No, you are still struggling with due process. 

I highly doubt you are consistent with your application of natural rights concepts.

Not swoosh. According to the article "the case is set to be appealed to the New York Court of Appeals" meaning it hasn't been ultimately decided yet.

yes swoosh
you missed his sarcasm...

Need to use the [nuance] tags next time.

 

You were talking about the WHO coming in and enforcing some WHO rule but then you switched to talking about American law so you are changing the issue to one that doesn't address the challenge I posed to your conspiracy theory.

Why even bring up quarantine law, do you think the government should have no legal powers to forcibly quarantine individuals regardless of the severity of a communicable disease they possess?

You can doubt all you want -- highly or otherwise.

You're still wrong.

You sound confused

yes swoosh
you missed his sarcasm...

He said my article was old and he presented a more recent one. That was not sarcastic, that was informative and I thanked him for it.

Swoosh you missed my sincerity.

He said my article was old and he presented a more recent one. That was not sarcastic, that was informative and I thanked him for it.

Swoosh you missed my sincerity.

How come you can't answer the question? It isn't a gotcha question, if you feel the government should have no power to detain someone with a deadly contagious disease then just say so. I would just ask how you propose to deal with such a person who doesn't comply with medical advice to isolate and instead goes to public areas where they may spread the disease?

As for the WHO, I am not confused. I said I don't believe WHO policy would trump constitutional law and then you change topics to American law about medical quarantine.

1. There’s already medical quarantine laws in place. The NY version is a step way over the line with no definitions and therefore no restrictions on state authority and therefore completely unconstitutional. Your comparison assumes the only two choices are anarchy and tyranny. So let me ask you the kind of question that you just asked me…do you hate freedom? Because you seem awfully defensive of tyrannical policies.

2. If we sign onto an international treaty that subverts our own constitution then who’s going to stand up against it? Certainly not politicians or cops who clearly see the constitution as an impediment to their own power.

Note that I was not defending this new NY law, I only expanded on the issue of quarantine law since you brought it up. I would have to look at the difference between the old NY quarantine law and the new one to offer opinion. My question to you was to see where you stood on the question of forced quarantine in general, not NY's specific one. Personally I would be very hesitant to give the government quarantine powers. Limited powers to be used in the most extreme of circumstances.

Why would the USA ever sign a treaty that subverts its own power? Thats where it doesn't make sense. The richest, most power nation on earth, with the best protections for its citizens is just going to hand that away. You have a very pessimistic outlook, no offense.

Thats not what I said, I said no way WHO policy is going to supersede the bill of rights. What court is going to come in and force the USA to obey some international mandate?
[/quote

SWOOOSSHHHHH

Glad we are in agreement on your first point.

My response to the second point is that it's complicated matrix of problems but basically comes down to resource depletion and delusional corrupt elites and their mostly useless managerial class wanting to stay in power and maintain their extravagant lifestyles at the expense of everyone else. They are aware that industrial output will continue to decline given the planet's resource constraints, and have decided to terrorize their populations into compliance and give global communism a try. It's a terrible plan that will inevitably fail and has already resulted in lots of unnecessary chaos and death, but things are just getting started and in the meantime it's a good idea to continue resisting wherever possible. We're going to need those firearms when our state starts missing payroll and cops walk off the job.

 

Ok. My comment was meant to be taken in the present state of things meaning I cannot see, in the near future, the USA surrendering its power to another country/authority. 100 years down the line could America degrade so greatly that constitutional rights are meaningless? Sure, then I would concede your scenario is possible.

I apologize for losing patience with you in the past. It seemed to me that it would be impossible for someone to ignore the ongoing degradation of western civilization, but it’s not an easy thing to accept and completely understandable that some would prefer to keep hoping that this will all blow over soon and we can return to Progress