Weren't the Democrats the ones who use to say "my body, my choice"? If so, why is the Biden administration preventing our local defense contractors, and any organization accepting federal funds, from granting medical exemptions to pregnant women who do not want to be vaccinated while pregnant.

Those women get to choose alright. They get to choose between the vaccine and their job. Democrats are all kinds of compassionate if she wanted to decide whether or not to kill the baby but when it comes to the vaccine, the same liberals are basically like "shut up you stupid bitch, it's for your own good". I am just waiting for the first liberal to say that they are forcing mothers to get vaccinated for the protection of the unborn baby.

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden

There's pandemic going on. Over 700,000 dead. Its about as tyrannical as the law requiring you to wear a seatbelt.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

Well I personally know a federal worker that got a reasonable accommodation exemption for her pregnancy. I believe contractors play by the same rule set. That said, please link your source Sniper.

While you are at it, please explain why you are outraged by this and not at Texas or Florida. Thanks!

I don't agree with the seatbelt thing either. So that argument doesn't work with me.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

I think all cars should have an iron spite mounted in front of the driver and passenger in all cars.

-------------------------
Capitalism is based on the ridiculous notion that you can enjoy limitless growth in a closed, finite system.

In biology, such behavior of cells is called "cancer".

The source is someone I know personally who lives/works locally here in Brevard County. She applied for the exemption last week and was told by HR today that the request was denied. Probably by somebody in HR that has zero medical background and nobody wanted to trade papers with in elementary school when the teacher asked the students to help grade papers. I hope she lets them fire her, files a lawsuit, and Joe Biden's dumb ass makes her a millionaire.

I don't care about Texas because I don't live there. Same reason I don't care whether New York wants to force vaccine mandates or regulate the shit out of their guns or defund their police.

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden

The mileage standards are killing many people. It is fine to kill people, so long as the politics favor something else over safety. Killing bald eagles is a pretty serious felony unless you have a windmill. Then it's fine.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

And you here you are again, killing time for politics again. You don't have to agree with the law, but you do have to abide by them or face the consequences.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

That's F'ing stupid. Everyone is not equally at risk. If you are vaccinated, then you have no reason to be terrified of this young woman and her unborn baby.

There are women who refuse to get X-rays while pregnant yet, you want to force them to choose between being able to earn a living or receive a vaccine that has been out for less than a year?

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden

Yep, had a judge send us to mediation in lieu of a 4 hr evidentiary hearing. Bless her. Kind of sucks that I spent all weekend preparing. But, I'll take it.

-------------------------
I :heart; Q

Oh no qnipe upset about the treatment of women! You waived your rights to do that bitch by being a member of the QOP. Pregnancy doesn't last forever, if a woman is planning to have a kid and they work for a federal contractor they should probably get the shot now. If you're pregnant and you don't want to get the shot then you're gonna have to wait a while to work. A decent employer will keep you employed.

Edited: 10/18/2021 at 12:07 PM by Greensleeves

Sniper, look at what you wrote so that you can call yourself an idiot and I won't have to.

-------------------------

"One of the reasons why propaganda tries to get you to hate government is because it's the one existing institution in which people can participate to some extent and constrain tyrannical unaccountable power." Noam Chomsky.

How exactly does the law read and which legislature passed it?

-------------------------
Romans 8;18-32 John 3;16-18

Oh jeez did he read the law wrong?

Yeah, I reread it, so you can explain away.

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden

there are many lawsuits in process and in the courts to restrict the vaccine mandate and roll back its dictates.
One of these lawsuits is a petition for temporary injunction against the City of Gainesville by its employees.

Please read the attached briefs.

The court cites a Supreme Court ruling that says in part:
The right to privacy guarantees provided to Florida citizens under the Florida Constitution are Broader that the right to privacy guarantees under the US constitution.
... A right explicitly contained in the declaration of Rights of the Florida Constitution is considered a fundamental right...
The government can only infringe upon that right if necessary to accomplish a compelling government interest, Using the least restrictive means necessary..

Florida law provides that citizens have the right to refuse unwanted medical treatments...

The strict scrutiny standard applies.... even when the government employer seeks to enforce workplace policies....
... the city failed to provide that the vaccine mandate serves a compelling STATE interest and that the vaccine was the least restrictive means to accomplish that interest.

In a second document: the city argued that the strict scrutiny standard should not apply to an employer from keeping Covid-19 out of the workforce
But the plaintiffs replied that nobody argued that the strict scrutiny applies to any and all Covid-19 mitigation strategies that the city can implement.
It is common knowledge that the city or in our case the company has been mitigating the spread of Covid-19 for nearly two years without invading constitutionally protected privacy interests.

Therefore the city or the Company cannot claim the vaccine mandate is the only mitigation policy and that the mandated vaccination is the least restrictive available process.

1. The City of Gainesville (the "City") has enacted a policy requiring its employees to be "fully vaccinated" for Covid-19 on or before October 30, 2021, or face progressive disciplinary action, up to and including termination of employment
5. The United States Supreme Court has previously analyzed the constitutionality of a compelled vaccination law by reviewing the vaccination mandate in the context of the rights afforded citizens under the constitution of the individual state. Jacobson v. Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11, 26 (1905). Therefore, this Court must review the City's Vaccine
Mandate within the context of the protections contained within the Florida Constitution.
6. Florida's constitutional right to privacy is contained in Article I, 23 of the
Florida Constitution and provides, in part, as follows:
Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into the person's private life except as otherwise provided herein . . .
7. The right to privacy guarantees provided to Florida citizens under the Florida Constitution are broader than the right to privacy guarantees provided to citizens under the U.S.
Constitution. Green v. Alachua County, 2021 WL 2387983 at (Fla. 1 st DCA 2021).
8. Florida's right to privacy is contained in the Declaration of Rights of the Florida Constitution. A right explicitly contained in the Declaration of Rights of the Florida Constitution is considered a fundamental right
). Because the right to privacy is a fundamental right in Florida, the government can only infringe upon that right if necessary to accomplish a compelling government interest, using the least restrictive means necessary to serve that interest (this test is commonly referred to as the "strict scrutiny" standard of review)
11. Federal law holds that compelled physical intrusion into the human body is an invasion of bodily integrity that implicates significant, constitutionally protected privacy interests. Missouri v. McNeely, 569 U.S. 141, 143 (2013).
12. The City's Vaccine Mandate requires City employees to receive a complete dose of the COVID-19 vaccines. These vaccinations are administered through intramuscular injection. The City's Vaccine Mandate requires a compulsory vaccination procedure that can reasonably be considered a form of medical treatment and/or a medical procedure, and thus, this mandate implicates the City employees' fundamental right to privacy.
14. This "strict scrutiny" standard applies equally to constitutional challenges in instances when the government seeks to enforce laws, and also, in instances when the government employer seeks to enforce workplace policies
19. When a law is challenged on privacy grounds, the Court must first make a single, threshold do novo inquiry whether the challenged law invades an individual's right to privacy.
Green, 2021 WL 2387983 at *2. This court has conducted that inquiry and has determined that the challenged policy invades and/or implicates the Plaintiffs' constitutionally protected right to privacy.
21. In other words, having determined that the City's Vaccine Mandate implicates
Plaintiffs' privacy rights (and with no showing of a compelling interest demonstrated by the City), this Court is required to presume that the Plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated the four elements required for this Court to order the requested injunctive relief: likelihood of success on the merits, lack of an adequate legal remedy, irreparable harm, and the public and private interests at stake. Id.
22. Therefore, the Court ENJOINS Defendant City of Gainesville, as follows:
a. The City shall not enforce the Vaccine Mandate policy.
b. The City shall not terminate or discipline any employee for failure to comply with the Vaccine Mandate.
23. The Court determines that, giving due regard for the public interest, no bond is required to be posted, pursuant to Rule 1.610(b).
24. This injunction will continue in force until further order of the Court.



-------------------------

That's just creepy. Does Trump practice it?



-------------------------
I was right.

The city asked for a reconsideration and said they had a compelling interest, ie... to stop Covid-19
Summary: The majority of the City's authority is inapplicable because it is inconsistent with the holding in Jacobson.
The Supreme Court in Jacobson held that mandatory vaccination laws lie within the province of state - not federal - law:
[T]his court has distinctly recognized the authority of a state to enact quarantine laws and 'health laws of every description'
It is equally true that the state may invest local bodies called into existence for purposes of local administration with authority in some appropriate way to safeguard the public health and the public safety. The mode or manner in which those results are to be accomplished is within the discretion of the state[.]
So this Court must look to the Florida constitution for the state's authority to "vaccinate or terminate." Florida's constitution is completely different than Massachusetts'. Unlike Massachusetts' constitution, Florida's constitution seeks "to achieve the primary goal of individual freedom and autonomy." Traylor v. State, 596 So. 2d 957, 963 (Fla. 1992). The Right to Privacy preserves for Floridians what has been surrendered by citizens of Massachusetts: an individual liberty interest.
In its Motion for Reconsideration, the City argues, "[a] strict scrutiny standard should not apply to bar a public employer from keeping COVID-19 out of the workplace[.]" This is an illogical strawman argument. Nobody argued that strict scrutiny applies to any and all Covid-19 mitigation strategies that the City can implement to reduce spread of the virus, even assuming that goal is a compelling state interest at all.
It is common knowledge that the City has already been mitigating the spread of Covid-19 in its workplace for nearly two years without invading constitutionally-protected privacy interests. It is misleading for the City to now argue that the only possible mitigation strategy is one it has never used but - coincidentally - the only one it now seeks to pursue.
Summary: The Court already rejected the City's arguments that its "policies" are not subject to constitutional scrutiny, based on Florida Supreme Court law.
At the hearing, the City argued strenuously that its "vaccinate or terminate" policy was not unlawful because it wasn't a law but was only a policy. The Court rejected this argument, not least because of the Kurtz case, which reviewed a workplace policy related to disclosure of smoking status
Florida Statutes (emphasis added).
The emphasized portion of the statutory text is extremely significant. Florida's OSHA doesn't say that employers - especially government employers - can do anything necessary to protect workplace safety. The inclusion of the word "reasonably" leaves the door wide open to constitutional limitations like the right to privacy - which are, absent strict scrutiny, presumptively unreasonable.
First, the City omits any reference in its Motion for Reconsideration to SB2006 - Florida's so-called "Vaccine Passport Ban." Since this Court must harmonize the two statutes (even if there were any conflict between them), the Court cannot find both that Florida statutes enable and also simultaneously forbid vaccine passports and related policies. The City also completely overlooks the fact that the State's Attorney General filed an amicus brief in this case arguing that the City's vaccine policy was not supported by law and in fact illegally violates the "Vaccine Passport Ban" in SB2006.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request the Court enter an order denying the Motion for Reconsideration, award attorney's fees and costs, and order any other relief the Court deems just and proper.
Dated this 7th day of October, 2021.




-------------------------

I looked at what I wrote. Care to explain?

-------------------------
"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," - George Bernard Shaw

“Don’t underestimate Joe’s ability to f—k things up.” - Barack Obama

“End of quote. Repeat the line.” - wise words from Joe Biden