It’s not a mass firing of unvaccinated workers.

It’s an overdue reduction of unsafe employees.

Point of view is everything.


I’m not averse to it.

If a healthcare employer wants all of its employees to be vaccinated, then I’m FULLY supportive!

Hell, I thought it was silly that a COVID vaccine wasn’t required for the military until very recently.

There sure as Hell weren’t any “optional” vaccines when I was active.

Hell, I can remember getting two smallpox and at least ten anthrax vaccines when I was in…NOT ONE of them was optional, and I can remember people getting kicked out for refusing vaccines back in the day.


Agree with both you fine gentleman; but there is an outstanding Supreme Coogfans
ruling that this topic is out of bounds here…Oh well, I’ll enjoy the vital information
while it’s here…

1 Like

It is being challenged in courts, multiple courts.

1 Like

It’s not likely to go anywhere for those challenging it.

Vaccine mandates have already been upheld as constitutional as far back as 1909 in the case of smallpox.

See here.

Pretty strong precedent to overcome.

As I said…there’s never been such a thing as an “optional” vaccine in the military that I’m aware of.

1 Like

Will see. It is still being challenged at local and federal levels. The biggest news for me is that Merck is soon to release pill to fight off the virus:

Those challenges will fail.

The USSC affirmed the Constitutionality of vaccine mandates in several other subsequent decisions.

So my advice to those servicemembers: roll up your sleeves and take a jab!!!

One would think all these pending lower court cases would just
be dismissed by the courts based upon this SC ruling, unless there
is some new wrinkle in the newly filed cases being introduced.

Now I guess every 50 years or so the SC will reverse a previous courts decision
( and rightly so … Brown vs Bd Edu) …but don’t see how these anti vax folks get it
this far on this topic unless they attack on newness of mRNA technology…

From what I hear, some Soldiers are trying to excuse themselves by saying that since they’ve had COVID already, then they shouldn’t have to get a shot, and that natural immunity either exempts them or is somehow better than inoculation. I doubt that that argument will win the day.

In the end, diseases such as smallpox and polio weren’t eradicated by natural immunity…they were eradicated by VACCINES.

1 Like

This is great news to have an antiviral drug too. But what are its side effects ?

To be honest, I was hesitant to use the Tamiflu products at first too…but the good
old flu didn’t have a mortality rate somewhere between 1.3-2% either.

Guess all the bleach, UV light, HCQ, and dewormer med advocates will go in a
meltdown in the alternate universe.

1 Like

Even George Washington mandated a vaccine for his troops. Its silly how people have been brainwashed into thinking that the mask and vaccine are bad. Weak minded folk are so easily brainwashed.


Agree…but when we use derogatory terms to describe the other tribe, we
will probably will not be very persuasive. The danger of having ample supply
of misinformation is not something I think the world has ever had to deal with before.

It is fascinating to read how ivermectin and HCQ given in the early stages of the virus have been very effective treating the virus. My sister in law came down with the virus with high fever and was quickly administered both. She recovered within five days.
Statistics are now pointing out that more than 70/75% of the U.S. population has had covid. To find out that individuals that have had covid tend to be better immune against the virus than getting the vaccine is indeed crucial to the on going research.

Sorry Chris, “fascinating” reads and anecdotal stories does not equal controlled
scientific studies. Glad your sis recovered, but you have no clue as to what “worked”


It’s great that she recovered.

But keep in mind that assuming that she got better because of those “treatments” could be a case of “ex post ergo propter hoc.”

That is to say, don’t assume that simply because “a” (her recovery) followed “b” (the treatment), that b caused a.

It could be that she was going to get better anyway (which happens in a large number of COVID cases), and that her recovery had nothing to do with those two drugs, both of which have been widely discredited as COVID treatments in clinical research.


It is not anecdotal NRGcoog. There are some promising results in different countries. The good news is that both medications are inexpensive and have been on the market for eyars/decades.

Fair enough uhlaw97 and at the same it can’t discounted. That goes both ways.

Which countries are those Chris?

righto… about 98% recover. But personally I know many that recover have long term lung damage.


Soldiers are one thing, citizenry is different, way different


©Copyright 2017