Owosso barber

[TC Talks]

Still responding like a one trick troll? I think we will need to assume you just like yelling but can't understand the complexity of our Constitution. In case you are wondering: MFA Journalism. I spent plenty of time studying the First Amendment.

[R Bedell]

Still responding like a one trick troll? I think we will need to assume you just like yelling but can't understand the complexity of our Constitution. In case you are wondering: MFA Journalism. I spent plenty of time studying the First Amendment

OH Oh.......a butt hurt liberal. I read read your Keyboard Opinion but will rely on the the Legal Experts.

[HD74]

How the hell did you get a picture of my ex? In full psycho mode at that.

[matt1]

Read this: https://www.abc12.com/content/news/Owos ... 82351.html

[MWmetalhead]

Fair enough. So your comments were just a keyboard opinion. You have an opinion, as well as I do. Your don't like mine, and I don't like yours.

I cited actual U.S. Constitution passages to support my opinion.

Will you do the same?

You said "I will rely on the legal experts." OK. Fair enough. Which ones are claiming stay-at-home orders are in violation of the U.S. Constitution, and are they able to recite an actual passage that these orders violate? Please provide a link to one example. Of course, such claims are one thing. Actually being able to win a court case on such grounds is another.

I've read a number of articles that cite a "compelling government interest" test (e.g. such as to protect the general welfare of the citizenry) in order for a state or local governmental action to pass muster, which has been the standard established by court precedent.

One such article:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/evangerstm ... dc48b3104e

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on similar matters on prior occasions.

Excerpt:

The Supreme Court has had little to say about state power to override people’s liberty during epidemics. The most helpful case is from back in 1905 during the smallpox epidemic, Jacobson v. Massachusetts. In that case, a pastor argued that a mandatory smallpox vaccination violated his constitutional rights. The Supreme Court sided with Massachusetts but framed its decision carefully.

The Court acknowledged that “the liberty secured by the Fourteenth Amendment . . . consists, in part, in the right of a person ‘to live and work where he will.’" But it added: “in every well-ordered society . . . the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand.”

There is an interesting court case ongoing in Oregon, but the suit there was filed on the basis of the OREGON Constitution, not the U.S. Constitution.

https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/4670 ... rder-pwoff

[MWmetalhead]

YOU do not have the right.... to restrict freedoms as outlined and guaranteed by the US Constitution.

Private citizens certainly have the right to restrict "freedoms" on their PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Most conservative legal scholars would agree with my statement.

You profess to be a conservative. I presume you support private property rights?

[R Bedell]

MWmetalhead:

Thank you for your Liberal Keyboard Opinions, but.........I am NOT buying it.

[MWmetalhead]

Fair enough; I've challenged you to provide ONE third party source to support your opinion. You are either unable or simply too lazy to do so.

As for my "liberal" opinions, I am a registered Republican and voted Republican for all major statewide offices every election since the age of 18.

So, you do not believe the U.S. Constitution provides private property owners the ability to restrict speech, practice of religion, etc. on *their* private property?

I have no issue with you saying that state restrictions on businesses due to COVID-19 are bad public policy or are immoral. I agree that some restrictions are overreach, and in fact, unlawful under State of Michigan law. (Yet, that opinion is "liberal." Interesting.) But you specifically referenced the U.S. Constitution earlier. I've challenged you to provide a basis for that claim, and you've failed in that regard.

I guess name calling and using juvenile terms like "butt hurt" comes more naturally to you than doing research.

[R Bedell]

MWmetalhead:

Whatever.

[sinklair]

MW: you’re my hero. Someone who actually shut down R with FACTS that he can’t dispute.

[R Bedell]

Sinklair: So says a Liberal/Leftist alleged journalist.

I expressed my opinion and MW expressed HIS OPINION. He admits to NOT being a legal expert. His statements are NOT facts. It is amazing how you liberals twist things to YOUR narrative. Again, not buying your crap.

[MWmetalhead]

Wow, R Bedell. You know how to use the laugh emoticon on repeat. I'm impressed.

Are you a condescending asshole to everyone with whom you interact? Just curious.

Of course, just like all of my earlier questions, you'll likely ignore that one, too. You do not seem too interested in having a dialogue.

[TC Talks]

MWmetalhead:

Whatever.

This one is an idiot. They're always from the East-Central part of the state.

[R Bedell]

This one is an idiot.

There is the Pot calling the Kettle black. They can be spotted a whole Mile away.

[TC Talks]

Good one