What Rights Will Remain, Post Pandemic?

This made me laugh:

Then I stopped to think about what could be the truth in this. Now, here in the U.S. Congress, as well as a majority of states would have to vote to overturn any of the Bill of Rights so it’s doubtful we would lose any rights that way. The issue is, and has been, how much authority does government have over your life, even in what has been determined a National Emergency? We actusally need the courts to step in and tell government at every level, when they’ve gone too far. It seems that ately, even in the most regressive states (NY, CA) judges are siding with the people.

What we are witnbessing is a popular uprising against ridiculously stringent rules for the pandemic, for some, and that these same people are suing their own local and state government to provide relief. That’s good. That’s what the courts should be for: retaining the rights of the citizens. Of course I am for taking precautions because as I wrote earlier, there is little scientific evidence to anything any government is telling it’s public. But sometimes it seems that these rules, these orders go beyond what any government has the authority to implement. the courts are beginning to agree.

A friend of mine, a lawyer, has told me her firm is considering taking on lawsuits like what has been seen in different places around the country. “Easy money”, she told me, “for everyone”, meaning that the loclity or state is going to lose on the most basic constitutional issues. Of course, where I live, our governor hasnot become an ass. He’s worried about the huge spike in cases, but seems to understand that the virus becomes an issue when we start overrunning hospital facilities, which we’re far from. Now.

Notice Florida, which has zero restrictions (or minor) on their population (21 million). Although the’ve had a spike, they haven’t seen that same spike in hospitalizations or deaths. My sister and he husband live in Texas. they are mostly open. My brother in law tells me it’s the same there. Everyone being cautious without being over wrought. Our governor here has done mostly the same but with a bit more caution. Tonight, I’m going out to a restaurant for dinner. As far as I know there are no restrictions as to number of customers.

Other states (CA) have suggestions that when you go out and eat, you wear a mask between bites of food. No, it’s not a joke. I wish it were. It’s complete idiocy. It’s heartbreaking that so many people, some that didn’t need to (@JaniceDean) die at all but lost their lives because of the incompetence of their local and state government. What Rights Will Remain, Post Pandemic? Everyone needs to pay attention. This is not ideological because here in the U.S. Liberals/Progressives will have to work out how their response to government overreach is just like conservatives.

Remember this: At first they came for John, and I said nothing,. Then they went for John’s family, and I still said nothing.

One thought on “What Rights Will Remain, Post Pandemic?

  1. We have in the USA, a wonderful supreme law of the land. I offer this concise bit from this site: https://www.csmonitor.com/1982/0430/043020.html

    April 30, 1982
    By a staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
    George Washington, in 1787, was president of the Constitutional Convention.
    That is, he presided over that convention whose purpose it was to prepare a constitution for the then 13 states of the former British colony.
    The nation’s new name was The United States of America.
    The Declaration of Independence was then just two years old.
    Some 39 men signed the final document; 55 were alleged to have participated in the framing of the laws.
    Often the men disagreed strongly, and this gave rise to many compromise suggestions.
    It is recorded that George Washington seldom participated in the debates.
    But one day, after several suggestions had been watered down by compromisers, he rose to his feet and, according to observers, changed the course of history.

    ”If, to please the people, we offer what we ourselves disapprove, how can we afterward defend our work?
    ”Let us raise a standard to which the wise and honest can repair; the event is in the hand of God.”

    According to some historians, this ringing statement caused the framers of our Constitution to be more radical and to avoid compromising statements.
    Charles C. Nott, writing in the 1903 edition of the Americana encyclopedia, predicted that the US Constitution, written with both speed and care in 1787, would endure for some time to come.

    ”To foretell the future of the Constitution,” he wrote, ”is to foretell the future of the American people. They will change before it is changed.”

    Then he made a fascinating analogy:
    ”As with Washington and Lincoln, the more we know of them the better they appear; so of the Constitution, the more we contemplate its trials the better it appears adapted to our national needs.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s