This bill HB1118, which was written to remove our Religious Exemptions from Daycare children, public & private school children, and College students will be heard on the House Floor this Tuesday, March 4th. Time TBD. Please call your Hawai'i State Representative for exact time the public can attend, or call Representative Diamond Garcia's office at (808) 586-8500. In the meantime, please call and email your Hawai'i State Representative and ask him/her to Vote NO on HB1118. Despite what Representative David Tarnas says, this bill DOES violate our 1st Amendment Right to exercise our religion. This bill also violates Parental Rights. Mahalo in advance!
This has never made it to SCOTUS. The fundamental issue is that the States have the right to make public health policy because it was never mentioned in the constitution. But the federal constitution guarantees freedom of religion. SCOTUS has never agreed to hear one of these cases.
Perhaps maga/maha will eventually realize that we have never lived in a democracy as the checks and balances are sometimes ignored in favor of insanity and corruption.
I'm glad that this time around, they're not so high on the hopium that happened on Trump's first term.
years back I was listening to the conversation of RFK Jr asking Alan Dershowitz (AD) about mandates, and his response was 'yes', 'mandatory vaccination' is legal, governemnt has the right to do it.... I could not believe my ears. The same AD who after so many flies to Little Saint James, U.S. Virgin Islands still has no dirt put behind his ears, can jab anyone all the way to death! Maybe that place down there was offering conferences and discussions exactly on these issues??? Joking, it was a vacation spot.., oh.
Dershowitz was wrong. All federal law and legal precedent requires valid religious exemptions to be offered in the face of vaccine mandates. In addition, Dershowitz was interpreting JACOBSON V. MASSACHUSETTS incorrectly. That's the case always referenced to support mandates. No one got a needle FORCED into their arm - Jacobson paid a $5 fine.
yes, of course Dershowitz was making up something, given his name in German: der-Show-witz, meaning the 'show of a joke', I thought forget it, but that scared me already then.
And now if you follow the reasoning's of the courts to justify the refusal of the religious exemption it is, for Christians at least: 'because Pope got it too', the injections....
Oh yeah, civil rights attorneys and groups like the ACLU will fight to the death for the rights of tiny groups but sold us out when it came to con-vid!
It's just like priests who talk about sin while they lust after children.
These people are mentally deranged where they pick and choose what they consider evil and good. Psychopaths do this too!
From chapter 4 of Ian McGilchrist 's book The Matter with Things:
"One related difference between right and left prefrontal cortex activation is that the left dominates where belief bias points to the correct conclusion, and, by contrast, the right dominates where it does not. Belief bias is in fact generally associated with the left hemisphere, not with the right hemisphere."
Also chapter 4
"To put it crudely, the right hemisphere is our bullshit detector. It is better at avoiding nonsense when asked to believe it, but it is also better at avoiding falling prey to local prejudice and just dismissing rational argument because the argument does not happen to agree with that prejudice"
Please be more specific (1) What is your specific concern with the sentence you referenced, and (2) What are you referring to when you ask, "What is going on?:
it is a clear question, are you implying those two intend to reverse that trend to 5??? or do you mean they do not need that action done by others..? Aren't they are the ones who decide? Sorry, my english...
The second question was while assuming those two intend to increase that ratio, which would be absurd (!!), it is obvious. But still, unclear words, to me.
You are reading what I wrote incorrectly, or I wasn't clear.
The trend has been that the number of states WITH NO religious exemption has been decreasing.
This is good!
But, if Hawaii loses their exemption that GOOD TREND Will reverse to a BAD TREND, and Trump/Kennedy don't need that - it won't be good for them and their ultimate plans
This bill HB1118, which was written to remove our Religious Exemptions from Daycare children, public & private school children, and College students will be heard on the House Floor this Tuesday, March 4th. Time TBD. Please call your Hawai'i State Representative for exact time the public can attend, or call Representative Diamond Garcia's office at (808) 586-8500. In the meantime, please call and email your Hawai'i State Representative and ask him/her to Vote NO on HB1118. Despite what Representative David Tarnas says, this bill DOES violate our 1st Amendment Right to exercise our religion. This bill also violates Parental Rights. Mahalo in advance!
I still don't understand how states were able to violate the Constitution, Bill of rights, and the civil rights act.
What's next? Stopping women from having choice with their own bodies?
Oh wait, now I get it. The courts and the politicians are mentally deranged just like the oligarchs.
https://posthumousstyle.substack.com/p/are-the-tech-bros-insane?utm_source=%2Finbox&utm_medium=reader2
This has never made it to SCOTUS. The fundamental issue is that the States have the right to make public health policy because it was never mentioned in the constitution. But the federal constitution guarantees freedom of religion. SCOTUS has never agreed to hear one of these cases.
It's such a stupid corrupt system.
Scotus has regularly ignored issues in favor of hearing bullshit cases.
Even here we see how corrupt the system is.
https://therealcdc.substack.com/p/the-pro-se-5
Perhaps maga/maha will eventually realize that we have never lived in a democracy as the checks and balances are sometimes ignored in favor of insanity and corruption.
I'm glad that this time around, they're not so high on the hopium that happened on Trump's first term.
years back I was listening to the conversation of RFK Jr asking Alan Dershowitz (AD) about mandates, and his response was 'yes', 'mandatory vaccination' is legal, governemnt has the right to do it.... I could not believe my ears. The same AD who after so many flies to Little Saint James, U.S. Virgin Islands still has no dirt put behind his ears, can jab anyone all the way to death! Maybe that place down there was offering conferences and discussions exactly on these issues??? Joking, it was a vacation spot.., oh.
Dershowitz was wrong. All federal law and legal precedent requires valid religious exemptions to be offered in the face of vaccine mandates. In addition, Dershowitz was interpreting JACOBSON V. MASSACHUSETTS incorrectly. That's the case always referenced to support mandates. No one got a needle FORCED into their arm - Jacobson paid a $5 fine.
yes, of course Dershowitz was making up something, given his name in German: der-Show-witz, meaning the 'show of a joke', I thought forget it, but that scared me already then.
And now if you follow the reasoning's of the courts to justify the refusal of the religious exemption it is, for Christians at least: 'because Pope got it too', the injections....
Oh yeah, civil rights attorneys and groups like the ACLU will fight to the death for the rights of tiny groups but sold us out when it came to con-vid!
It's just like priests who talk about sin while they lust after children.
These people are mentally deranged where they pick and choose what they consider evil and good. Psychopaths do this too!
From chapter 4 of Ian McGilchrist 's book The Matter with Things:
"One related difference between right and left prefrontal cortex activation is that the left dominates where belief bias points to the correct conclusion, and, by contrast, the right dominates where it does not. Belief bias is in fact generally associated with the left hemisphere, not with the right hemisphere."
Also chapter 4
"To put it crudely, the right hemisphere is our bullshit detector. It is better at avoiding nonsense when asked to believe it, but it is also better at avoiding falling prey to local prejudice and just dismissing rational argument because the argument does not happen to agree with that prejudice"
This sentence is really concerning:
"Trump and Kennedy don't need that trend to reverse now and go up to 5."
what the heck is going on?
Please be more specific (1) What is your specific concern with the sentence you referenced, and (2) What are you referring to when you ask, "What is going on?:
it is a clear question, are you implying those two intend to reverse that trend to 5??? or do you mean they do not need that action done by others..? Aren't they are the ones who decide? Sorry, my english...
The second question was while assuming those two intend to increase that ratio, which would be absurd (!!), it is obvious. But still, unclear words, to me.
You are reading what I wrote incorrectly, or I wasn't clear.
The trend has been that the number of states WITH NO religious exemption has been decreasing.
This is good!
But, if Hawaii loses their exemption that GOOD TREND Will reverse to a BAD TREND, and Trump/Kennedy don't need that - it won't be good for them and their ultimate plans