> In 2019 or earlier, when have you had to show an ID and proof of vaccination to enter any building other than your own house?

I live in upstate New York - one of the more aggressive states for COVID measures - and have not yet had to do this, a year and a half into the pandemic.

(I did, however, have to prove my vaccination status and present ID when I became a naturalized US citizen quite a few years ago. https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-8-part-b-chapter-...)

> And for schools, didn't you used to have private schools or homeschooling as an option to avoid these kind of mandates?

These still exist.

> These still exist.

But they don't get you out of the mandates anymore. Adults who already finished school used to never have to tell anyone their vaccination status to participate in society.

Again, I literally had to prove my vaccination status to be allowed to stay in the US. In 2009… and I’ve yet to present my COVID card anywhere in upstate NY.

Non-citizens do not have the right of citizens, you might have known already, but one can be denied the green card and/or not allowed into the country for having a communicable disease like AIDS or TB. If I follow your logic, it's okay to have AIDS, TB, leprosy, etc. passports too?

> If I follow your logic, it's okay to have AIDS, TB, leprosy, etc. passports too?

If they start spreading exponentially via aerosols, sure.

But people with AIDS are not allowed into the country already, why you add conditions? Does the Constitution say anything about aerosols? Besides, TB spreads with the aerosols so we should have the BCG vaccine mandates, right?

It's fairly obvious that TB is not spreading like COVID does in the United States. If it were, restrictions would be sensible. (I would note that if you have TB, you may wind up subject to a quarantine order. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/tb-patient-quarantine-condition...)

Constitutionally, SCOTUS has ruled on the point in the past. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

> Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.

You argued that the rules applied to foreigners should be applied to the citizens. Right now foreigners with TB, AIDS and many other diseases are not allowed in the country. The question for you: is it okay to deport citizens with the same diseases? If the same rules apply then we should be doing this but as we obviously don't do this, this means the rules for foreigners are different. I am sure you can find the court cases confirming that.

Not entirely true. Certain classes of jobs, like working in health care, have always mandated vaccination. Additionally, when most vaccines are given in childhood, making sure everyone is vaccinated in grade school has the effect of ensuring that most adults are vaccinated. No need to keep re-checking throughout life.

I’m referring to masks. Mandating vaccines is fine and good.

So you are ok with injecting things into peoples bodies, by force.

But covering the nose and mouth, when around others, is beyond the pale?

Yes, because I’ve gotten vaccinated and I shouldn’t be continued to be punished with restrictions.