12-15-2020, 11:16 AM
(12-15-2020, 09:06 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: lex will be pleased, but I believe most of us think this is stupid and puts us all at risk, because I think we know not stopping pandemics in one area makes them a certainty in another.
If there was anything for states to sue each other over in SCOTUS, it is this. I believe there is precedent for one state being held liable to another when it came to acid rain litigation, but not sure. Anyway, this is my gripe:
[tweet]https://twitter.com/LaurenWeberHP/status/1338849219277426691[/tweet]
What qualified person in their right mind is going to take on one of these jobs, when they are hamstrung to do it? We have seatbelt laws for a reason. We have warnings on cigarettes for a reason. Why the hell would we not want to empower and celebrate public health experts, and know that if we follow their advice, we will avoid the most public health damage?
Why limit it to public health directors? Why not just empower and celebrate a dictator - who needs such trifles as elections? Just pick someone qualified and let him or her run things without interference from such distractions such as, you know, public opinion, etc.
You may say the scenarios are completely different. And yes, there's a difference. But the principle animating against both is the same.
But I'm sure you knew that already . . . is it that principle only matters when it fits with your outlook on a particular issue?
But that's the tough thing about principles . . . they're not always convenient and easy.