I'm consistent on issues of liberty, so it's still "their business, their rules."  Of course, the govt. shouldn't be able to do this. If my employer does it, then I'll tell them to get bent and adios.

https://coloradopeakpolitics.com/2021/05/13/colorado-democrats-kill-gop-effort-to-ban-vaccine-mandates-at-work/

The Ds were right to kill this, but for the wrong reasons as usual.  Van Beeber (R) can't be that bright because she made this statement.

“Our rights and access are granted by the constitution; they are not granted to us by receiving a medical procedure,” she said. “Anything less really doesn’t honor equity, inclusivity and diversity.”

Yeah, no.

I got asked in a work survey yesterday if I supported the company requiring the vaccine as a condition of employment. Never thought I'd see that question.

That sounds like something my work would do.  They haven't done it yet, though.

And when every business does it to save the .gov the trouble? What then ya big brain, "consistent", Libertardian?

Nice name calling.  Since you just couldn't stop at the first question mark, does that mean that you're a statist and I hit a nerve?  I'll work for myself.  Hopefully, many other people say FOAD to that, too.  That's on them.


PS - I'm registered R, so that makes me a libertardarian (small l) .

I despise Libertarians and the ideology (which is where the idea of "their business, their rules" really finds its home), as that ideology is nothing more than liberalism w/ a facade of independence and faux-conservatism; in short, its appearance and declared tenets lack charity (that is, wanting the objective best for someone, not anything to do with the co-opting of the term by liberals to mean handouts). The reality is, not everyone can work for themselves. And I don't mean personal ability (which is also true, though gets into the unpopular reality that some people are just stupid or incompetent). I mean the systemic reality that it's impossible due to the nature of supply chains, 3rd party involvement in sub-contracting elements of work, etc. What happens when your supply chain for raw materials, data, internet access, (insert whatever "thing" you need *to* work for "yourself") becomes dependent on any manner of criteria which were present in the previous model of working "for" someone else? What then, hrmm?

Simply put, "their business their rules" is nothing more than a cover for laissez-faire morality and chaos inducement, or confined instances of the very "statist" mentality it supposedly opposes, since the idea of every man being a truly independent agent of commerce is only true in theory. In reality, everyone depends on someone else in some way, and some more than others. While the left takes that to another extreme from the Libertarian, the reality is they reach the same end: brokenness and subjugation.

In reality, the ideal is subsidiarity wherein the individual through the largest levels of social structure look out for and handle those things within their competency and sphere of influence only, and only involve higher or lateral elements when necessary; as such, any lateral or higher element inserting itself into said dealings is, in fact, a usurpation of the free agency of the element(s) into which they have encroached.

With pretty much no exception (aside from arbitrary standards we have gradually come to accept through a multi-generational process of being socially engineered), I see no reason for which a business has a realistic influence or competency in your, my, or anyone else's vaccination status.

As such, I reject such ideas as "their business, their rules" when its not caveated to those things for which any reasonable person can ascertain the party spoken of indeed has competency.

As you can see, I'm no statist.

From my perspective, even the John Birch Society is too liberal.

TL;DR  

Actually, I did.  I liked this line the best.

Nuremberg Code.  None of these shots are vaccines per se and have not been tested.  Those taking it are the test animals.