Gorsuch refuses to mask up

#276
#276
SamRebel35 said:
Out of respect, would you all please apply hand sanitizer before typing messages on Volnation. I know it doesn't have anything to do with public health, but it is the kind and respectful thing to do now that I have requested it. Thank you for your cooperation in this symbolic and pointless request.
Click to expand...
Your post, and this whole thread, made me think of a company email that was put out a week or longer ago. 🤣

Screenshot_20220118-172831_DuckDuckGo.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: CagleMtnVol, davethevol, AshG and 3 others
#277
#277
LouderVol said:
Where did I say they couldnt get N95s? I said are they using them?
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I still don’t feel this is worth even the minimal effort of spending 25 seconds to Google “Supreme Court Covid protocols.” The court’s official Covid protocols are online and I’m 99% confident that they would confirm that they’re acting on the CDC’s endorsement of N95 masks for best efficacy and are acting on that advice. I also don’t think there is any reason to assume that the justices would agree to wear a mask for their colleague and then intentionally or negligently wear a mask that wasn’t the most effective one they had access to.

That’s the kind of “no **** Sherlock” thing that you need to disprove or just look up for yourself. I’m not interested in the opinion of anybody who finds that persuasive.

You were talking about the intelligence of the other justices leaving Gorusch out of the 8 you referenced. I believe you left him out on purpose considering the nature of the discussion you have had to that point.
Click to expand...

My comment about intelligence was in response to someone saying that Sotomayor was uninformed. The others are all smart people who are in a better position to assess her credibility and probably better informed than me about the risks of Covid to people in various cohorts.

I was not saying Gorsuch is unintelligent. I think he is quick to assume bad faith from the chief and other justices when they don’t agree with him but has otherwise been a fair Justice. This is just a douche move, not an act of stupidity.
So because 1 didnt agree he is a douchebag?
Click to expand...

This is an attempt at a strawman. It’s such a dramatic oversimplification that I don’t believe it to have been made in good faith.

To the last if you have 1 person that makes a special request of a number of others and all but one comply I would be more thankful that most complied rather than calling out the one who didnt. Catch more flies with honey. Now I guess your angle here is that Sotomayuer didnt call Gorusch a douche. But considering the OP made that jump, and i have seen several other references outside this board to that point, it seems like it got around that she wasnt happy and complimentary with Gorusch.
Click to expand...

Again: link to her making a request for anything or calling anyone out.
 
#279
#279
RockyTop85 said:
Word salad says what?

Have you got a link to her initiating Roberts to asking or not?
First hand knowledge? You clerking for Gorsuch or something?
Click to expand...
How the eff would this whole thing have sprouted up if Sotomayeur didnt request it?

Did Robert's on her behalf, without involving her, spontaneously ask the others to wear masks? In that case I would say he is the douche. And that would change this entire conversation. Seems farfetched but I havent seen anything beyond Robert's asking others to wear masks based on sotomayeurs health concerns.
 
#280
#280
C-south said:
Not sure why you’re so hung up on this idiotic comparison. That is unless you’re simply saying masks are just for show and do nothing.
Click to expand...

Boy, you guys don't know how argumentation works. The idea is that if reason X (being a kind, respectful person) is sufficient reason for doing Z (wearing some item for a limited amount of time), then reason X (being a kind respectful person) + reason Y (doing the requested action may help protect the health of a close colleague) is even MORE reason to do Z.
 
#283
#283
evillawyer said:
Boy, you guys don't know how argumentation works. The idea is that if reason X (being a kind, respectful person) is sufficient reason for doing Z (wearing some item for a limited amount of time), then reason X (being a kind respectful person) + reason Y (doing the requested action may help protect the health of a close colleague) is even MORE reason to do Z.
Click to expand...

So now wearing paper masks that do nothing are out of “respect” instead of any alleged health and safety benefit? 🤣😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: allvol123 and Orange_Vol1321
#284
#284
landscapingvol said:
The real question is would you wear it at a Jewish funeral?
Click to expand...

If I attended one and they required it I would. Of course maybe since I’m not Jewish and I’m there simply to pay respects it wouldn’t matter to any rational and logical person.
 
#285
#285
LouderVol said:
How the eff would this whole thing have sprouted up if Sotomayeur didnt request it?

Did Robert's on her behalf, without involving her, spontaneously ask the others to wear masks? In that case I would say he is the douche. And that would change this entire conversation. Seems farfetched but I havent seen anything beyond Robert's asking others to wear masks based on sotomayeurs health concerns.
Click to expand...

There are multiple ways for this to have transpired without her asking. Too many to list all of them. There are ways that it could have transpired and Roberts asking was not even about her, just like there were many ways for Mark Milley to have both done what was reported and not committed treason. Putting on partisan glasses to read between the lines was what made everybody look stupid in that situation, too.
 
#286
#286
evillawyer said:
Boy, you guys don't know how argumentation works. The idea is that if reason X (being a kind, respectful person) is sufficient reason for doing Z (Not starting shart threads for an extended amount of time), then reason X (being a kind respectful person) + reason Y (doing the requested action may give all other VN'ers a break from you) is even MORE reason to do Z.
Click to expand...

FIXED. If only you were a kind, respectful person.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, NorthDallas40 and Orange_Vol1321
#287
#287
evillawyer said:
Boy, you guys don't know how argumentation works. The idea is that if reason X (being a kind, respectful person) is sufficient reason for doing Z (wearing some item for a limited amount of time), then reason X (being a kind respectful person) + reason Y (doing the requested action may help protect the health of a close colleague) is even MORE reason to do Z.
Click to expand...

Being respectful of someone's religious rituals and traditions is not the same as humoring someone who makes a decree that you should wear something on your face that serves no purpose other than to make the person feel good. They are not the same. It is a dumb comparison. The only way it would be an apt comparison is to rightly point out that masking has sort of become its own form of religious anti-science.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321 and allvol123
#289
#289
SamRebel35 said:
Being respectful of someone's religious rituals and traditions is not the same as humoring someone who makes a decree that you should wear something on your face that serves no purpose other than to make the person feel good. They are not the same. It is a dumb comparison. The only way it would be an apt comparison is to rightly point out that masking has sort of become its own form of religious anti-science.
Click to expand...
The hypothetical attendee is doing something of minimal inconvenience that they don’t see a need for and may not agree with out of concern for the feelings (at least) of someone else.

It seems pretty spot on.
 
#292
#292
I just think it's funny that you can show people decades of research demonstrating that cloth masks don't stop viruses, comparisons of places and schools with mask mandates and without, the actual numerical measurement of virus size and mask filtration capabilities, and now even the CDC guidance. . . .

And they still think people should wear face coverings.

It's laughable, or pitiful, and I can't decide which.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GVF, Orange_Vol1321, hog88 and 4 others
#293
#293
kiddiedoc said:
I just think it's funny that you can show people decades of research demonstrating that cloth masks don't stop viruses, comparisons of places and schools with mask mandates and without, the actual numerical measurement of virus size and mask filtration capabilities, and now even the CDC guidance. . . .

And they still think people should wear face coverings.

It's laughable, or pitiful, and I can't decide which.
Click to expand...

What is insane is that these are supposedly some of our sharpest legal minds. Sheesh! That is some scary ****.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange_Vol1321 and kiddiedoc
#294
#294
kiddiedoc said:
I just think it's funny that you can show people decades of research demonstrating that cloth masks don't stop viruses, comparisons of places and schools with mask mandates and without, the actual numerical measurement of virus size and mask filtration capabilities, and now even the CDC guidance. . . .

And they still think people should wear face coverings.

It's laughable, or pitiful, and I can't decide which.
Click to expand...
I think this is that “laugh to keep from crying” scenario.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kiddiedoc
#295
#295
RockyTop85 said:
Word salad says what?

Have you got a link to her initiating Roberts to asking or not?
First hand knowledge? You clerking for Gorsuch or something?
Click to expand...
Do you believe it more likely that Roberts asked the others on his own?
 
#299
#299
landscapingvol said:
What is the deal with you and Jewish funerals? It’s odd and not even a good comparison yet you keep using it in virtually every reply
Click to expand...
She saw someone else she respects make the comparison and thought it very clever so she brought it here.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top