Will Religious Org. Be Required To Force Employees To Receive Vaccine

[RonCorson]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-says-he-would-shut-down-the-virus-not-the-country-during-the-final-presidential-debate/ar-BB1ajnhw

Ok, he said Shut down the virus

• "I'm going to shut down the virus, not the country," Biden said."

[bonnie]

I believe nothing that comes out of his mouth, especially this manufactued panic over vaccine.  You dont exempt congress their staff etc and deliberately bring them by the thousands unvaccinated across the border to scatter thoughout the US and then claim to care. Declare a crisis. But it is effective in geting a brain dead country to say "Isnt he wonderful see how he csres"

[RonCorson]

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

If you live in a society you are going to have rules that are required! If we be save and live on the Earth made New, you are going to follow YAHWEH'S mandated Commandments. Public Health was put in place to protect all the people's health and these are laws.

So when I use words like illegal, lawless and as someone else said unconstitutional, what makes you think that is in anyway against laws. Laws in our country have a proscribed method of being enacted. It is not following the law to create special laws just because some president writes an executive order! 

[stinsonmarri]

1 hour ago, RonCorson said:

So when I use words like illegal, lawless and as someone else said unconstitutional, what makes you think that is in anyway against laws. Laws in our country have a proscribed method of being enacted. It is not following the law to create special laws just because some president writes an executive order! 

Sad that you do not realize that executive order are apart of the constitution. It has been done by many presidents over the years. So all of sudden this president cannot do what the word even says: Executive Order!

This is amazing to me. Now others don't want to follow the Constitution all of sudden.

[bonnie]

Sad that Biden does not realize what it means to stick to his word

https://nypost.com/2020/12/04/biden-wont-mandate-getting-covid-19-vaccine-wearing-masks

 

President-elect Joe Biden on Friday said that he won’t impose national mandates to get vaccinated for COVID-19 or to wear a mask.

But Biden said that he will encourage people to voluntarily do both.

“No, I don’t think it should be mandatory. I wouldn’t demand it be mandatory,” Biden said of vaccines at a press conference in Delaware.

“But I would do everything in my power — just like I don’t think masks have to be made mandatory nationwide — I will do everything in my power as president of the United States to encourage people to do the right thing. And when they do it, demonstrate that it matters.”

Biden said in September that his legal advisers believe a national mask mandate would be constitutional. On Thursday, he said he wanted Americans to voluntarily wear a mask for 100 days after he takes office on Jan. 20.

Biden repeated Friday that during his inaugural address, “I’m going to ask people to commit for 100 days to wear a mask.”

The former vice president will assume power in the midst of a massive vaccination deployment, which is expected to begin shortly after the Food and Drug Administration meets Dec. 10 to review a Nov. 20 vaccine application from Pfizer.

 

He said that voluntarily wearing masks after he takes office could help crush the pandemic.

“If people do it for 100 days in the middle of what will be still a raging crisis and the vaccine is able to be distributed, they’re going to see deaths drop off the edge,” Biden said.

“They’re going to see hundreds of thousands of people, not getting sick. My hope is they’ll be then inclined to say, ‘OK, it’s worth — it’s worth the patriotic duty to go ahead and protect people’.”

•  

[bonnie]

1 hour ago, RonCorson said:

So when I use words like illegal, lawless and as someone else said unconstitutional, what makes you think that is in anyway against laws. Laws in our country have a proscribed method of being enacted. It is not following the law to create special laws just because some president writes an executive order! 

But it helps deflect attention away from the hideous mess he made in Afghanistan and the lies and all the deaths that are on the hands of the administration

[RonCorson]

30 minutes ago, stinsonmarri said:

Sad that you do not realize that executive order are apart of the constitution. It has been done by many presidents over the years. So all of sudden this president cannot do what the word even says: Executive Order!

I was going to be mean and ask you where in the constitution executive orders are mentioned. But I thought I would make it easy on you with a quote: "

In Article I Section 1 of the Constitution, it is clear that all legislative powers reside in Congress. The Executive Branch has the responsibility to execute the laws passed by Congress.

An Executive Order is not legislation, it is a order issued by the President to enforce laws passed by the Congress. While Executive Orders are not mentioned in the Constitution, they have used for a long time." https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/are-executive-orders-constitutional/

[stinsonmarri]

1 hour ago, RonCorson said:

I was going to be mean and ask you where in the constitution executive orders are mentioned. But I thought I would make it easy on you with a quote: "

In Article I Section 1 of the Constitution, it is clear that all legislative powers reside in Congress. The Executive Branch has the responsibility to execute the laws passed by Congress.

An Executive Order is not legislation, it is a order issued by the President to enforce laws passed by the Congress. While Executive Orders are not mentioned in the Constitution, they have used for a long time." https://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2011/10/are-executive-orders-constitutional/

I do not look at you being mean. I look at we are commenting freely. I do not judge you, we are discussing the authority of the president. So, here is what Article 2 of the Constitution states:

An executive order is a signed, written, and published directive from the President of the United States that manages operations of the federal government. ... Executive orders are not legislation; they require no approval from Congress, and Congress cannot simply overturn them. What Is an Executive Order? - American Bar Association

An executive order is a means of issuing federal directives in the United States, used by the President of the United States, that manages operations of the federal government. The legal or constitutional basis for executive orders has multiple sources. Article Two of the United States Constitution gives the president broad executive and enforcement authority to use his or her discretion to determine how to enforce the law or to otherwise manage the resources and staff of the executive branch. The ability to make such orders is also based on expressed or implied Acts of Congress that delegate to the president some degree of discretionary power (delegated legislation). John Contrubis, Executive Orders and Proclamations, CRS Report for Congress #95-722A, March 9, 1999, Pp. 1-2

The first executive order was issued by Washington on June 8, 1789; addressed to the heads of the federal departments, it instructed them "to impress me with a full, precise, and distinct general idea of the affairs of the United States" in their fields. DiBacco, Thomas V. (August 14, 2014). "DiBACCO: George Washington had a pen, but no phone, for executive orders"

As I stated from the beginning of the United States of America, Executive Orders were mandated, enacted etc. So, Biden has a right under OSHA Mandates, Enactments for them to mandate together with Public Health:

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and previous pandemics have been viewed almost exclusively as virology problems, with toxicology problems mostly being ignored. This perspective is not supported by the evolution of COVID-19, where the impact of real-life exposures to multiple toxic stressors degrading the immune system is followed by the SARS-CoV-2 virus exploiting the degraded immune system to trigger a chain of events ultimately leading to COVID-19. This immune system degradation from multiple toxic stressors (chemical, physical, biological, psychosocial stressors) means that attribution of serious consequences from COVID-19 should be made to the virus-toxic stressors nexus, not to any of the nexus constituents in isolation. The leading toxic stressors (identified in this study as contributing to COVID-19) are pervasive, contributing to myriad chronic diseases as well as immune system degradation. They increase the likelihood for comorbidities and mortality associated with COVID-19. The under-reported role of toxic substance exposures in the COVID-19 pandemic; Elsevier Public Health Emergency Collection PMC7426727

Blessing and prayers

[stinsonmarri]

1 hour ago, bonnie said:

But it helps deflect attention away from the hideous mess he made in Afghanistan and the lies and all the deaths that are on the hands of the administration

Oh yes, Afghanistan Biden has some serious flaws. Lives were bombed and lost! However, it amazing that YAHWEH used Biden even though he has some serious problems to get over 120,000 people that includes Americans and other nationalities as well as Afghans. The only President in history. Then he got so more Americans out and the Taliban did it. I am just going to sit back and watch how THE HEAVENLY FATHER continues to move in these last days. HE uses people who show love, kindness and believes in HIM base on their understanding that they know.

Our HEAVENLY FATHER had Daniel to speak that HE, not us, sits up kings and sit them down.  HE IS in Control.

Blessings and prayers!

[bonnie]

Bidens inhumane Afghanistan disaster was not a flaw. It was deliberate without regard to those he left behind.Their lives meant nothing. To much has come out since to absolve this sorry excuse for a leader by praising him for supposedly 120,000 rescued.  His word for the rescued numbers may or may not be true. In any event that does not whitewash the absolute idiocy that has been reported time and time agaim. The ignorance that was watched and allowed for several weeks is beyond belief. I do agree that he is the only president in history lied and then turned his back on americans. Not something to be proud of but as typical many will piously fold their hands and pronounce the slaughter of those keft behind God's will because after all he is in control.  God does not always stop evil or willfully stupid people

[stinsonmarri]

Bonnie is partially right America is a democratic republic as follow:

A democratic republic is a form of government operating on principles adopted from a republic and a democracy. Rather than being a cross between two entirely separate systems, democratic republics may function on principles shared by both republics and democracies.

Common definitions of the terms democracy and republic often feature overlapping concerns, suggesting that many democracies function as republics, and many republics operate on democratic principles, as shown by these definitions from the Oxford English Dictionary:

Republic: "A state in which supreme power is held by the people and their elected representatives..."Oxford Dictionaries

Democracy: "A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives." Oxford Dictionaries Democratic republic; From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[bonnie]

U.S.Government. Often described as a democracy, the US is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. Constitutional refers to the fact that government in US is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the land .

The constitution not only provides the framework for how the federal and state governments are structured  BUT PLACES SIGNIFICENT LIMITS ON THEIR POWERS> A republic is a form of government in which the people hold power but elect representatives to exercise that power

[bonnie]

Personally I think we are fast approaching the time the constitution will only be a memory. SDA's hand in hand with those of the world in full agreement with  There ought to be a law.

[RonCorson]

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

I do not look at you being mean. I look at we are commenting freely. I do not judge you, we are discussing the authority of the president. So, here is what Article 2 of the Constitution states:

No that is not what Article 2 states. I will post section 1 of Article 2 and you can read the rest at the link. I have no disagreement with what the ABA states. But that really has nothing to do with laws. 
"

Article II Section 1

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the Term of four Years, and, together with the Vice President, chosen for the same Term, be elected, as follows

Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; A quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice President.

The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office, the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:– I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

[bonnie]

stinsonmarri,

You are not qualified to pass the judgements you have towards those that disagree with you. It is not only this topic ,it is any topic where others oppose your viewpoint of a topic. That is not love or sharing any gospel.  You are free to devotedly and blindly follow the current president but you simply don't have the authority to demand others do or they are somehow horrible, selfish and are turning their .backs  on the commandments, That shows complete ignorance of the gospel.

You want to trot along behind Biden, you are certainly free to do so. You are also free to condemn whoever you wish. But don't be surprised then when your "gospel"  is seen for what it is. No one on this forum has the medical or scientific knowledge to make the decision on vaccines for others.

 

 

 

 

[GHansen]

37 minutes ago, bonnie said:

 No one on this forum has the medical or scientific knowledge to make the decision on vaccines for others.

That's true; however, insurers, including Medicare and Medicaid providers do have the ability to refuse reimbursement for those antivaxxers who require hospitalization. The government should step up and deny Medicare to those who refuse to be vaccinated. There are plenty of people, trained professionals in biosciences, who are qualified to make that decision for others. 

An acquaintance of mine, an elderly lady, was discovered to have "terminal" cancer. She was doomed by any standard; nevertheless, her daughter demanded that every possible modality of modern medicine be utilized. Of course, she wasn't paying for it. The taxpayer was. I asked the physician about the situation, why would people demand everything when there was no hope, especially in an 80+ year old patient. He could have just blurted out "Because they are stupid." Being a professional, instead he said "Because they are medically unsophisticated." 

[bonnie]

10 minutes ago, GHansen said:

That's true; however, insurers, including Medicare and Medicaid providers do have the ability to refuse reimbursement for those antivaxxers who require hospitalization. The government should step up and deny Medicare to those who refuse to be vaccinated. There are plenty of people, trained professionals in biosciences, who are qualified to make that decision for others. 

In this instance there are plenty of people  that can attest to the long term safety of this vaccine? I certainly hope you are not in a position to take care of a  older vulnerable loved one   

So overweight people, should be denied medical care, those that smoke should be denied ?       There are countries where people like you would be most welcome. It will be here soon enough .

 

10 minutes ago, GHansen said:

An acquaintance of mine, an elderly lady, was discovered to have "terminal" cancer. She was doomed by any standard; nevertheless, her daughter demanded that every possible modality of modern medicine be utilized. Of course, she wasn't paying for it. The taxpayer was. I asked the physician about the situation, why would people demand everything when there was no hope, especially in an 80+ year old patient. He could have just blurted out "Because they are stupid." Being a professional, instead he said "Because they are medically unsophisticated." 

My husband is 80 years old with a variety of very serious health problems. In spite of having had 6 strokes, atrial fib, hole in his heart, a aortic heart valve aneurysm of 5.5., COPD. and has a uncommon eye disease that will eventually cause him to lose his vision. He has quality of life, enjoys his children and grandchildren still likes to putter with his flowers and enjoys his dogs. Nor am I stupid, I have a fairly high IQ nor medically unsophisticated . We have a unusually high number of medical professionals in our family and we all have a pretty good grasp of the medical. We have received many hours of medical care. Care in your estimation my husband should not have received as he certainly is doomed. Thank God we still have a little time left before your mentality is the norm

[bonnie]

Medicare and insurers are no more qualified to deny medical care than you are. They do so, but not based on medical knowledge. My husband is on several breathing medications. After several years someone, no DR or medical  personal denied a twice a day medication and decided he only needed it once a day. Why, because that is what a lot of patients take. Not very receptive to listening to  qualified medical.

[GHansen]

1 hour ago, bonnie said:

Medicare and insurers are no more qualified to deny medical care than you are.

Of course you know insurers work with qualified medical professionals. They have algorithms, based on experience, to determine treatment options and best practices. This knowledge allows people on the other side of the world to pose a set of questions and based on answers, determine the best course of treatment for a patient e.g. take 2 aspirin, call back in the morning, go to an ER right away, call an ambulance.

Obese people are just as ill as the anorexic. Except in rare cases, obesity is caused by too much food and not enough exercise, complicated by body image issues. Obese people are already denied certain kinds of insurance. Non smokers get better insurance rates. I'm sorry about your husband; however, it sounds like many of his problems are related to lifestyle issues. Orthodox medical professionals are a big part of the problem with healthcare in the USA, them, aligned with Big Ag and the pharmaceutical industry are responsible, more or less, for the "lack of sophistication" that contributes to obesity, tobacco use, poor diet, etc.

[stinsonmarri]

10 hours ago, RonCorson said:

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

You know what's amazing to me none of this was raise when the former person one in this office.

[bonnie]

8 hours ago, GHansen said:

Of course you know insurers work with qualified medical professionals. They have algorithms, based on experience, to determine treatment options and best practices. This knowledge allows people on the other side of the world to pose a set of questions and based on answers, determine the best course of treatment for a patient e.g. take 2 aspirin, call back in the morning, go to an ER right away, call an ambulance.

I also know that many times these "qualified medical professionals" are wrong. I have had quite reasonable responses from medicare

. When I haven't it has not been decided by a medical professional and it is sheer stupidity. 

I was scheduled for knee replacement and then denied "because I was to young". Medicare demanded minscus . surgery first to correct the problem. They wouldn't budge, so to correct a straight forward problem I needed surgery twice. Governments idea of saving cost.  My husband being denied medication twice a day and cut back to once. No medical professional made that decision. He had to get by with other meds. Dr presented proof for his twice a day just kept submitting and being denied until bingo went thru and no problem since. Different "employee" made her own judgement call

8 hours ago, GHansen said:

Obese people are just as ill as the anorexic. Except in rare cases, obesity is caused by too much food and not enough exercise, complicated by body image issues. Obese people are already denied certain kinds of insurance. Non smokers get better insurance rates. I'm sorry about your husband; however, it sounds like many of his problems are related to lifestyle issues. Orthodox medical professionals are a big part of the problem with healthcare in the USA, them, aligned with Big Ag and the pharmaceutical industry are responsible, more or less, for the "lack of sophistication" that contributes to obesity, tobacco use, poor diet, etc.

And it sounds like you have no idea what you are talking about.  None of my husband's health problems are lifestyle related, but so what if they were?  Would that mean unless he can pay for medical care, he should sit in his recliner and wait to die?  COPD is the closest to lifestyle cause and that is because of his profession as a painter. He always wore a mask but that is far from a guarantee after 40 years.  Or if he came to a valid opinion that the vaccine was not proven safe long term and he refused, he should be denied care while he lays and dies from covid?

 

What exactly do you mean by ......."lack of sophistication" that contributes to obesity, tobacco use, poor diet, etc."?

If you mean lack of knowledge,  BULL.

Maybe for a small number but not to many think tobacco use is good for you, or the more obese the healthier. 

What I find the most disturbing is there are SDA that believe medical care should be denied if there is a failure to get the vaccine mandated by government

 

[bonnie]

My husband has never been obese, does not smoke, no alcohol, physically active. We had been married 30 years before he required medical care and a prescription for strep. 

[RonCorson]

2 hours ago, stinsonmarri said:

The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America.

You know what's amazing to me none of this was raise when the former person one in this office.

Oh good, you found that in the Constitution where it writes about the Executive branch of government it uses the word executive!

Then you reveal that there was actually one thing in the Trump administration that the left did not complain about. Executive orders! Well it was only 4 years ago so I guess you can't be expected to remember that, the court cases and then the supreme court saying that his executive order was constitutional. By the way Biden has done more executive orders than the last 3 presidents combined!

"On his first day as US president, Joe Biden hit the ground running. He issued more executive actions than his three immediate predecessors—Trump, Obama, and Bush—combined. Now, 100 days into his term, he has hardly slowed down.

Biden has issued 106 executive actions since taking office,.."https://qz.com/2003207/bidens-first-100-days-had-more-executive-orders-than-trump-obama-or-bush/

[GHansen]

Bonnie, People who refuse to get vaccinated and get Covid  pay for their choice. I've yet to see an article about an antivaxxer who got Covid and thinks it was worthwhile to be true to their "conscience." I definitely don't believe that society at large should be responsible financially for their decision. Part of the problem is the way the medical system is set up in the States. I also question whether anitvaxxing is a matter of conscience. I doubt it. Normally, matters of conscience pertain to moral issues. There's a big difference between ignorance and conscientiousness.

Adolph Eichmann's "conscience" troubled him if he didn't murder Jews. He felt guilty when people escaped his net. True matters of conscience are the result of the HS working in someone's life like when Jesus said "the HS will convince the world of sin because they don't believe in me." Some Jewish people believe that the breath of life itself is sacred. Quality of life is not an issue.; consequently, they want everything done to prolong their life. In some cases, it inflicts needless suffering on people. People like that should pay higher insurance premiums if they can get insurance at all.

JWs refuse blood transfusions as a matter of conscience. It's a sincerely held belief based on their understanding of Scripture. I don't hold that belief but it's a belief based on God's word as they understand it. My cousin, possibly an aunt both died due to their Christian Science beliefs. Another dear friend died because he didn't like conventional medicine. He figured that if God wouldn't heal him, he would die and he did. None of these deaths involved an infectious disease that could be lethal for others. There are already existing laws that allow for the arrest and confinement of people who are public health nuisances. There was a guy in Sacramento years ago who had drug resistant TB. He refused to quarantine and exposed his family members to the disease. If I remember correctly, he was arrested, based on existing public health law and forcibly quarantined. I applaud that.  

Much illness in America is the result of lifestyle choices. Unfortunately, due to the fallen condition in which we live, even if we make right choices, we are still going to "die." I'm sorry your husband is ill. If he is able to work around the garden and enjoy his family and pets at 80, he's not doing too bad. He's not laid up in a SNF, taking his meals through a feeding tube.

[bonnie]

21 minutes ago, GHansen said:

Bonnie, People who refuse to get vaccinated and get Covid  pay for their choice. I've yet to see an article about an antivaxxer who got Covid and thinks it was worthwhile to be true to their "conscience." I definitely don't believe that society at large should be responsible financially for their decision. Part of the problem is the way the medical system is set up in the States. I also question whether anitvaxxing is a matter of conscience. I doubt it. Normally, matters of conscience pertain to moral issues. There's a big difference between ignorance and conscientiousness.

We will be starting down a very slippery slope when medical care is based on the degree of responsibility for their medical issues. Quite honestly ,I thank God that you or someone like you does not have any say in the matter of my husband's  medical care. Just as I am extremely grateful that stinsomarri does not have the slightest bit of influence or say so in the salvation of anyone. Far to fond of the everlasting lake of fire if her opinion is not treated as spreading the gospel.

I don't believe the refusal is so much a matter of religious conviction as mistrust in those trying to force the vaccine. You have a president and vice president that cast doubt on a vaccine if it came from Trump, Nancy Pelosi ridiculing fear of covid, Dr Fauci changing his "expert" opinion every other day, President Biden and his promise of no vaccine mandate, no mask mandate, now oops, I really didn't mean that. People have a very healthy skepticism of the "professionals" demanding everyone getting the vaccine.

21 minutes ago, GHansen said:

Adolph Eichmann's "conscience" troubled him if he didn't murder Jews. He felt guilty when people escaped his net. True matters of conscience are the result of the HS working in someone's life like when Jesus said "the HS will convince the world of sin because they don't believe in me." Some Jewish people believe that the breath of life itself is sacred. Quality of life is not an issue.; consequently, they want everything done to prolong their life. In some cases, it inflicts needless suffering on people. People like that should pay higher insurance premiums if they can get insurance at all.

Some people do pay higher premiums for health issues. Thankfully you are not in a position to make that decision for another human being. Soon enough we will be facing some pretty serious decisions forced on us my the government, obviously you think that a good thing.

 

21 minutes ago, GHansen said:

JWs refuse blood transfusions as a matter of conscience. It's a sincerely held belief based on their understanding of Scripture. I don't hold that belief but it's a belief based on God's word as they understand it. My cousin, possibly an aunt both died due to their Christian Science beliefs. Another dear friend died because he didn't like conventional medicine. He figured that if God wouldn't heal him, he would die and he did. None of these deaths involved an infectious disease that could be lethal for others. There are already existing laws that allow for the arrest and confinement of people who are public health nuisances. There was a guy in Sacramento years ago who had drug resistant TB. He refused to quarantine and exposed his family members to the disease. If I remember correctly, he was arrested, based on existing public health law and forcibly quarantined. I applaud that.  

The same should hold true for anyone deliberately infecting someone else with a serious or potentially fatal illness. Doesnt mean they should be denied treatment

21 minutes ago, GHansen said:

Much illness in America is the result of lifestyle choices. Unfortunately, due to the fallen condition in which we live, even if we make right choices, we are still going to "die." I'm sorry your husband is ill. If he is able to work around the garden and enjoy his family and pets at 80, he's not doing too bad. He's not laid up in a SNF, taking his meals through a feeding tube.

Yes, we will all die, however those like yourself will do what they can to move it along to save money. My husband at this stage of the game rally doesnt have anything to offer society. No longer able to earn a income, doesn't pay taxes, if called on to do so to provide for a family cant do so. He has no value to anyone except his immediate family, why should you or anyone else contribute to his rather extensive medical expenses.  From a practical standpoint I believe those that think like you would be perfectly willing to do so.