Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human

[BADecker]

'Bout time somebody let the vaxxed people know that they are not human beings.


Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human

Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human. They no longer have rights. And this applies worldwide….

[1714976241]

1714976241

[suchmoon]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

[BADecker]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

How do you know that? Didn't your mommy let you listen to the video?

[suchmoon]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

How do you know that?

Post a link to the document on https://www.supremecourt.gov/

SC doesn't hide its documents inside bitchute videos.

[philipma1957]

'Bout time somebody let the vaxxed people know that they are not human beings.


Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human

Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human. They no longer have rights. And this applies worldwide….

Are you posting this a a fact and truth? If so please link proper documentation.

I think you should get a temp ban if this is a falsehood.

If this is a fake you are yelling fire 🔥 in a crowded movie theater. which is not allowed by free speech rules.

BTW It is a fake as the USA supreme court ruling apply to the USA constitution not the entire world.

At the mods he should be banned for a few days as this could hurt the website since it is a USA website and you kind of can’t allow obviously false inflammatory info that is a danger to public be online once it is pointed out to be so.

BTW if the proper link to the SCOTUS does exist I withdraw my post’s request.

[BADecker]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

How do you know that?

Post a link to the document on https://www.supremecourt.gov/

SC doesn't hide its documents inside bitchute videos.

Since you know that there is a link, why don't you save us all a bit of trouble, and post it yourself?

'Bout time somebody let the vaxxed people know that they are not human beings.


Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human

Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human. They no longer have rights. And this applies worldwide….

Are you posting this a a fact and truth? If so please link proper documentation.

I think you should get a temp ban if this is a falsehood.

If this is a fake you are yelling fire 🔥 in a crowded movie theater. which is not allowed by free speech rules.

BTW It is a fake as the USA supreme court ruling apply to the USA constitution not the entire world.

At the mods he should be banned for a few days as this could hurt the website since it is a USA website and you kind of can’t allow obviously false inflammatory info that is a danger to public be online once it is pointed out to be so.

BTW if the proper link to the SCOTUS does exist I withdraw my post’s request.

If I really have to tell it to you directly, there is a link in the video. What's your problem? Haven't you figured out how to watch videos yet?



EDIT: Here's your ban, btw:

[suchmoon]

Since you know that there is a link, why don't you save us all a bit of trouble, and post it yourself?

I would if it existed. It does not. You're the one making the claim, you should prove it.

If I really have to tell it to you directly, there is a link in the video. What's your problem? Haven't you figured out how to watch videos yet?

Bitchute video is not a Supreme Court ruling.

[BADecker]

Since you know that there is a link, why don't you save us all a bit of trouble, and post it yourself?

I would if it existed. It does not. You're the one making the claim, you should prove it.

If I really have to tell it to you directly, there is a link in the video. What's your problem? Haven't you figured out how to watch videos yet?

Bitchute video is not a Supreme Court ruling.

I had kinda thought in the past that you were simply an obstinate son of a gun. I am now realizing that you and the other joker above simply have very limited computer skills. So, I apologize. I'm not used to working with retarded people.

Listen to the video.

[PrimeNumber7]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

Here is the link referenced in the video --> https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

He spells out the link instead of giving something you can click on.

The case this person is referencing is from 2013, ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., and involves the question if mRNA sequences can be patented. The ruling makes clear that DNA sequences cannot be subject to a patient because they occur naturally in nature.

I am not sure how the person in the video comes to the conclusions that he does. The references to humans in the majority opinion are regarding human genes and genomes. Further, the case in question is a patient case, and other than the right to patient an invention, it does not involve any kind of rights that people have.

[Tash]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

Here is the link referenced in the video --> https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

He spells out the link instead of giving something you can click on.

The case this person is referencing is from 2013, ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., and involves the question if mRNA sequences can be patented. The ruling makes clear that DNA sequences cannot be subject to a patient because they occur naturally in nature.

I am not sure how the person in the video comes to the conclusions that he does. The references to humans in the majority opinion are regarding human genes and genomes. Further, the case in question is a patient case, and other than the right to patient an invention, it does not involve any kind of rights that people have.

It can not be patented  unless it is changed. That is what the vaccine is for. Vaccines are patent.
Anyway it does not matter that much because the vaccine is working.
South Africa’s first nurse to get jab dies
https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-kzn/20210930/281689732969724
parallels to Tiffany
https://www.bitchute.com/video/13Ei999rGlaZ/

The grave of Tiffany Dover
https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/232915568/tiffany-dover

[PrimeNumber7]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

Here is the link referenced in the video --> https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

He spells out the link instead of giving something you can click on.

The case this person is referencing is from 2013, ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., and involves the question if mRNA sequences can be patented. The ruling makes clear that DNA sequences cannot be subject to a patient because they occur naturally in nature.

I am not sure how the person in the video comes to the conclusions that he does. The references to humans in the majority opinion are regarding human genes and genomes. Further, the case in question is a patient case, and other than the right to patient an invention, it does not involve any kind of rights that people have.

It can not be patented  unless it is changed. That is what the vaccine is for. Vaccines are patent.

Are you making the argument that since the vaccine is put into your body, that your body "becomes" the vaccine? That is ridiculous. Nearly every medicine is either subject to a patient or has had their patient expire due to time, and you put medicine into your body that will cause your body to respond to the medicine.

[Natsuu]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

Here is the link referenced in the video --> https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

He spells out the link instead of giving something you can click on.

The case this person is referencing is from 2013, ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., and involves the question if mRNA sequences can be patented. The ruling makes clear that DNA sequences cannot be subject to a patient because they occur naturally in nature.

I am not sure how the person in the video comes to the conclusions that he does. The references to humans in the majority opinion are regarding human genes and genomes. Further, the case in question is a patient case, and other than the right to patient an invention, it does not involve any kind of rights that people have.

Therefore the thread for "Re: Supreme Court ruling vaccinated subjects not classified as human but trans human" is just a whole bunch of shits voiced together by some freak who misunderstood the ruling regarding patents in a persons genetics.

[Tash]

You forgot to add the link to the actual "ruling".

Here is the link referenced in the video --> https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/12pdf/12-398_1b7d.pdf

He spells out the link instead of giving something you can click on.

The case this person is referencing is from 2013, ASSOCIATION FOR MOLECULAR PATHOLOGY, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. MYRIAD GENETICS, INC., ET AL., and involves the question if mRNA sequences can be patented. The ruling makes clear that DNA sequences cannot be subject to a patient because they occur naturally in nature.

I am not sure how the person in the video comes to the conclusions that he does. The references to humans in the majority opinion are regarding human genes and genomes. Further, the case in question is a patient case, and other than the right to patient an invention, it does not involve any kind of rights that people have.

It can not be patented  unless it is changed. That is what the vaccine is for. Vaccines are patent.
Anyway it does not matter that much because the vaccine is working.
South Africa’s first nurse to get jab dies
https://www.pressreader.com/south-africa/the-citizen-kzn/20210930/281689732969724
parallels to Tiffany
https://www.bitchute.com/video/13Ei999rGlaZ/

Are you making the argument that since the vaccine is put into your body, that your body "becomes" the vaccine? That is ridiculous. Nearly every medicine is either subject to a patient or has had their patient expire due to time, and you put medicine into your body that will cause your body to respond to the medicine.

You tell me how you seperate the patented from the natural mRNA.

A deaf did hear as the mute told somebody the blind saw Corona.

[BADecker]

Learn how to read a judgment. It says right in itself that certain of the results of mRNA are natural, and others are man-made.

The trick is which side the judge and jury will be on when the question goes to court. The 12-jury can overrule the Supreme Court.