Nets Announce Kyrie Irving Won't Play At All Until He Can Participate Fully

[arasu]

Yeah the state of New York says that doesn't cut it unless there's a valid medical exemption. Which is entirely reasonable.

Not even close to reasonable. Read my post above.

Yeah, your post is nonsensical. All legal precedent points towards their being plenty basis for vaccine requirements being legal. Also, OSHA regulations clearly allow for rules to protect workers from contagious diseases. Stop playing meme-lord Constitutional scholar. Even for right-wing judges, this is a slam-dunk no-brainer.

Mass censorship and serious consequences for dissent, and even professional consequences for questioning at the earliest stages is proof beyond all doubt that we are headed down a totally unprecedented path in the U.S. We've certainly flirted with totalitarianism in the past, but never gone this far. It doesn't take a Constitutional scholar to see this. Your eyes are the only expert you need. OPEN THEM!

[jstudabaka]

people are so angry and hate a specific group of people because people in power have told them they are dangerous and a threat to their livelihood and that they should be treated differently and should be shunned from society. hmmm i think i’ve heard this before….. didn’t end well.

What you're getting at can be dispelled with minimal application of common sense and basic facts. The kind of unjust treatment against groups you're alluding to is considered wrong because it was directed at people because of who they are, not what they do. Kyrie Irving chooses to intake bad information about subjects on which he is not an expert and then make bad decisions. A reasonable person can readily understand that there is a global pandemic in which a highly contagious virus has killed many people and as a result governments are going to need to take actions to address it.

There is a concerted effort to politically marginalize and criminalize skepticism and skeptics. It's as much who we are as any religious or ethnic identity. The "conspiracy theorist" accusation is a prime example of purposeful political marginalization of anyone who opposes the new ideological religion. It's sick and disgusting. It's time for folks like you to open your eyes and stop with the pointless extremism.

That's wholly irrelevant to the basic facts around Covid and vaccines, none of which vaccine or Covid skeptics have addressed with actual unrebutted information. You see, early in the pandemic, there was some instances of bad information spread around about Covid -- that masks were ineffective or that Covid spread heavily through surfaces. Better information got out and did challenge some of these statements issuing from official sources. And as a result, the body of accepted information changed. But with people like Kyrie and yourself, you're not dealing in objective facts that can be plainly discussed. You're hiding behind abstractions and theories, because you don't have fact or science-based narratives.

[arasu]

Yeah the state of New York says that doesn't cut it unless there's a valid medical exemption. Which is entirely reasonable.

Not even close to reasonable. Read my post above.

Why it is not reasonable? I know a few people in Europe who have testing as an alternative option to vaccination. I think this is sufficient. I mean, what is the actual goal here? Safety of people in the building to get COVID and get substantially ill right? Then testing should give more assurances that the person in question is free of the disease at the time of the event. I absolutely am for vaccinations, and I think it is unwise not to be vaccinated against COVID, but there must be an alternative to still participate for people who choose to not be vaccinated

I think you misunderstood. I think testing is reasonable. The post I disagreed with read that it was reasonable that testing was not an option.

[jstudabaka]

Not even close to reasonable. Read my post above.

Yeah, your post is nonsensical. All legal precedent points towards their being plenty basis for vaccine requirements being legal. Also, OSHA regulations clearly allow for rules to protect workers from contagious diseases. Stop playing meme-lord Constitutional scholar. Even for right-wing judges, this is a slam-dunk no-brainer.

Mass censorship and serious consequences for dissent, and even professional consequences for questioning at the earliest stages is proof beyond all doubt that we are headed down a totally unprecedented path in the U.S. We've certainly flirted with totalitarianism in the past, but never gone this far. It doesn't take a Constitutional scholar to see this. Your eyes are the only expert you need. OPEN THEM!

Yeah, you can't even stay on topic. I addressed the legal basis for requiring vaccines and now you're rambling about censorship. Most public schools wouldn't let kids attend classes without vaccination for more than half a century. The military and other jobs require a ton of vaccines. This is not something new. What's new is the ability of the internet to allow people to more seamlessly form echo chambers where they entertain themselves with sexy theories on "what's really going on" and conceitedly preen themselves on being smart enough not to be brainwashed. That's Kyrie in a nutshell, only his situation is worse because he has money and fans to feed his ridiculous ego.

[arasu]

Yeah, your post is nonsensical. All legal precedent points towards their being plenty basis for vaccine requirements being legal. Also, OSHA regulations clearly allow for rules to protect workers from contagious diseases. Stop playing meme-lord Constitutional scholar. Even for right-wing judges, this is a slam-dunk no-brainer.

Mass censorship and serious consequences for dissent, and even professional consequences for questioning at the earliest stages is proof beyond all doubt that we are headed down a totally unprecedented path in the U.S. We've certainly flirted with totalitarianism in the past, but never gone this far. It doesn't take a Constitutional scholar to see this. Your eyes are the only expert you need. OPEN THEM!

Yeah, you can't even stay on topic. I addressed the legal basis for requiring vaccines and now you're rambling about censorship. Most public schools wouldn't let kids attend classes without vaccination for more than half a century. The military and other jobs require a ton of vaccines. This is not something new. What's new is the ability of the internet to allow people to more seamlessly form echo chambers where they entertain themselves with sexy theories on "what's really going on" and conceitedly preen themselves on being smart enough not to be brainwashed. That's Kyrie in a nutshell, only his situation is worse because he has money and fans to feed his ridiculous ego.

Read some of my above posts. Censorship prevents idea transfer, which prevents the acquisition of the necessary knowledge to make policy decisions. Free speech underscores every policy decision and is fundamental to this discussion. It is THE most important part of this discussion, both from a legal point of view and a scientific one. Notice how YOU refuse to stay on topic, constantly deflecting.

[arasu]

Yeah, your post is nonsensical. All legal precedent points towards their being plenty basis for vaccine requirements being legal. Also, OSHA regulations clearly allow for rules to protect workers from contagious diseases. Stop playing meme-lord Constitutional scholar. Even for right-wing judges, this is a slam-dunk no-brainer.

Mass censorship and serious consequences for dissent, and even professional consequences for questioning at the earliest stages is proof beyond all doubt that we are headed down a totally unprecedented path in the U.S. We've certainly flirted with totalitarianism in the past, but never gone this far. It doesn't take a Constitutional scholar to see this. Your eyes are the only expert you need. OPEN THEM!

Yeah, you can't even stay on topic. I addressed the legal basis for requiring vaccines and now you're rambling about censorship. Most public schools wouldn't let kids attend classes without vaccination for more than half a century. The military and other jobs require a ton of vaccines. This is not something new. What's new is the ability of the internet to allow people to more seamlessly form echo chambers where they entertain themselves with sexy theories on "what's really going on" and conceitedly preen themselves on being smart enough not to be brainwashed. That's Kyrie in a nutshell, only his situation is worse because he has money and fans to feed his ridiculous ego.

Having a wacky contrarian like Kyrie take his stand here is not especially helpful to the rational folks who have legitimate skepticism towards current medical propaganda. There's a huge difference between a skeptic and a contrarian, where contrarians often find themselves deep in "conspiracy theory" territory, while skeptics reject such things. Unfortunately the lay person doesn't really understand the difference, and it appears that there is a concerted political effort to lump skeptics and contrarians into the same "conspiracy theorist" category, consequently destroying societal acceptance of rational thought itself, a pillar of the modern advancements that have brought us so much comfort and relative peace.

[GordanFreeman]

You're not interested in wisdom. Informing people who are incapable of questioning their own confirmation bias is an exercise in futility. You are just looking for someone to speak rationally towards you, so you can lash out at that unbeliever and feel emotionally satisfied. Good luck with that.

You seem very irritated. Step away from your computer, have a snickers, and do a few mins of breathing exercises. Then come back and teach us uneducated folk.

You are the one pushing policies. The onus is on you to prove beyond a great degree of doubt that your policy choices should be allowed to substantially limit basic human rights. Even the SCOTUS decision on vaccines so long ago made it clear that vaccine mandates limit basic rights, and can only be allowed when they pass a sufficient threshold to protect public safety.

Since public safety has always been the excuse for falsely limiting civil and human rights, the threshold for evidence should be relatively uncontroversial and definitely must involve complete and unfettered public discourse. Neither of those conditions have yet to be satisfied.

You seem to have me confused with someone else. I'm not pushing any policies. I read your posts, in which you were throwing out labels, and responding to others angrily, and asked you to relax and impart your wisdom in a more calm fashion.

[jstudabaka]

Mass censorship and serious consequences for dissent, and even professional consequences for questioning at the earliest stages is proof beyond all doubt that we are headed down a totally unprecedented path in the U.S. We've certainly flirted with totalitarianism in the past, but never gone this far. It doesn't take a Constitutional scholar to see this. Your eyes are the only expert you need. OPEN THEM!

Yeah, you can't even stay on topic. I addressed the legal basis for requiring vaccines and now you're rambling about censorship. Most public schools wouldn't let kids attend classes without vaccination for more than half a century. The military and other jobs require a ton of vaccines. This is not something new. What's new is the ability of the internet to allow people to more seamlessly form echo chambers where they entertain themselves with sexy theories on "what's really going on" and conceitedly preen themselves on being smart enough not to be brainwashed. That's Kyrie in a nutshell, only his situation is worse because he has money and fans to feed his ridiculous ego.

Read some of my above posts. Censorship prevents idea transfer, which prevents the acquisition of the necessary knowledge to make policy decisions. Free speech underscores every policy decision and is fundamental to this discussion. It is THE most important part of this discussion, both from a legal point of view and a scientific one. Notice how YOU refuse to stay on topic, constantly deflecting.

Again, I've yet to see a rational information-based rebuttal to vaccines. Sometimes people yammer about mRNA and how "the vaccine was developed in less than a year," but basic reading on the topic reveals that there's nothing particularly remarkable in mRNA vaccines and that they've been in development for fifty years.

Dr. Fauci basically admitted that official sources told what he deemed a "white lie" about masks not being effective so there wouldn't be a run on them. So it's not as if the official narrative is not challenged -- it just seems that reality isn't sexy enough for those who want to anoint themselves intellectual dark net philosopher kings.

[RipCityKJ]

I didn't claim that you are such a person in the "mock people" post, only that such a person would behave as such. If you prefer not to be confused with such people, maybe don't act as they do. Once it was clear that you woulud continue with the mocking and derision, I concluded that you are exactly what I thought you might be, an extremist.

And no, it's not an opinion. The past 19 months or so has been characterized by totalitarian extremism across the world, by definition. Making a claim that matches a definition isn't an opinion. Many people are okay with totalitarianism, but many of those same people take issue with being labeled as such. If you fit the bill, own it.

When I said "opinion" I really meant that you are wrong, but I'm OK with it. I don't know you so I won't label you, but I'm sure some would label you a wakadoo conspiracy nut. Not me... because I don't know you and I don't like to generalize.

But let me ask you:
Should Kyrie be required to wear pants in New York?
Should he be allowed to urinate in public?
Smoke on an Airplane?
Drive 100 mph through your neighborhood?

So some mandates are OK... but only if you understand them? Got it!

I've spent the last 19 months arguing the nuances of how freedom works, and how it doesn't. I've run across the same parroted excuses as you posted above. I'm of the strong impression that you aren't one to overcome confirmation bias. Your quickness to mockery demonstrates a serious lack of willingness to question your own beliefs. Such a person can't come to a conversation in good faith. There is a difference between a debate and a rational argument, and rationality requires the willingness to concede points. I've wasted too much time on people who think I'm here to debate or exchange ridicule or "opinions".

*Anyone reading this who may be interested in a more in depth discussion on the obvious trend towards totalitarianism, feel free to address me, or even message me in private. Anyone who is uninterested in a good faith discussion, maybe don't bother, because I won't be provoked by nonsense.

Did you even read this before you sent it? You’re being extremely hypocritical and ignorant by saying you won’t listen to people with other opinions because they’re opinions are considered closed minded to you, how is that not being the closed minded one? You’re ignorance has blinded you from the exact thing you’re complaining about. It’s not covid or the vaccine that is leading to a totalitarian state it’s the you vs me, blue vs red, urban vs rural mentality that our politicians and media (on all sides) has created and as long as we all play into it we’ll ignore the behind close doors corruption between the elites and their control of our government which will lead to and is a form of totalitarianism.

[arasu]

You seem very irritated. Step away from your computer, have a snickers, and do a few mins of breathing exercises. Then come back and teach us uneducated folk.

You are the one pushing policies. The onus is on you to prove beyond a great degree of doubt that your policy choices should be allowed to substantially limit basic human rights. Even the SCOTUS decision on vaccines so long ago made it clear that vaccine mandates limit basic rights, and can only be allowed when they pass a sufficient threshold to protect public safety.

Since public safety has always been the excuse for falsely limiting civil and human rights, the threshold for evidence should be relatively uncontroversial and definitely must involve complete and unfettered public discourse. Neither of those conditions have yet to be satisfied.

You seem to have me confused with someone else. I'm not pushing any policies. I read your posts, in which you were throwing out labels, and responding to others angrily, and asked you to relax and impart your wisdom in a more calm fashion.

Labels are how we distinguish one thing from another. If we don't have them, definition, navigation, and communication is impossible. We live in a society that is so caught up in rejection of past poorly substantiated labels, we've come into the habit of rejecting all identifying labels, especially when it comes to our personal existence. We often reject any and all personally defining labels, regardless of how objectively they may apply. Totalitarianism has a definition, and in my opinion, It is wrong, vile, and extreme. Over the past 19 months we've seen it creep across the world. That is rationally irrefutable. All of the defining factors are objectively present. Anyone who supports its spread and makes excuses for it is a totalitarian, by definition.

You're reading anger where it doesn't exist. Certainly people should be angry at what has transpired regarding totalitarianism and its global spread, but I've been disappointed by human behavior far too long to have such a strong emotional reaction. It's not easy to read emotions from text, so it's best to err on the side of no emotional read. I've calmly presented the necessary information in my comments on this thread. Feel free to read them.

[arasu]

When I said "opinion" I really meant that you are wrong, but I'm OK with it. I don't know you so I won't label you, but I'm sure some would label you a wakadoo conspiracy nut. Not me... because I don't know you and I don't like to generalize.

But let me ask you:
Should Kyrie be required to wear pants in New York?
Should he be allowed to urinate in public?
Smoke on an Airplane?
Drive 100 mph through your neighborhood?

So some mandates are OK... but only if you understand them? Got it!

I've spent the last 19 months arguing the nuances of how freedom works, and how it doesn't. I've run across the same parroted excuses as you posted above. I'm of the strong impression that you aren't one to overcome confirmation bias. Your quickness to mockery demonstrates a serious lack of willingness to question your own beliefs. Such a person can't come to a conversation in good faith. There is a difference between a debate and a rational argument, and rationality requires the willingness to concede points. I've wasted too much time on people who think I'm here to debate or exchange ridicule or "opinions".

*Anyone reading this who may be interested in a more in depth discussion on the obvious trend towards totalitarianism, feel free to address me, or even message me in private. Anyone who is uninterested in a good faith discussion, maybe don't bother, because I won't be provoked by nonsense.

Did you even read this before you sent it? You’re being extremely hypocritical and ignorant by saying you won’t listen to people with other opinions because they’re opinions are considered closed minded to you, how is that not being the closed minded one? You’re ignorance has blinded you from the exact thing you’re complaining about. It’s not covid or the vaccine that is leading to a totalitarian state it’s the you vs me, blue vs red, urban vs rural mentality that our politicians and media (on all sides) has created and as long as we all play into it we’ll ignore the behind close doors corruption between the elites and their control of our government which will lead to and is a form of totalitarianism.

I question my beliefs every single day. Do you?

[arasu]

I've spent the last 19 months arguing the nuances of how freedom works, and how it doesn't. I've run across the same parroted excuses as you posted above. I'm of the strong impression that you aren't one to overcome confirmation bias. Your quickness to mockery demonstrates a serious lack of willingness to question your own beliefs. Such a person can't come to a conversation in good faith. There is a difference between a debate and a rational argument, and rationality requires the willingness to concede points. I've wasted too much time on people who think I'm here to debate or exchange ridicule or "opinions".

*Anyone reading this who may be interested in a more in depth discussion on the obvious trend towards totalitarianism, feel free to address me, or even message me in private. Anyone who is uninterested in a good faith discussion, maybe don't bother, because I won't be provoked by nonsense.

Did you even read this before you sent it? You’re being extremely hypocritical and ignorant by saying you won’t listen to people with other opinions because they’re opinions are considered closed minded to you, how is that not being the closed minded one? You’re ignorance has blinded you from the exact thing you’re complaining about. It’s not covid or the vaccine that is leading to a totalitarian state it’s the you vs me, blue vs red, urban vs rural mentality that our politicians and media (on all sides) has created and as long as we all play into it we’ll ignore the behind close doors corruption between the elites and their control of our government which will lead to and is a form of totalitarianism.

I question my beliefs every single day. Do you?

No where did I state that I won't listen to others. Just the opposite. I've invited others to convince me of their position. We're not discussing opinions here, but rather facts. When I hear the word fact, I define that as objective fact. If others have a different definition of facts, then a discussion is pointless. So unless we can first agree on the rules of the game, I won't be playing the game. The conversations I've had so far in this thread all demonstrate that we're playing by different rules, and that I'm just being asked to play the part of the object of ridicule, which I reject.

[xinxin]

.

2. Why not just trade him instead of dragging him and your organization through the mud?

Who would be dumb enough to trade for him after he already said , he’s rather retire if he gets traded from the Nets. ?

Way to deflate your value; nice going Kyrie


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SixStringAxis]

I've spent the last 19 months arguing the nuances of how freedom works, and how it doesn't. I've run across the same parroted excuses as you posted above. I'm of the strong impression that you aren't one to overcome confirmation bias. Your quickness to mockery demonstrates a serious lack of willingness to question your own beliefs. Such a person can't come to a conversation in good faith. There is a difference between a debate and a rational argument, and rationality requires the willingness to concede points. I've wasted too much time on people who think I'm here to debate or exchange ridicule or "opinions".

*Anyone reading this who may be interested in a more in depth discussion on the obvious trend towards totalitarianism, feel free to address me, or even message me in private. Anyone who is uninterested in a good faith discussion, maybe don't bother, because I won't be provoked by nonsense.

How about you offer some actual facts and arguments instead of every post being about how we are? How somehow you're mind and thought processes are so much smarter than ours?

Explain buddy how actively endangering fellow citizens by not getting the vaccine and the govt trying to stop people from endangering people.. is somehow such determent to your freedoms. Last time I checked almost every law is built around making sure a person can't harm another person. You can bend the argument as far as you want but at the end of the day that comment sense fact you will never be able to counter, period.

It's clear to me, that you aren't here for facts. Like I wrote before, most people are just going to use me as a source of derision, someone to attack and make themselves feel superior and as part of a group. It's clear that you're deeply entrenched in your propaganda, and overcoming confirmation bias is the furthest thing from your mind. You wouldn't need me to present facts, if you were genuinely interested. So making that claim to me seems to be nothing but an excuse for you to trash another person.

I may be wrong about you. If so, then start questioning your beliefs, BEFORE you start advocating for policies.

Lmao I literally asked you for facts. I asked you for one thing and that was it. You respond that somehow I don't what I want. Lol. Too funny dude. I realize you're probably just a troll.

I asked you to explain your stance with real evidence to support your stance and you can't do it. You claim to be so well read on history but yet you can't actually even being to explain anything.

[RipCityKJ]

Did you even read this before you sent it? You’re being extremely hypocritical and ignorant by saying you won’t listen to people with other opinions because they’re opinions are considered closed minded to you, how is that not being the closed minded one? You’re ignorance has blinded you from the exact thing you’re complaining about. It’s not covid or the vaccine that is leading to a totalitarian state it’s the you vs me, blue vs red, urban vs rural mentality that our politicians and media (on all sides) has created and as long as we all play into it we’ll ignore the behind close doors corruption between the elites and their control of our government which will lead to and is a form of totalitarianism.

I question my beliefs every single day. Do you?

No where did I state that I won't listen to others. Just the opposite. I've invited others to convince me of their position. We're not discussing opinions here, but rather facts. When I hear the word fact, I define that as objective fact. If others have a different definition of facts, then a discussion is pointless. So unless we can first agree on the rules of the game, I won't be playing the game. The conversations I've had so far in this thread all demonstrate that we're playing by different rules, and that I'm just being asked to play the part of the object of ridicule, which I reject.

You’re last paragraph said

“ *Anyone reading this who may be interested in a more in depth discussion on the obvious trend towards totalitarianism, feel free to address me, or even message me in private. Anyone who is uninterested in a good faith discussion, maybe don't bother, because I won't be provoked by nonsense.”

Translation: I only want to hear from people with opinions that fit my narrative. Anyone who argues with me is just bullying me and shouting nonsense.

You’re the one virtue signaling, you’re the closed minded one shouting nonsense and you’re the one that’s ok with totalitarianism because everything is about you as long as you keep lying to yourself that you’re open minded. I am pro choice for anyone who doesn’t want to get vaccinated but there are consequences to every action and if the private sector and our government require the vaccine for anything that may effect the unvaccinated life’s then that’s a consequence of their actions and their choice. They shouldn’t be ridiculed for their choice but they also don’t deserve sympathy for their choice, they have to live with it just like vaccinated people had to live with choice to get stuck in the arm by a government created vaccine in good faith that it would work.

[MegaK]

Trade him for the GOAT - Alex Caruso bro. Best move the Nets could make bro.

[Twinkie defense]

This guy's a cancer - Nets will be lucky if they can cut him and void his salary.

[MegaK]

Vaccinate the rich bro ! Us poor people are happy to die for the idea of a democracy that perpetually fails us bro. We smart bro.

[kenwood3333]

Does that mean Kyrie will still be paid for the away games? He is technically eligble to play those games, but it appears to be a Nets decision to not want him there. Also want to hear what Michelle Roberts has to say.

[arasu]

How about you offer some actual facts and arguments instead of every post being about how we are? How somehow you're mind and thought processes are so much smarter than ours?

Explain buddy how actively endangering fellow citizens by not getting the vaccine and the govt trying to stop people from endangering people.. is somehow such determent to your freedoms. Last time I checked almost every law is built around making sure a person can't harm another person. You can bend the argument as far as you want but at the end of the day that comment sense fact you will never be able to counter, period.

It's clear to me, that you aren't here for facts. Like I wrote before, most people are just going to use me as a source of derision, someone to attack and make themselves feel superior and as part of a group. It's clear that you're deeply entrenched in your propaganda, and overcoming confirmation bias is the furthest thing from your mind. You wouldn't need me to present facts, if you were genuinely interested. So making that claim to me seems to be nothing but an excuse for you to trash another person.

I may be wrong about you. If so, then start questioning your beliefs, BEFORE you start advocating for policies.

Lmao I literally asked you for facts. I asked you for one thing and that was it. You respond that somehow I don't what I want. Lol. Too funny dude. I realize you're probably just a troll.

I asked you to explain your stance with real evidence to support your stance and you can't do it. You claim to be so well read on history but yet you can't actually even being to explain anything.

When our definition of facts isn't the same, facts won't matter to you. Why should I bother with you, when all you do is laugh your A off? You made it clear that you aren't responding to me to have a good faith conversation. You're here to ridicule someone to make yourself feel special and accepted.

Despite the lack of good faith participants, anyone who actually reads all of my comments in this thread will find many rationally undeniable facts. Not a single person has addressed those of course.