Political rants

@hell_hound7 its the freedom of speech to criticize politicians my guy. they were in a public space and held up signs. the signs were criticizing a politician. the cops would probz tell them to disperse, but what laws are they breaking? harassment? for what? criticizing the morality of a politician? if it was people following bill cosby into the court house shouting 'rapist!' and holding up signs i would have the same level of sympathy. do you think calling someone a pedophile is on par with calling a black person the n word? the fact that i can say pedophile and i gotta use 'the n word' should show in and of itself the different weight these two words hold. it is a crime to poison the water. its domestic terrorism i believe. the law doesnt just observe the effects of a crime, but also the intent. if you just plan to kill someone but never do it you can still go to prison for conspiracy (i think thats the charge?).

@hell_hound7 The constitution does address this in a way with the 9th Amendment. It is explicitly stating that the rights declared in the constitution is not a comprehensive list of rights afforded to the people. The purpose of the constitution was more geared towards laying the foundation of the government not so much defining laws between the people and defining crimes. That power was left to the states for a long time IIRC.

@momoichi Sorry, I'm not sure I understand the sentiment you're trying to get across (btfo?). I was just curious and did a bit of research to see if there was anything at all. I hardly look to the constitution for all things law/rights if that's what you're implying.

@umi_nezumi im just being dumb. constitutionalists are stupid and believe that the constitution is the only governing rules they should have to live by. libertarians but somehow dumber, i guess the bfto is implying that your statement btfo'ed them, or 'blew them the fuck out'

“like 30% effective? Right thats less than 50 so its not even half a chance you wont get it, there is a 70% chance you will. So how effective is it really? Oh wow maybe it will lessen the toll it has on your body." “Like 30% effective?” That is actually a half truth and a half lie. According to The New England Journal of Medicine. You are technically incorrect. It is about 30% effective with only one dose. But someone isn’t fully vaccinated with one dose. The second dose dramatically increases the effectiveness to around 80%. Let’s use the Pandus logic. Like 80% effective? Right thats more than 50 so that’s over half a chance you wont get it, there is a 20% chance you will. So how effective is it really? Oh wow maybe it will lessen the toll it has on your body. For the fully vaccinated. Effectiveness is in the 80’s not 30’s. You may ask. Why the hell do I need a second dose? Why can’t I do one dose and get it over with? Because that is not how medicine works. When fighting a decease, illness, or whatever. A person has to have the correct doses of medicine to fight off that decease, illness, sickness etc. Let’s extend this analogy to cancer. Why receive full dosage of cancer drugs, when partial dosage might save you? Because the proper dosage will increase the chance of you surviving cancer. Likewise, with the covid vaccine. Why receive full vaccination when one dose might suffice? Because the proper vaccination increases the effective rate of infection from the low 30’s to the high 80, s. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2108891 https://i.ani.me/0307/7299/screenshot_18.png https://i.ani.me/0307/7303/screenshot_19.png https://i.ani.me/0307/7307/screenshot_22.png

Where did you get it was only 30% effective? For fully vaccinated people. It is actually in the high 80’s. Did you just regurgitate talking points without going straight to source? That is how misinformation is spread. Through half-truths and half-lies. Half-truths and half-lies are still incorrect information. Half-truths and half lies are misinformation. Biased political agendas are often made through half-truths and half-lies. Which is ultimately fake news. https://assets.teenvogue.com/photos/5dae2cb156a2b0000860086a/16:9/w_1920,c_limit/Pol_Fake-News_10-21_PROMO.jpg

The only information I could find on gay bombs was that the air forced looked into it in the early 90's. Call me skeptical. Forgive me for not believing in things without sufficient evidence. Looking into something and actually creating something are two completely different things. Well they could? Coulda, woulda, shoulda, did they or did they not create it? Unless there is direct evidence for it. I don't believe it. But lets say that for the sake of argument that the US government was indeed creating the gays. Gays existed before the US was ever founded. Who created the gays before the gay bombs arrived? @momoichi

@a1ephy here we go again, im tired of doing this man. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-covid-vaccine-39percent-effective-in-israel-prevents-severe-illness.html

It is 30% effective vs delta variant the only 80% comes from the number of hospitalizations it has prevented vs the virus. This also isnt a republican source so suck a dick. Swear you know it all.