Talk:Terry A. Doughty

Last paragraph
The last paragraph of this article is inaccurate. The physician it anonymously refers to is Dr. Peter McCullough, who is experienced, qualified and widely well-respected in the medical establishment. Pm1492 (talk) 17:13, 17 December 2021 (UTC)Phoebe Moody


 * It doesn't matter. Wiki prose does not allow us to opine on the opinions of others, even experts. Whether they are well respected requires citation in and of itself, which just ends up derailing the article, or marks clear bias and I can probably bet you that there are a whole mishmash of other experts who would claim otherwise. Deleted this last 3 paragraphs because it is wholly irrelevant. He blocked the medical worker mandate is good enough as written. 12.108.113.106 (talk) 06:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)


 * It most certainly does matter, because Wikipedia doesn't allow us to even refer to the "opinions of others", period. What is referred to must be factual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:200:C082:2EA0:118A:5137:CD20:7231 (talk) 03:29, 6 July 2023 (UTC)

The source cited in 18 and 19, OpenVAERS, is not reputable. From their own FAQ, "OpenVAERS is a project developed by a small team of people with vaccine injuries or who have children with vaccine injuries." As such, unless the last paragraph can provide a corroborating source, it should be dropped as it advances an argument without proper evidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:2890:4F20:81C6:5D44:C229:F51B (talk) 04:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

New ruling
He just made a new ruling related to Covid-19. 173.88.246.138 (talk) 07:51, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:26, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Terry Doughty.jpg

Opinion on Prelim Injunction in St. of Missouri et. al. v Joseph R. Biden, Jr. et. al.
Is it appropriate to include a quote from an organization that salutes Voltaire in this opinion? Voltaire was a controversial anti-Christian figure who was arrested for speaking out against a Christian Society, and very possibly regularly blasphemed - a sin in a nation that tries to use revealed law as that to subject itself to. The United States was supposed to respect religion--as a matter of law (First Ammendment of Bill of Rights). The idea of separation of powers is rooted in the Magna Carta-before Voltaire's time-and would never have existed without the efforts of Cardinal Stephen Langton, an individual whose ecclesial education was rooted in natural law and revealed law. Our Bill of Rights is rooted in the concepts of the Magna Carta, and surely, many of the nation's founders were formed by Western Christian Legal Principles (to include Magna Carta, Natural Law, and Revealed Law). 174.69.198.123 (talk) 23:25, 6 July 2023 (UTC)