It's Time to Mandate Vaccines

[Big Blitz]

 

 

The New World Order kindly asks you to not critically think or at least ask questions.....just get the jab bro.   

[The Frankish Reich]

13 hours ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

Stop being an ass. I am not an anti-vaxxer and it wasn't an argument at all. It was a legitimate question to which I didn't know the answer. So, I asked. And now I know that you don't know the answer either. Maybe you should town down your arrogance and know a little bit more about the topic on which you choose to go on a crusade. 

If I mis-ascribed some of these thoughts to you, my apologies.

Honestly, I don't keep track of individual posters.

I'll just point out that we now have something of a divergence of arguments (if they deserve that lofty term) among the anti-mandate/anti-vaccine posters here:

- the ones who've backed off the conspiratorial thinking. We have almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines, and it's obvious that the fears of some kind of awful wave of side effects just ain't happening. So they say things like "but it won't completely eradicate COVID, so the herd immunity argument in favor of a mandate is a bad one." Those are the arguments I'm taking on here. 

- the ones who are now starting, little by little, to let their wacko conspiratorial ideas leak out. You know who you are. The use of the term "Big Pharma" is a giveaway. So too is some bizarro Digital Control thing that seems to be a repackaged Bill Gates Micro-Chipped My Ass thing.

[JaCrispy]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

So you're admitting you're wrong then, that's cool. 

 

 

Get vaccinated, get boosted. 

 

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiight

 

What are you talking about? Overall death rates have spiked up. Something caused and continues to cause that. Something like, well, Covid. 

Where is it wrong? 
 

Or did you just respond without watching the full video?

 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by JaCrispy

[The Frankish Reich]

16 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

The New World Order kindly asks you to not critically think or at least ask questions.....just get the jab bro.   

"The Brownstone Institute." Hmm, sounds reputable ...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Tucker

 

Guy who "encountered Austrian economics" at something called Howard Payne University.

 

[billsfan1959]

2 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said:

If I mis-ascribed some of these thoughts to you, my apologies.

Honestly, I don't keep track of individual posters.

I'll just point out that we now have something of a divergence of arguments (if they deserve that lofty term) among the anti-mandate/anti-vaccine posters here:

- the ones who've backed off the conspiratorial thinking. We have almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines, and it's obvious that the fears of some kind of awful wave of side effects just ain't happening. So they say things like "but it won't completely eradicate COVID, so the herd immunity argument in favor of a mandate is a bad one." Those are the arguments I'm taking on here. 

- the ones who are now starting, little by little, to let their wacko conspiratorial ideas leak out. You know who you are. The use of the term "Big Pharma" is a giveaway. So too is some bizarro Digital Control thing that seems to be a repackaged Bill Gates Micro-Chipped My Ass thing.

 

This is not my area of expertise, so I typically refrain from givng my opinion. However, I think, in your argument, you leave no room for educated, rational, critical thinking adults who believe that if you are vulnerable, you should take the vaccine - and who also might be healthy and, in no way, remotely close to being in a vulnerable population, and question whether they need to take a vaccine. Or those who might disagree with you and think that "almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines" still isn't long enough study period - particularly when the advice on the vaccines and boosters keeps changing or, as you say, "evolving."

 

Not everyone who disagrees with a mandate is an anti-vaxxer or a conspiracy theorist.

[Sundancer]

37 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

The New World Order kindly asks you to not critically think or at least ask questions.....just get the jab bro.   

 

You mean like the Covid vaccine that we already see is working well and the very promising HIV (human trials), rabies, malaria, Zika, and other candidates including even cancers?

 

 

[The Frankish Reich]

9 minutes ago, billsfan1959 said:

 

This is not my area of expertise, so I typically refrain from givng my opinion. However, I think, in your argument, you leave no room for educated, rational, critical thinking adults who believe that if you are vulnerable, you should take the vaccine - and who also might be healthy and, in no way, remotely close to being in a vulnerable population, and question whether they need to take a vaccine. Or those who might disagree with you and think that "almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines" still isn't long enough study period - particularly when the advice on the vaccines and boosters keeps changing or, as you say, "evolving."

 

Not everyone who disagrees with a mandate is an anti-vaxxer or a conspiracy theorist.

I get that. And yes, there's been overreach by a lot of the pro-vaccine types. I think there's plenty of room for debate when it comes to younger children for example.

But ... I live in a state (Colorado) that is right now running AHEAD of mid-November 2020 in cases and hospitalizations. We're reaching the point again of having to move people to find ICU beds, etc., etc. And 83% of those hospitalized with COVID complications are unvaccinated. This is a state that is 63% fully vaccinated (a rate that is much higher among adults). The repercussions go way, way beyond the unvaccinated - they impact everyone. No, we are not going to shut the unvaccinated out and leave them to die. As annoyed as I get at unvaccinated adults sucking up our limited health resources, I'm not some kind of ogre - I don't want them shut off from health care. They made a bad choice, just like life-long smokers or the morbidly obese did. While vaccines may not eradicate COVID, they WILL allow us to avoid these kinds of episodes. We are moving toward more COVID restrictions because the unvaccinated are pushing us to another minor health crisis. That limits my freedoms, and it limits them because of stupid misinformation and collective bad decisionmaking of others.

That's why I started this thread. That's why it's point - it's time to mandate vaccines - is even more important now.

[JaCrispy]

1 hour ago, JaCrispy said:

Where is it wrong? 
 

Or did you just respond without watching the full video?

 

 

Well, I see you know how to vomit...now, are you capable an adult response with actual words, or is this not the forum for that?

 

Asking for a friend...😉

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by JaCrispy

[dpberr]

15 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I’m sorry, but this has to be the stupidest anti-vaxx argument yet. And I’m seeing it from all of you. So what if it lasts 4, 5, 6 months? They seem perfectly capable of keeping pace with production. I imagine anti-Vaxxers take their ivermectin and vitamins every day, or every week,

or whatever. They probably pop viagra every time their wieners don’t spring into action. They probably take finasteride every day to keep those beautiful locks on their heads. The women amongst that group probably take contraceptives every day, get Botox injections every month or two. Why on earth would it matter that you need to get a booster a couple times a year?

The problem with your argument is that all of those drugs have consumer protections the Covid vaccination products do not.   

 

Covid shot?  You know how much you'll get?  Zero dollars.  

 

I have a big problem with the government mandating its citizens to take more and more of a product they cannot collect compensation for should they be injured from it.  If vaccine injury is allegedly rare as they say it is, there should be no issue in compensating such a small group of people. 

 

Mr. $500K/year salary Dr. Fauci can likely pay for his healthcare if he gets injured.  What about the single mom who's child has GBS or myocarditis, or that mother dies from a vaccine injury and leaves that child behind?  What if a person develops clots and can't work?  Don't they deserve to be compensated for that loss?  

 

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

If I mis-ascribed some of these thoughts to you, my apologies.

Honestly, I don't keep track of individual posters.

I'll just point out that we now have something of a divergence of arguments (if they deserve that lofty term) among the anti-mandate/anti-vaccine posters here:

- the ones who've backed off the conspiratorial thinking. We have almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines, and it's obvious that the fears of some kind of awful wave of side effects just ain't happening. So they say things like "but it won't completely eradicate COVID, so the herd immunity argument in favor of a mandate is a bad one." Those are the arguments I'm taking on here. 

- the ones who are now starting, little by little, to let their wacko conspiratorial ideas leak out. You know who you are. The use of the term "Big Pharma" is a giveaway. So too is some bizarro Digital Control thing that seems to be a repackaged Bill Gates Micro-Chipped My Ass thing.

I find it sad that you think not trusting Big Pharma is a conspiracy theory. I think only a fool looks at a situation with 100s of billions of dollars up for grab and believes in the purity of intentions. I do want to go back to the mandate with you- you admitted that asking children to get mandated to protect the elderly is immoral, but did not tell me what age you would enact the mandate? I am seriously curious what age is proper?

[Big Blitz]

54 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

You mean like the Covid vaccine that we already see is working well and the very promising HIV (human trials), rabies, malaria, Zika, and other candidates including even cancers?

 

 

 

 

I can site lots of "promising" trials.   

 

Doesn't mean anything or have anything to do with protocols, mandates, and control.

 

  

 

But define "working well."  The vaccine that's still forcing NFL players to miss games and derail seasons.  Forcing (lol by choice) teams to enact protocols that upend normal life permanently. 

 

Please explain how this dynamic ever changes.  

 

Thanks.  

[Chef Jim]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

 

So you're admitting you're wrong then, that's cool. 

 

 

Get vaccinated, get boosted. 

 

 

 

Yes I was wrong but I hope you can understand my assumption as to your mandating vaccines seeing you're incessantly talking about the viability of vaccines in a thread about vaccine mandates no?  

 

Now on to your assumptions.  Why do you keep telling me to get vaccinated?  

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

If I mis-ascribed some of these thoughts to you, my apologies.

Honestly, I don't keep track of individual posters.

I'll just point out that we now have something of a divergence of arguments (if they deserve that lofty term) among the anti-mandate/anti-vaccine posters here:

- the ones who've backed off the conspiratorial thinking. We have almost a year of experience with the major COVID vaccines, and it's obvious that the fears of some kind of awful wave of side effects just ain't happening. So they say things like "but it won't completely eradicate COVID, so the herd immunity argument in favor of a mandate is a bad one." Those are the arguments I'm taking on here. 

- the ones who are now starting, little by little, to let their wacko conspiratorial ideas leak out. You know who you are. The use of the term "Big Pharma" is a giveaway. So too is some bizarro Digital Control thing that seems to be a repackaged Bill Gates Micro-Chipped My Ass thing.

 

I don't give a flying flip about side effects.  I care about mandates.  You lump anti-mandates with anti-vaccine posters based on the highlighted above.  Please list the posters here that are anti-vaccine.  We'll wait......

[The Frankish Reich]

39 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I find it sad that you think not trusting Big Pharma is a conspiracy theory. I think only a fool looks at a situation with 100s of billions of dollars up for grab and believes in the purity of intentions. I do want to go back to the mandate with you- you admitted that asking children to get mandated to protect the elderly is immoral, but did not tell me what age you would enact the mandate? I am seriously curious what age is proper?

I “admitted” nothing of the sort (that it is “immoral” to require kids to get the vaccine). I suggested that the full cost-benefit analysis for younger children is still an open question. 

8 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Yes I was wrong but I hope you can understand my assumption as to your mandating vaccines seeing you're incessantly talking about the viability of vaccines in a thread about vaccine mandates no?  

 

Now on to your assumptions.  Why do you keep telling me to get vaccinated?  

 

I don't give a flying flip about side effects.  I care about mandates.  You lump anti-mandates with anti-vaccine posters based on the highlighted above.  Please list the posters here that are anti-vaccine.  We'll wait......

I told you, I don’t keep track of individual posters. But clearly the poster who said that COVID vaccines “ruin” your immune system would fit within the description of an anti-COVID vaxxer, no? That’s not an argument about personal freedom;

it’s an argument (based on …. Nothing) that the vaccine actually does require more harm than good. 

[B-Man]

 

 

Biden administration suspends enforcement of business vaccine mandate to comply with court order (msn.com)

 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration said it "suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement" of the requirements "pending further developments in the litigation."

 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, considered one of the most conservative in the country, ordered OSHA last week to "take no steps to implement or enforce the Mandate until further court order."

 

The White House previously told businesses to proceed with the implementation of the requirements

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/smallbusiness/biden-administration-suspends-enforcement-of-business-vaccine-mandate-to-comply-with-court-order/ar-AAQSu5P?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

 

 

 

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

I can site lots of "promising" trials.   

 

Doesn't mean anything or have anything to do with protocols, mandates, and control.

 

  

 

But define "working well."  The vaccine that's still forcing NFL players to miss games and derail seasons.  Forcing (lol by choice) teams to enact protocols that upend normal life permanently. 

 

Please explain how this dynamic ever changes.  

 

Thanks.  

 

More data showing that vaccine effectiveness wanes for older and at risk, as we've been seeing for months now (*not for most people). Less so but a little waning for younger folk. Boosters jam protection through the roof and at least initially appear longer lasting for the data we have so far. 

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

 

Biden administration suspends enforcement of business vaccine mandate to comply with court order (msn.com)

 

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration said it "suspended activities related to the implementation and enforcement" of the requirements "pending further developments in the litigation."

 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, considered one of the most conservative in the country, ordered OSHA last week to "take no steps to implement or enforce the Mandate until further court order."

 

The White House previously told businesses to proceed with the implementation of the requirements

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/smallbusiness/biden-administration-suspends-enforcement-of-business-vaccine-mandate-to-comply-with-court-order/ar-AAQSu5P?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531

 

 

 

 

Always nice when an administration respects the rule of law!

Edited November 19, 2021 by Sundancer

[Sundancer]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Yes I was wrong but I hope you can understand my assumption as to your mandating vaccines seeing you're incessantly talking about the viability of vaccines in a thread about vaccine mandates no?  

 

Thank you and no: I've mentioned several times how bad the school mandates are (just the worst) and that the mandates are terrible in general. 

 

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

Now on to your assumptions.  Why do you keep telling me to get vaccinated?  

 

I say that a lot in this thread. For you and anyone. Get vaccinated, get boosted.

 

[Chef Jim]

2 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

 

I say that a lot in this thread. For you and anyone. Get vaccinated, get boosted.

 

Thanks mom.  I’ll make my own decisions. Especially seeing no one has really convinced me why other than to protect others.  Well if others are vaccinated and boosted they have nothing to worry about right?  

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I “admitted” nothing of the sort (that it is “immoral” to require kids to get the vaccine). I suggested that the full cost-benefit analysis for younger children is still an open question. 

What is the open question in your mind? We know that children without serious pre existing conditions are not dying from it, or generally being hospitalized, we do not have a long term track record of RNA vaccines. You seem to  have a position you believe but are afraid to say it outright, what age is appropriate for the mandate? What exemptions? Also what would be moral about forcing children to get a vaccine to protect the elderly when the vaccine does not stop you from spreading the illness?

[The Frankish Reich]

1 minute ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

What is the open question in your mind? We know that children without serious pre existing conditions are not dying from it, or generally being hospitalized, we do not have a long term track record of RNA vaccines. You seem to  have a position you believe but are afraid to say it outright, what age is appropriate for the mandate? What exemptions? Also what would be moral about forcing children to get a vaccine to protect the elderly when the vaccine does not stop you from spreading the illness?

Ok. Here we go:

- mandates are appropriate for all adults. Period. 
- mandates are appropriate for older

children.  I think the studies were

typically first done on 12 and ups. And that’s a good line. 
- whether a mandate is needed for younger children is probably debatable. I see the science as warranting vaccines. But I will say that there is room for debate here, such that a mandate may not be necessary or appropriate for, say, 5 to 10 year olds. 

And by the way, the “vaccine does not stop you from spreading the infection” is just silly. No, it is not perfect. But greatly reduces the risk

of spread is still a great thing. 

[Big Blitz]

31 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

More data showing that vaccine effectiveness wanes for older and at risk, as we've been seeing for months now (*not for most people). Less so but a little waning for younger folk. Boosters jam protection through the roof and at least initially appear longer lasting for the data we have so far. 

 

 

 

Please explain to me how this dynamic ever changes.

 

I don't give a flip about the vaccine data because cases aren't going away, hospitalizations aren't going away, and people will die vaccinated or not.  

 

 

 

When does the dynamic of "positive test for Big Ben see you in 10 days" ever changes?

 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Big Blitz

[The Frankish Reich]

2 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

Please explain to me how this dynamic ever changes.

 

I don't give a flip about the vaccine data because cases aren't going away, hospitalizations aren't going away, and people will die vaccinated or not.  

 

 

 

When does the dynamic of "positive test for Big Ben see you in 10 days" ever changes?

 

 

No, hospitalizations for COVID aren’t going away under any current scenario. But “aren’t going to zero” Is kind of different than “are using 100% of our ICU beds.”  Silly argument. 

[Sundancer]

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

 

Please explain to me how this dynamic ever changes.

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

I don't give a flip about the vaccine data because cases aren't going away, hospitalizations aren't going away, and people will die vaccinated or not.  

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

When does the dynamic of "positive test for Big Ben see you in 10 days" ever changes?

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Sundancer

[Chef Jim]

45 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

 

Stop the spread?  Who's lying now?  

[JaCrispy]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

And this is a BIG one because it has been a major argument for the “pro mandate” crowd...basically a game changer...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

Edited November 19, 2021 by JaCrispy

[Buffarukus]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision. He made the ten-day decision. For the Bills, Brown and Star probably made the same decision, and likely Beasley too. 

 

so is any of this adjacent to natural immunity?

 

any of this included with monoclonal antibodies,  vitamins, excercise, age, horse paste or a s#it ton of other therapeutics or determining factors of severity. interesting that it takes so long to get proper studies in the same time that a vax, sorry THREE vaxes . have been created, tested, distributed *cough* i mean mandated and pronounced 100% safe. now we also have a pill, by the same company. amazing how big pharma and phizer in particular has such remarkable..marketability. incredably precise definitive answers along with top notch state approved testing procedures that none of the other things i mentioned do. 

 

" maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points."

 

ever think we do have alot of data points seeing as there are millions test subjects to base it on and 2 year time frame to make them and they are simply suppressed to the public?

 

if you dig deep you will find some answers from independent scientists but just never seems to make its way to the top of the science chain to give any overwhelming approval or exemptions? so just keep on jabbin it up until that day comes because what else could there possibly be on this planet? "its the best thing to do!" 🤔

 

 

 

 

Edited November 19, 2021 by Buffarukus

[Buffarukus]

14 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

 

 you have to wait for the corporate media cycle to declare it in unison. otherwise its misinformation. 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

What dynamic? 

 

You get vaccinated and so far, that is the best thing you can do to protect yourself AND stop the spread. 

 

If you need a booster, get boosted. It's not that hard to understand. As more meds and vaccines come out, maybe there will be more ways to address this. It's a pandemic--not like we have a lot of data points to accurately predict the end points. But we know what helps. 

 

 

Absurd. Vaccinations minimize all of these things, but especially the later two. 

 

 

When he gets vaccinated. When we're not in a pandemic anymore. When we have better treatments. 

 

 

He was vaccinated.  

 

Your definition of a pandemic is this never ends.  

 

 

You just MOVED THE GOAL POSTS again from "15 days.......to 45 days.....Till we get the vaccine.......to when we get to 75% vaccinated........to....when we get a cure (better treatments)

 

 

Go f yourselves.  You've all lost your minds.  

 

 

1 hour ago, Sundancer said:

 

So far only the first one is in his hands. His employer let him make his decision.

 

"Your employer let you make your decision."

 

 

Fortunately few people on earth can do what Ben does and won't get fired.  

 

The little people.....not so much

 

 

And Ben is vaccinated 

 

 

[Sundancer]

44 minutes ago, JaCrispy said:

Unfortunately, you’re a couple weeks late Sundancer...already been proven vaccines won’t stop the spread of covid...according to CDC...

And this is a BIG one because it has been a major argument for the “pro mandate” crowd...basically a game changer...

 

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/08/06/cdc_director_vaccines_no_longer_prevent_you_from_spreading_covid.html#!

 

Sigh. More incomplete words from the CDC. Data shows pretty clearly that transmission risk falls off faster for vaxxed people. So actually she's wrong, but as usual, erring on the side of being overly cautious. 

45 minutes ago, Buffarukus said:

 

so is any of this adjacent to natural immunity?

 

Sure. Natural immunity is awesome. But you have to live through Covid and spread covid longer to get it. Not ideal. 

 

[Orlando Tim]

4 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

Ok. Here we go:

- mandates are appropriate for all adults. Period. 
- mandates are appropriate for older

children.  I think the studies were

typically first done on 12 and ups. And that’s a good line. 
- whether a mandate is needed for younger children is probably debatable. I see the science as warranting vaccines. But I will say that there is room for debate here, such that a mandate may not be necessary or appropriate for, say, 5 to 10 year olds. 

And by the way, the “vaccine does not stop you from spreading the infection” is just silly. No, it is not perfect. But greatly reduces the risk

of spread is still a great thing. 

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

[The Frankish Reich]

32 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

I didn’t say “the science is still out” re kids and COVID vaccines. The science is most definitely in: they are safe and effective. I would like to see more epidemiological data about risk of spread among children for one thing. We continue to mandate measles vaccines even though an individual kid’s chances of getting it - THANKS TO THE HIGH VACCINE RATE - is low. Nothing immoral about that. You need to study your ethics. 

[Precision]

I am vaccinated and believed in the first round of vaccinations.  This second round I have my doubts but am firmly against mandates.

 

I do have a couple of questions for the pro-mandate crowd.

 

Since this pandemic is going to require multiple vaccinations over an extended time how do you mandate and track that everyone is "all caught up with their shots, at the correct interval between shots"?  If the shots were a one time event I could see you having a chance.  We're at 3 shots now and who knows how many more shots will need to be administered and for how long.

 

Most idiots have trouble getting their taxes done every year.  Tell me how to force these same people to get shots, for themselves and their children, every 6 months?  Know that any "enforcement" will disproportionally impact the poor. 

 

Logistically are you going to have everyone run around with a tattered vaccine card to show at the entrance of every business/event or are we going to get more creative and tattoo QR codes on people or add a chip?  If you allow the government to put what they want into your body do you have a say if they want to put something on the outside of your body?

 

[Orlando Tim]

1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I didn’t say “the science is still out” re kids and COVID vaccines. The science is most definitely in: they are safe and effective. I would like to see more epidemiological data about risk of spread among children for one thing. We continue to mandate measles vaccines even though an individual kid’s chances of getting it - THANKS TO THE HIGH VACCINE RATE - is low. Nothing immoral about that. You need to study your ethics. 

The fact that you keep comparing childhood illnesses to Covid means I am wasting my breath. The measle vaccine protects children, the Covid vaccine is to protect the elderly. If Covid only had numbers like we do with kids across the board we would not be discussing it much less have a vaccine for it. I though am getting to the point you might not be immoral, you simply have not thought this through. 

[Big Blitz]

1 hour ago, Precision said:

I am vaccinated and believed in the first round of vaccinations.  This second round I have my doubts but am firmly against mandates.

 

I do have a couple of questions for the pro-mandate crowd.

 

Since this pandemic is going to require multiple vaccinations over an extended time how do you mandate and track that everyone is "all caught up with their shots, at the correct interval between shots"?  If the shots were a one time event I could see you having a chance.  We're at 3 shots now and who knows how many more shots will need to be administered and for how long.

 

 

 

And imagine thinking they can do this......with 8 billion people 

 

 

Either they intend to live in a permanent state of protocols and control, or they have no clue how admit what we should be doing right now is what we could have been doing all along  - they won't admit this so they're doubling down. 

 

Basically if life can go back to normal (it isn't) say 6 months from now, that means it absolutely can......yesterday. 

 

 

They STILL cannot answer how the dynamic today is different then it will be 1 or 5 years from now.    

[All_Pro_Bills]

52 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

And imagine thinking they can do this......with 8 billion people 

 

 

Either they intend to live in a permanent state of protocols and control, or they have no clue how admit what we should be doing right now is what we could have been doing all along  - they won't admit this so they're doubling down. 

 

Basically if life can go back to normal (it isn't) say 6 months from now, that means it absolutely can......yesterday. 

 

 

They STILL cannot answer how the dynamic today is different then it will be 1 or 5 years from now.    

It's all basically trial and error.  

[The Frankish Reich]

2 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

The fact that you keep comparing childhood illnesses to Covid means I am wasting my breath. The measle vaccine protects children, the Covid vaccine is to protect the elderly. If Covid only had numbers like we do with kids across the board we would not be discussing it much less have a vaccine for it. I though am getting to the point you might not be immoral, you simply have not thought this through. 

I told you - read up on the branch of philosophy known as ethics.

You are adopting an extreme libertarian position, which is fine as long as you understand what you're doing. You don't. 

[Sundancer]

11 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I honestly do thank you for stating your beliefs. As I have stated several times your belief that children should be required to get a vaccine that has minimal advantages for then without a long term study makes you immoral. The fact that you believe you can tell another adult what is best for them is egomaniacal. Lastly you literally said a few posts ago that the science is still out on kids, which means you are willing to use children as test subjects to protect from something that is of minimal risk to them. 

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

[billsfan5121]

56 minutes ago, Sundancer said:

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

You really do love making broad generalizations about the unvaccinated. How can you say the unvaccinated doesn’t care about the elderly, but in every post tell us that getting vaccinated prevents the spread and hospitalizations? Wouldn’t that imply that an elderly person with the vaccine is safe? I don’t understand the logic here. If I am 80 and get the vaccine, shouldn’t it be my expectation that it doesn’t matter what you do because my risk is diminished? According to the charts you love posting, I should be ok shouldn’t I?

 

Now back to generalizing the unvaccinated as not giving a $@&t about the elderly. You really need to get off your high horse acting like getting the vaccine is some sort of noble decision to benefit all of humanity, because it’s not. You have picked this hill to die on while you likely make other decisions in your life that scream “I only care about myself.” Am I right? Does every choice you make have the benefit of everyone else above yourself? I doubt it. 
 

So I’d love to know how I don’t care about the elderly because I’m unvaccinated? Here’s the reality. You don’t know me or my family. What you don’t know is that I haven’t been to church in 18 months because of the pandemic. I haven’t been to any public events in 18 months. I’ve made many sacrifices because I’m not vaccinated because of my own personal choice. But someone unvaccinated and living responsibly doesn’t fit your narrative that we are out, spreading COVID to everyone. So keep generalizing that we are a detriment to society.

 

Whats funny is I have heard numerous stories of the vaccinated that would suggest maybe they should evaluate their own view of “protecting” others. I have a coworker who came down with COVID symptoms but decided to go to a basketball game anyways because she was vaccinated. So even though she thought she had it, and we know she can spread it, she went anyways. So who is more in the wrong here? The vaccinated coworker or me who is unvaccinated and doesn’t go to public events despite feeling great? I’m guessing you’ll say both but I’d love to know what makes me such a problem to society. 

[Sundancer]

59 minutes ago, billsfan5121 said:

You really do love making broad generalizations about the unvaccinated. How can you say the unvaccinated doesn’t care about the elderly, but in every post tell us that getting vaccinated prevents the spread and hospitalizations? Wouldn’t that imply that an elderly person with the vaccine is safe? I don’t understand the logic here. If I am 80 and get the vaccine, shouldn’t it be my expectation that it doesn’t matter what you do because my risk is diminished? According to the charts you love posting, I should be ok shouldn’t I?

 

Now back to generalizing the unvaccinated as not giving a $@&t about the elderly. You really need to get off your high horse acting like getting the vaccine is some sort of noble decision to benefit all of humanity, because it’s not. You have picked this hill to die on while you likely make other decisions in your life that scream “I only care about myself.” Am I right? Does every choice you make have the benefit of everyone else above yourself? I doubt it. 
 

So I’d love to know how I don’t care about the elderly because I’m unvaccinated? Here’s the reality. You don’t know me or my family. What you don’t know is that I haven’t been to church in 18 months because of the pandemic. I haven’t been to any public events in 18 months. I’ve made many sacrifices because I’m not vaccinated because of my own personal choice. But someone unvaccinated and living responsibly doesn’t fit your narrative that we are out, spreading COVID to everyone. So keep generalizing that we are a detriment to society.

 

Whats funny is I have heard numerous stories of the vaccinated that would suggest maybe they should evaluate their own view of “protecting” others. I have a coworker who came down with COVID symptoms but decided to go to a basketball game anyways because she was vaccinated. So even though she thought she had it, and we know she can spread it, she went anyways. So who is more in the wrong here? The vaccinated coworker or me who is unvaccinated and doesn’t go to public events despite feeling great? I’m guessing you’ll say both but I’d love to know what makes me such a problem to society. 

I made a broad generalization that if kids were dying like the elderly, our attitude would be different to vaccination. Nothing you said addressed that hypothetical. 

 

Everyone has the choice on vaccination. Everyone has a choice to be a shut in and never come out again. I’d suggest that your mental health would be better if you went to church and interacted with people in person, whether you’re vaccinated or not. That’s way more important than Covid spread. That is opinion, based on a lot of Covid data by the way.
 

 And I’d doubly suggest, based on those pesky science-y charts that you don’t like, that getting vaccinated is a very low risk and high reward proposition. 
 

I go to everything. I mask only when asked. I am anti mandate. And I think people who do not have a particular complication should get vaccinated. 

[Orlando Tim]

9 hours ago, The Frankish Reich said:

I told you - read up on the branch of philosophy known as ethics.

You are adopting an extreme libertarian position, which is fine as long as you understand what you're doing. You don't. 

stating that it is wrong forcing children to get a vaccine without any long term studies for an illness that has minimal effect on them is not extreme, what is wrong with you? I will guarantee you that there are more side effects for the Covid vaccine among children than lives saved, and by a large amount 

 

[Orlando Tim]

3 hours ago, Sundancer said:

If Covid was killing kids but not adults like it’s killing elderly, EVERYONE would be rushing to get vaccines and boosters, and triple masked without question. 
 

We don’t give two ***** about the elderly though. “Let them get vaccinated but I don’t need to play any other role helping to keep them safe.” 

"Either you force people to do as I tell them or you don't care if everyone dies". Got ya buddy.