many of the worst disasters in our history.
 
"And a study17 by Public Health England has found that even a single dose of either the Pfizer–BioNTech or Oxford–AstraZeneca vaccine reduced the spread of disease from infected individuals to household members by up to 50%. “It’s likely that all the vaccines have some similar effect,” says Michael Weekes, a viral immunologist at the University of Cambridge, UK. “Overall, it’s quite an optimistic picture.”"

"Both studies found that two doses of the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine were 81% effective at preventing infections. Those who did get infected were also less likely to pass the infection to household members than were unvaccinated individuals.

The first study saw a drop of 78%, and the second 41%, in infectiousness — with the large difference in numbers perhaps explained by the fact that the estimates are based on a very small number of vaccinated people who were infected and then infected others."

"Conclusions Vaccination reduces transmission of Delta, but by less than the Alpha variant."

“They absolutely do reduce transmission,” says Christopher Byron Brooke at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. “Vaccinated people do transmit the virus in some cases, but the data are super crystal-clear that the risk of transmission for a vaccinated individual is much, much lower than for an unvaccinated individual.”

"Dr. Alsip told KENS 5, "There's also data to suggest that those who are vaccinated carry fewer viral particles in the respiratory tract, which makes them less likely to actually spread the disease to somebody else, even if they don't have symptoms.""

"As expected, because no vaccines is 100% effective, infections in fully vaccinated persons (e.g. breakthrough infections) have been observed, albeit at much lower rates than infections among unvaccinated persons; vaccine effectiveness against severe disease remains high."
____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Repeating the same ignorant claim over and over again does not make it true. VACCINATION. DOES. SLOW. THE. SPREAD. The experts and current data is very clear on this. It's also blindingly obvious to anyone with even a basic understanding of biology. You people are spreading misinformation that is getting people killed. Stop it.
Which does answer one question but leaves the other unanswered, what is the difference between people vaccinated and people who previously caught the disease? Bad answer, it depends on the severity of the first response and whether its a variant or not.

From multiple sources it looks like vaccination is the better course with hybrid immunity coming into play from both catching Covid and being vaccinated being the strongest antibody response.
 
That is whats the right wing media is claiming. Other legal experts are saying Biden has a strong case.
He would have a much stronger one with actual legislation.
 
He would have a much stronger one with actual legislation.
Probably, but , well, when one party abdicates their responsiblity to public welfare to 'get' the other party, then, you got to use the tools at hand that are feasible.
 
Probably, but , well, when one party abdicates their responsiblity to public welfare to 'get' the other party, then, you got to use the tools at hand that are feasible.
Well isn't that pithy. Maybe you use the tools that are constitutional, instead.
 
The cost of this is dire. A federal mandate would give the president the right to act unconstitutionally anytime they can justify something is an emergency.

I know people want everyone to get vaccinated and that's okay to want that but throwing away the Republic doesn't seem like a good idea over an illness isn't that dangerous, especially since we didn't do it for illnesses that were far more dangerous.
Agreed, and quoted for truth.
 
Agreed, that was very fast!
Team Biden promised an "emergency" order and then waited weeks to announce it. So, they gave opponents plenty of time to draw up lawsuits.

It may be the strategy: Team Biden does something that will be loved by the New Authoritarian Left and hated by people who still think we should be a free country. He waits until after an election and then gives enough time for it to be tied up indefinitely in court.
 
Team Biden promised an "emergency" order and then waited weeks to announce it. So, they gave opponents plenty of time to draw up lawsuits.

It may be the strategy: Team Biden does something that will be loved by the New Authoritarian Left and hated by people who still think we should be a free country. He waits until after an election and then gives enough time for it to be tied up indefinitely in court.
The shit you people convince yourselves of.
 
Well isn't that pithy. Maybe you use the tools that are constitutional, instead.
The method of going through Osha is well established for being constitutional, despite the whining of the right wing Republicans who are willing to have their followers die it pwn the libss
 
The method of going through Osha is well established for being constitutional, despite the whining of the right wing Republicans who are willing to have their followers die it pwn the libss
Not for a public health issue, no, its not. Its has nothing to do with owning anyone, it has to do with being able to make medical decisions on your own and not having a government that is politically siding with making the decision for you.
 
Not for a public health issue, no, its not. Its has nothing to do with owning anyone, it has to do with being able to make medical decisions on your own and not having a government that is politically siding with making the decision for you.
Considering that so many Republicans are being so anti-mask and anti-vaccination, and not just 'make medical decisions on your own', that is pretty much false. And , considering 'your decisions' can kill other people, that isn't a valid reason anyway.
 
Which does answer one question but leaves the other unanswered, what is the difference between people vaccinated and people who previously caught the disease? Bad answer, it depends on the severity of the first response and whether its a variant or not.

From multiple sources it looks like vaccination is the better course with hybrid immunity coming into play from both catching Covid and being vaccinated being the strongest antibody response.
Sorry, I'm not sure what your point is here. Yeah, getting antibodies from multiple sources (vaccine + infection) will result in the most antibodies. Seems pretty obvious, so what? Are you agreeing that vaccines do in fact reduce the spread?
 
Well isn't that pithy. Maybe you use the tools that are constitutional, instead.
Did the supremes deem it unconstitutional already? I must have missed that headline.
 
Did the supremes deem it unconstitutional already? I must have missed that headline.
So what you need to do, since you are indicating you haven't, is read the OP headline.
 
is random drug testing illegal? Why would Covid testing be illegal then?
Being under the influence of drugs at work is one, criminal and two, impairs skills needed to do multiple jobs and three, can harm others.
 
Being under the influence of drugs at work is one, criminal and two, impairs skills needed to do multiple jobs and three, can harm others.
being under the influence of a drug at work isn't illegal....because they don't just test for illegal substances....having Covid endangers the rest of the workforce....and can impair the entire company from operating.....and harms others.
 
being under the influence of a drug at work isn't illegal....because they don't just test for illegal substances....having Covid endangers the rest of the workforce....and can impair the entire company from operating.....and harms others.
Bolded?

Being under the influence of an illegal drug is by definition illegal. I mean what sort of bullshit do you think you are pulling?
 
So what you need to do, since you are indicating you haven't, is read the OP headline.
You mean the headline that contains the words "5th circuit" and "temporary"? I think it is a safe assumption that this particular legal battle is far from settled.
 
Back
Top Bottom