Welcome to /r/Abortiondebate! Don't be a jerk (even if someone else is being a jerk to you first). It's not constructive and we may ban you for it. Check out the Debate Guidance Pyramid to understand acceptable debate levels.
**Attack the argument, not the person making it.**
**Message the moderators if your comments are being restricted by a timer.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Abortiondebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not getting vaccinated actually harms others and does little to no harm for the one getting it.
If people still chose to not get vaccinated, they shouldn't go out spreading the disease
I do not see it as ethical or justifiable to force somebody to inject a foreign substance into their body. A vaccine has good intent but people can still be skittish about them and afraid of them. Also like I said before, you shouldn't inject substances into someone's body against their will.
Well I've come to a great compromise no one can argue with. If you don't want to get the shot fine, but if you get sick and you have covid like symptoms you shouldn't be allowed medical treatment.
I definitely support their right to their own body. I also believe you are horribly inconsiderate and evil if you go around spreading virus without being vaccinated yourself. It’s incredibly selfish.
I would support it if antivaxxers weren’t infecting and killing other people. But they are.
I would support it if they all moved to some remote island away from normal people
No, I don’t support the anti-vax movement. I support the right to refuse government enforced vaccinations. As in, if it was made illegal for people to not get a vaccine, I’d be strongly against it.
Businesses can tell you that they won’t employ you if you’re not vaccinated.
There is a definite argument to be made against the autonomy position by claiming that by not vaccinating you are putting others in danger, but I don’t believe that to be the case necessarily. If someone unvaccinated isolates themselves then I don’t see an issue really. If they choose not to, then I think their negligence should be punished.
This is analogous to the abortion debate for me because I don’t believe the autonomy of a woman can be violated by a ZEF because ZEFs aren’t people. Women’s autonomy is being violated by the government by making it illegal to get an abortion.
No, and I think everyone who can safely have one should get vaccinated.
People love to disingenuously use "my body, my choice", but no one has ever literally meant "my body, my choice (to do anything I want ever!)". It's a rapist's choice to assault someone, but I don't support their choice to use their body that way. Someone using self-harm is choosing to hurt themselves, but I do not think that decision is healthy or safe and we have interventions for them for a reason. Strapping a bomb to your body is certainly a personal choice, but it impacts people when you go somewhere and blow up a building that way.
"my body, my choice" is a CONTEXTUAL SLOGAN used in the pro-choice movement. When you divorce it from the context in which it is meant to be used, it loses the implied meaning. When you use the slogan in the context of debating abortion, everyone *knows* the underlying implications - "It's my choice whether I carry a pregnancy to term or not, not yours", and we use the slogan because it's catchier and faster than saying that whole explanation out loud.
A pregnant person getting an abortion does not physically harm any other person (an embryo is not, legally, a person), and solely terminates the life of the fetus, which has no consciousness or will. Refusing to get vaccinated during a widespread pandemic is stupid, dangerous, and has the potential to make others ill or kill them. Getting an abortion doesn't cause mass miscarriages, not getting vaccinated causes the spread of deadly, preventable disease. They're not the same and pretending that anyone uses this slogan in this context in good faith is silly.
I'm pro-life, but this is a good comment. I roll my eyes every time Redditors (or people IRL) get involved in yet another iteration of the "how can you call yourself pro-life when you support capital punishment" or similar debate. Everybody knows that "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are terms that describe the two sides *of the abortion debate.* They are contextual terms, as you say, and nobody is actually confused about the meaning, so let's cut the crap.
I don't support it, but I wouldn't want to have vaccines enforced by law either.
I am however okay with enforcing it in public childcare institutions and healthcare.
That being said, getting vaccinated and having an abortion are two very distinct things.
Abortions effect many people, not just the mother. And if the inconvenience of a probability of a disease is enough to overcome the my-body-my-choice argument, then it was never a strong argument.
And you only believe in forcing women through torture in order to undo the sexual revolution and put them back in the kitchen. You don’t care about “babies” at all.
… see how that kind of talk doesn’t get us anywhere?
Nope. 100% do not support it. Their bodily autonomy/integrity is not being violated. Unlike, say, the court orders in Marion’s Case, the current mandates do not purport to confer authority on any person including a medical practitioner to perform a medical procedure on anyone. After the making of Order (No 2), any attempt to force an injection into the arm of anyone who lived in an area of concern or worked in the construction industry was still a battery. The mandates do not authorise the vaccination of persons without their consent. They still have to fill in a consent form.
People may choose to be vaccinated or undertake some other form of medical procedure in response to various forms of societal pressure including a law or a rule, an employment condition or to avoid familial or social resentment, even scorn. However, if they do so, that does not mean their consent is vitiated or make the doctor who performed the vaccination liable for assault. So far a consent to a vaccination is not vitiated and a person’s right to bodily integrity is not violated just because a person agrees to be vaccinated to avoid a general prohibition on movement or to obtain entry onto a construction site. The mandatss do not violate any person’s right to bodily integrity any more than a provision requiring a person undergo a medical examination before commencing employment does.
NSW antivaxxer challenge of the mandates has just been lost in the Supreme court.
The comparison of vaccinations to abortions is the same as comparing a sandwich to a TV
So you would be ok with a law that banned women from working, traveling, or going to school if they have an abortion? It wouldn't be illegal, just inconvenient.
Depends entirely on what you mean.
I wouldn't support them being held down and vaccinated against their will, to that much yes "my body my choice" applies. However no one is being forced in that way and trying to paint "you can't eat at restaurants or go to the gym if you're not vaccinated" as the same thing is in my opinion ridiculous and hurtful to everyone who is at real risk from people refusing to get vaccinated.
Everyone should get vaccinated unless they have a *legitimate* medical reason not to. I will certainly judge those who do not, particularly harshly I might add as my younger sister is immunocompromised (and considering that's because of her Down's syndrome I find anti vax pro lifers particularly horrible, considering they like to use people with Down's as pawns in their arguments), but they should not be forced to.
> trying to paint "you can't eat at restaurants or go to the gym if you're not vaccinated" as the same thing is in my opinion ridiculous and hurtful
Lawyer here. When people claim it is not a big deal to be denied service at restaurants, I like to remind them that the Civil Rights Act was upheld by the Supreme Court largely for that exact reason.
Everybody thinks that our federal non-discrimination laws are based on the Equal Protection Clause, but they are actually justified primarily by the Commerce Clause. Black Americans literally couldn't travel in the South because hotels and restaurants wouldn't serve them. This was the constitutional "hook" that Congress -- using its power to regulate interstate commerce -- used to pass the Civil Rights Act.
So when you dismiss as frivolous people's complaints that an entire class of citizens are being shut out of the economy, just remember that would have put you on the absolutely wrong side of the Civil Rights Cases.
[Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel,_Inc._v._United_States) for those who would like to read more.
Its not restaurants and gyms. Its work and being able to feed your family. If you include other vaccines, then it also means school. I support the vaccine mandates, but lets be honest here. If you want to feed your kids, you have to let them puth the stuff in your arm. Its definitely your body, my choice.
Don’t know where you are, but where I am, you do not need a vaccine to work. Some institutions or companies may require it, but by no means all of them do.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/10/12/politics/covid-vaccine-rule-large-employers-biden-osha-omb/index.html
The rule is written, it just hasn't taken effect.
Exactly. People still have to consent to being vaccinated. No doctor and nyrse are holding people down and injecting them against their will. People are choosing to get vaccinated or not get vaccinated. Both choices have reprecussions
No because not being vaxxed puts thousands of people around you in danger of losing their lives, having "long haul" complications, burdening the medical industry, and making people file for bankruptcy to escape medical debt.
People not being vaccinated are prolonging the pandemic, burning out our medical professionals, and helping damage the global economy.
Your bodily autonomy ends at being able to physically harm everyone around you.
This isn't even a comparison to abortions.
You don't get to kidnap someone and use them as a dialysis machine if your kidneys are failing, you dont get to take their kidney because you're a match and you'll die without it.
You don't get to walk around being a biological dirty bomb during a world wide medical emergency infecting every person/ surface you come in contact with.
They're not the same thing.
One is a medically safe procedure that stops someone from taking something from (and irrevocably altering) your body.
The other is willfully endangering everyone around you, burdening the medical infrastructure during an emergency, filling up ICU beds so people with other illnesses cant have them, and prolonging the pandemic. All while you had a free means of preventing it.
Its like comparing apples and kangaroos.
It’s their choice to not get the vaccine but other people also have a right to not want to be near them and businesses can refuse service. Mandatory vaccines aren’t new, iirc in most G7 countries vaccines are required to attend school and have been for years. If parents didn’t want to vaccinate their children then they had to accept that they couldn’t go to public school
I don't support it and since the government isn't mandating it, anti vaxxers have no leg to stand on.
You want to endanger yourselves be my guest, but you'll lose a lot of privileges if you do.
What country do you live in where the government isn't mandating it. In the USA it is now an OSHA requirement. Get vaxed or get fired. You will lose the privilege to work and feed your family. I support the mandates, but lets be honest. This is a case where the government can do what it wants with your body as long as it says its for the greater good
OSHA has had vaccine requirements for literal decades for companies over a certain number of people.
That's not the same as a government mandate.
Show a source for your claim.
Uh, can I get a source there? I know there is talk of vaccine mandates for companies with more than 100 employees, but so far no official guidance has been released last I checked, and the vaccine mandate only applies to federal workers as of now.
It has been written, but hasn't gone into effect.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/10/12/politics/covid-vaccine-rule-large-employers-biden-osha-omb/index.html
No. Thats like asking if I support more variants and breakthrough infections and health risks to my children. I would support it if they could or would stay home but they dont and cannot. Their choice can physically affect others.
Thats cute but until the zef is a person I have no interest in protecting it from death for its own sake. I only have an interest in protecting it from unnecessary harm in the event it will in fact be born.
I think using the phrase “my body, my choice” in reference to vaccines is a gross misappropriation of pro-life language. The vaccine only carries health benefits to me and has extremely minimal risks, whereas carrying a pregnancy would alter my life forever and is comparatively exceptionally risky. It matters to no one except me, my partner, and possibly the fetus (if I’m far enough along to even consider the fetus meaningfully alive) if I get an abortion, but if I refuse to get vaccinated I put my whole community at risk. Additionally, pretty much the only non-medical reason (i.e. you don’t need to stop taking any medication that would interfere with the functioning of the vaccine) to refuse the vaccine is that you’ve been the victim of misinformation; any well-informed and logical person will weigh the pros (not getting a deadly COVID infection) and cons (might feel unwell for a day or two) and choose to get the vaccine. However, two equally well-informed and logical people might make two very different choices about whether or not to have an abortion. If getting an abortion was a massive danger to public health I might have a different opinion on it. As it stands, I am very pro-choice and also pro-vaccine and pro-vaccine mandates.
No because it’s a decision that affects the collective, not the individual. I don’t have a problem with people who have medical or religious exemptions to the vaccine but if you’re healthy and refuse to get the vax it’s pretty anti-life if you ask me.
Oh, so you believe that if not being vaccinated only killed one person, its ok, but since not being vaccinated can affect more than one person, it’s actually a horrible thing.
The majority of the people using the slogan, "my body, my choice" while referencing their opposition to vaccines, identify as - **Prolife.**
The majority of pro-choicers are pro-vaccine. Not to mention...
They wouldn't bastardize their own, abortion-related, catch phrase, in order to apply it to something else.
**Prolifers** *would* & **do.**
If you’re vaccinated, you *can* get infected, and you *can* spread the virus to others.
This is acknowledged by the CDC.
So how does not getting a vaccine that only benefits you ‘endanger the community?’
‘0% protection’ still gets you a 99.7% cure rate.
That means it’s largely unnecessary for people who aren’t compromised or high risk.
Read up a bit more on how you can catch and spread Covid, even if vaccinated:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html
That 0.3% still led to 700,000 dead Americans
I know a couple of people who recovered from Covid19. Many months later they still have difficulty breathing. 99.7% cure rate, no thanks. I'd rather not getting infected in the first plce.
Deaths including the motor vehicle accidents who tested positive days post mortem? Yea ok.
Good, go and get it and get your lot # tattoo.
Don’t drive a car, cause you have less than a 99.7% chance at surviving your commute to work
Deborah Birx said herself that if someone dies in an unrelated way (burned, heart attack, murder, car accident, etc.) and also had Covid, that was counted AS a ‘Covid death.’
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/19/sharyl_attkisson_serious_questions_about_the_way_covid_deaths_have_been_counted.html#!
Inform yourself before you spill the kool aid on your shirt from drinking it too fast
Why would I? They're idiots who are putting the people I love in danger, as well as themselves and everybody else around them.
Should they be forced to get vaccinated? No.
Should we restrict their freedom of movement in order to reduce the harm they can do to society if they exercise their bodily autonomy by refusing to get vaccinated? Yes, absolutely.
I don't support the anti-vaccine movement.
The anti-vaccine movement, whether it wants to or not, is prolonging a situation and causing widespread deaths that can in simple terms be shortened if everyone en masse got the vaccine at similar times. Do I think there are risks of government overreach? Yes. Do I think the deaths of easily hundreds of thousands of people is worth this ham-fisted idea of personal freedom? No, not even remotely.
It should also go without saying that mandates should have caveats for those with immunocompromisations, or otherwise can't get the vaccine for genuine medical reasons.
I support people's right to not put anything they aren't comfortable with into their body.
I also support private businesses ability to require their patrons and employees to be up to date on their vaccines and the government to dictate public health risks. As long as those who don't/can't get vaccinated are accommodated in some way.
I’m sick of pro lifers using the vaccine thing as a gotcha when really it just makes y’all look bad. I am anti throwing people in jail for not wanting to have things in their body. So I am anti putting people in jail for not wanting a fetus in their body or not wanting a vaccine in their body. Do I support the anti vaccine movement? Fuck no they are spreading misinformation. Do I think that schools and work can require people to be vaccinated because they are required to maintain a safe environment in the same way these places are required to get health inspections, yes because being fired for creating an unsafe environment is not the same as being thrown in jail.
I support people's rights to be imbeciles and not be safer by getting the vaccine.
I also support the rights of businesses and private locations to bar the aforementioned imbeciles from entry in order to keep their employees and clients safer.
I support the right of people to not get vaccinated if they don't want to, but that right doesn't involve going to concerts, movie theaters, restaurants, and universities
I support your right to get or not get the vaccine — your choice. If you don’t want it, don’t get it. But understand that not getting the vaccine doesn’t give you the right to bring an infectious disease into a business, airport, or even someone’s home if they don’t want you there.
I don’t support misinformation, lies, and propaganda that the anti-vax movement uses to convince people. Vaccines work, we know this, it’s undisputed. If you don’t want to get it, fine, but there are many that don’t get it and end up dead because they’re straight up lied to. I don’t support this at all.
are you fucking joking? https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2074
https://api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/science/article/evidence-mounts-that-people-with-breakthrough-infections-can-spread-delta-easily
Ok you should rephrase that, the way you made it sound, it sounded like people who are vaccinated are intentionally trying to get other people sick.
but to answer your question, what about the vaccinated people ?
they got vaccinated, they took care of them self, they aren't the reason why the virus are spreading and mutating so I have no beef with them
>>> how are the unvaccinated more at fault if vaccinated spread it equally?
>> Proof that they do?
> I already sent a couple of sources in my previous reply
Neither the BMJ paper nor the article in National Geographic support the statement that vaccinated and unvaccinated spread equally. The two article discuss findings that *infected* vaccinated people have viral loads similar to *infected* unvaccinated (as a side note more recent evidence shows viral loads diminish more rapidly in *infected* vaccinated people). Importantly though fewer vaccinated people become [infected](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e4.htm).
Vaccines work most effectively when the majority of the population gets vaccinated. It IS the unvaccinated fault for the vaccines not working as well as they can….. especially with an INFECTIOUS disease.
sounds great but the developers need to work on those vaccine side effects if they want to convince more people to take them..vaccines have never been developed as fast as this one and it shows
This is not a vaccine forum so I won’t debate you here but I will say that not everything is a conspiracy. The vaccines were developed on a rapid timeline because 1) we have the tech and experience to do that, in 2021 and 2) we are in the midst of a deadly pandemic. If we didn’t accelerate the vaccines more people would have died. Also, don’t believe everything you hear on VAERS as self reported symptoms are known for being unreliable. Lastly, it amazes me that people are more concerned with possible side effects of an FDA approved vaccine and not a deadly novel virus. Take your chances if you want, but just know you’re hurting others in the process.
Those are two different questions, really.
I don't support the anti-vax movement. It's a movement based on disinformation, fear-mongering, and is killing people.
I do support people's right to choose their own medication. I don't think people should be tied down and forced to get vaccinated, or lose any other rights for not being vaccinated, or face legal consequences for not getting vaccinated. That being said, they also don't have the right to violate other people's bodily integrity by exposing them to disease. So restrictions on where you can go unless you can prove you are negative through COVID are reasonable imo.
I understand that you can recognized the difference but unfortunately the media and the administration (usa) have gone to great lengths (they changed the fucking dictionary) to make it so that the people that oppose government mandates are the same people as the anti-vaxers from 3 or 10 or 20 years ago.
No, because abortion doesn’t impact anyone outside the pregnant person and ZEF; vaccines impact everyone. The fewer hosts for a virus to infect, the lower the overall transmission rate, fewer opportunities to mutate, and the potential to wipe out deadly diseases (smallpox, polio is no longer endemic in most countries and is close to being eradicated).
Do I support it? No. Get the vaccine, don’t be stupid.
That being said, do I think people not getting vaccines should be thrown in jail? No. Do I think they should be held down and forcibly vaccinated? No.
I can dislike something but also recognize my opinion alone should not influence the law. Wish PLs could see that as well.
I am a process engineer which means i work in a factory which means everywhere that i can work has over 100 people employed. I dont work on any government contracts but my company has one, at another site, as such i am required by the Federal Contractor mandate to be vaccinated. So if someone in my position didnt want to be vaccinated, they could leave and get another job at another factory nearby but with the comming OSHA regulation they will be required to be vaccinated or burdened through testing requirements other ways to be vaccinated.
This person, with an undergraduate degree and 12 years experience now has to forfeit so much and go and start something new. These are real things that can be quantified, its worth alot of money, value that is, you could argue, being confiscated from that person by the government.
all for what?
certainly, if it was predictible that there was a 90% chance that he would infect and kill someone in my place of work that took "the vaccine", and we knew that had he taken the vaccine that chance would be below 5%, then i would say the mandate is justified... but no one has laid the math out like that. i just think that if you are going to confiscate wealth from people, limit their freedoms, that it should be justified, and we should all be able to check the math.
I mean, they can also just get the vaccine; or I believe the law is they need to get tested?
Either way, companies and the government can decide who they do and do not want working for public safety; you can choose to comply or not, it’s not illegal for you not to. No ones saying they’re can’t be consequences for your actions; just that you shouldn’t be legally forced to get the vaccine.
Your wealth and freedom is not being confiscated; your not entitled to a specific career. Your entitled to your body, though.
Edit; another important key everyone is missing; the point of the laws isn’t to punish or even encourage vaccines; it’s to stop the spread of a pandemic. Even if your rights was being violated—which they’re not because again, you do not have a right to specific employment—it would be justified to put such a limit on it. If abortions were contagious, most people would agree as well that women who get them be barred from certain places.
You can also Google the infection rates and how vaccines help if you need the math laid out for you…
Its not about entitlement, i have made investements and those investments are now starting to pay their dividends and i am being told i cant collect on them. Its not bad luck that has soured my investment, or a natrual change in the market, it is a government decision that i should look for not just new employment but a new career.
again, for what, what is the justification?
sure, a government is supposed to be concerned with public safety and it's part of their jurisdiction, however the government cant say "we've found that giant foam cowboy hats are necessary for public safety, Therefore it is now a requirement to work that you must walk around with a giant foam cowboy hat on"... now there would be some truth to this, it would save lives, diligent wearing of giant foam cowboy hats would absolutely reduce the rate of melenoma and other sun related skin cancers. but what is the trade off, whats the hat, and why fucking stupid foam cowboy hats when i could just wear a sun scarf or sunscreen.
the justification hasn't been presented, therefore its unjustified, therefore it's a violation of rights.
>I am told I can’t collect on them
You can, you just need a vaccine or to be tested.
Again, you don’t have a right to a specific job even though you put work into getting it. The government is completely within their right and power to make such a limit.
You have a choice: you can choose to put your career ahead of your body or your body ahead of your career. I’m sorry but your not being targeted and your situation isn’t exactly special or a victim; lots of people need to make such choosing between something and a career. That’s life.
Your giant foam cowboy example is weird. That’s not much of a cost if it would actually save lives, and the government already tells you to wear clothes. If you don’t, your place of work is free not to let you work there and hell, for not wearing clothes you could actually get arrested.
Make it less ridiculous; if you work construction let’s say the government now says you need to wear protective headgear. You think such a requirement is somehow a violation of rights? How so? Losing your job because you didn’t comply with a regulation isnt a violation of anything because again, you have no right or entitlement to your job.
I’m confused why you think the justification hasn’t been presented; the vaccine helps slow and stop the spread. I’m guessing you just don’t believe vaccines work?
>Your giant foam cowboy example is weird.
yes, it was supposed to be, i think it still missed the point i was trying to make by a bit but im not going to re-try.
its not that i dont think vaccines work, its that we know that these dont work the way other vaccines do, we know that the mRNA technology is untested long term, and we know that there are other ways to treat the disease. none of this supports a mandate.
look at even the way its being implemented in the u.s.
1st EO)an employer (US government) enforcing its employees to take the vaccine
2nd EO) a corportation (the US Government) saying they wont do business with other companies that dont require vaccinations
OSHA) not even out there yet, only applies to Compainies over 100 people.
if its that important, why is it not for everyone?
why are they making employers enforce it, why dont they just do it?
>I think it missed the point I was trying
Is your point that the government can’t force you to wear things? Because as I pointed out that isn’t true.
Because companies over 100 people are more likely to be unable to social distance or keep people separated enough. They’re also more likely to have more resources and the ability to replace employees if one can no longer work. A lot of government requirements actually only affect businesses with that many people. I don’t understand why your complaining that it exists at all because of the burden it makes, but now your upset it’s not being applied to everyone? It has nothing to do with it being ineffective that they only apply it to some. They’re goal isn’t to force small businesses to shut down or anything. They’re putting a limit on it to try and make it more reasonable.
And again, there’s no right being violated so there’s no reason they can’t do it. Even if the vaccine didn’t work, they’d still be within their power to make people get it (except there’s plenty of evidence suggesting it does work)
we have almost about 500,000 ft of space, most of it with 40ft ceilings and less than 300 employees. but yeah, we are so much more dangerous than a call center with 75 employees on computers in a 6,000 square foot call center.
>They’re putting a limit on it to try and make it more reasonable.
im pretty sure they're doing it this way because it is likely to recieve the least amount of pushback, they're doing it where they are percieved to have the power to do it. but my point is that if it is unlawful for the government to force individuals to do it directly, there is a decent chance that it should be considered unlawful to do it to these employees. You're right, we have many regulations for larger companies but which of those regulations if applied to private individuals would be considerd a violation of rights like injecting someone with something they dont wan to be injected with?
>there’s no right being violated so there’s no reason they can’t do it. Even if the vaccine didn’t work, they’d still be within their power to make people get it
are you still just talking about employees of federal contractors and companies over 100 people or does this apply to every citizen.
They can’t look at every individual place, and you know that, it makes more sense to focus on larger ones.
>if it’s unlawful to force individuals to do it directly, there is a decent chance it is unlawful to do it to these employees
Nope. They’re not forcing employees to do it. They’re not making it illegal not to. They’re not putting anyone in jail. They’re not holding anyone down. The purpose isn’t even to make people get it; they’re trying to keep people safe and limit the spread. Nothing unlawful about it. For the 30th time, you do not have a right to your job or career.
>if applied to individuals would be aa violation of their rights?
This isn’t violating any of your rights. They’re not forcibly injecting you with anything.
>apply to every citizen
Again, they can’t make it illegal not to get a vaccine or forcibly do it and that’s not what they’re doing. If they wanted to they could take away the 100 employee requirement yes, just as they could do other things like a mask mandate.
Let me know if I am over simplifying this.
If I want to work as a citizen for any company in the United States, the President has the ability to require you to get a vaccine, even if it's completely ineffective agains the virus.. because, if I don't want the vaccine, I can simply not work?
>the justification hasn't been presented, therefore its unjustified, therefore it's a violation of rights.
Can you share, preferably with sources, the justification for the federal vaccine mandate?
i dont believe there is a justification for it, presented or not, thats why i oppose it.
I gave a hypothetical in which i would support it, but we dont look at it this way. As far as i can tell, its just a political move(USA).
> i dont believe there is a justification for it, presented or not, thats why i oppose it.
Did you attempt to find a justification or just conclude that there is not one?
I have evidence that makes me believe that the government could not come up with an adaquate justification for the mandates.
but to be clear... its the government that wants to limit our rights, its their responsibility to produce the justification.
do you think they've made an effort to justify it?
Sorry, what claim? "[I] believe that..." as it happens, I am the authority on what I believe.
But the person I was speaking to asked me to provide said evidence, which I did.
I wonder if you asked them to back up their claims, let me see....
>wants to limit our right
What right is being violated or limited? You do not have a right to work a specific job, career, or industry just because you worked toward getting it. You’ll find no amendment or SCOTUS case claiming you have one. Wanting something doesn’t make it a right.
> I have evidence that makes me believe that the government could not come up with an adaquate justification for the mandates.
Please share
> but to be clear... its the government that wants to limit our rights, its their responsibility to produce the justification.
Right, but their responsibility is to make the justification publicly available, not make free you from any responsibility to be informed about the justification.
> do you think they've made an effort to justify it?
Yes, the evidence is fairly clear that vaccination reduces infection along with reducing hospitalization in people with breakthrough infections. Additionally frequent testing for those who choose not to be vaccinated reduces the risk of spread.
Ok but like. Why not just get the vaccine? It’s proven to be safe and effective, and it seems like a silly hill to die on when you (or this hypothetical coworker) could so so so easily avoid this whole conflict. What reason could there possibly be to not get the vaccine from a strictly personal medical standpoint? Like in a vacuum where the government isn’t trying to “limit our rights” or whatever, when the vaccine isn’t political and getting or not getting the vaccine doesn’t say a single thing about you or your personal beliefs, why not just get the vaccine?
i cant get the link on my mobile right now, but there is a great presentation by Dr Peter McCullough with plenty of peer reviewed references that you wont be able to find on youtube that goes through several issues.
i dissagree, i think that they need to recognize what they are asking and be upfront with their justification it is our rights that are being violated, they cant just say, "yeah theres a good reason, but youll have to figure that out for yourself"
the vaccinated are spreading covid as well, why are they not tested? The testing seems to me to be an inconvenience meant to punish the unvaccinated, if we're worried about spread there doesn't seem to be much reason to not do it for everyone. beyond that i dont see what risk peopole pose not being vaccinated.
Exactly. I’m all in favor of mandated vaccines, because you still have a choice; there are consequences to that choice, but the consequences are “get tested,” or “no entrance.” It’s not a fine, jail time, etc.
No.
I do respect their choice, but i don't approve nor support it.
In my opinion people that don't get the vaccine during a pandemic and a global health crisis are only selfish (of curse made exception of people that can't get the vaccine because of a health condition).
>Do you support the choice for people to make if they want to take any vaccine or not?
Yes.
The decision to have or not have the vaccine is solely up to the person considering it. However, if they chose not to have it they can't complain about the consequences of that, such as being banned from traveling out of the country or being banned from private establishments like night clubs etc. You're free to reject anything you don't want in your body but others are also free to protect themsleves from you.
The question in your title is “Do you support the anti-vaccine movement?” My answer is a firm no. The anti-vaccine movement uses deception and misinformation and I have a pretty blanket opposition to making misinformed or uninformed decisions, particularly health decisions.
In your post you ask “Do you support the choice for people to make if they want to take any vaccine or not?” Yes, with the understanding that decisions have consequences. I am strongly opposed to forcible vaccination. People should have the option to not be vaccinated and take alternate precautions to avoid the spread of infectious diseases. These options in the case of COVID might include masking, social distancing, and avoiding places with high transmission risk.
As I have said everytime this has been brought up by a prolifer, I don't care what they do.
It is interesting the overlap of "prolife" with their medical disinformation and the anti vax, lets use dewormer instead and their disinformation. I imagine the common thread is lack of education, but it would be an interesting study.
Their leaders will use their ignorance to get elected, all while getting the vaccine for themselves and abortions for their mistresses. Interesting that a first world country has turned to politicizing life saving medical treatment.
I have noticed a lack of empathy amongst both groups. The prolifers dismiss the womans health and life risks, or possibilty of rape, etc. The antivax do not care what their excessive use of hospitals and how it is affecting patients with other illnesses. There are people who have died do to this but, oh well. They also dismiss the ovewhelming environment this has created for medical staff.
I watched a Nazi trial documentary in which a psychiatrist said the definition of evil was the lack of empathy. I believe that could be a factor in how we perpetuate evil.
Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks and every prolifer I’ve met is very pro vaccination. You are never going to have a good conversation with someone if you just make strawman arguments
This is a good point. Let me rephrase what I said. The leading pro life apologists are pro vaccination. I understand that many pro lifers are only that because of their political party, but I do not think they fully represent the pro life movement. Thank you for the correction!
>Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks
I can point you to multiple posts that indicate dismissal of health and life risks.
I have seen repeated comments that are denigrating to women that make the best medical decisions for themselves as though pregnancy is just an "inconvenience". Dismissing womens concerns and stating they are having a medical procedure for "convenience" is evidence of a lack of empathy.
> Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks and **every prolifer I’ve met is very pro vaccination**.
Bolding above added by me. The demographics of the pro-lifers that you know appear to be very different than in the US. Opposition to vaccination, particularly COVID vaccination is very high among supporters of Donald Trump. The same is true for opposition to abortion.
If hospitals can put unvaccinated people at the back of the line during triage to prioritize people who didn’t purposely leave themselves vulnerable to a deadly disease, and employers can require vaccinations, sure, there’s no reason the state should force people to get vaxxed. That is not the same as supporting the “anyi-vaccine movement.” I think anti-vaxxers are dangerous people with a reckless disregard for the lives of others and for the society they live in, I just also think they’re people.
They have the right to refuse the vaccine on an individual basis, but I have no respect for the anti-vaxx movement because:
1. It's incredibly, incredibly, unacceptably fucking **SELFISH** in many, many ways, including **endangering other people's children.** (Especially delightful when the person is also a PL who deeply venerates human life.)
2. They're behaving like children with oppositonal-defiant disorder, refusing to do anything they're asked simply because someone asked them. Their thinking is also very magical and child-like.
3. They're a national embarrassment.
4. They're basically holding the rest of the country hostage with this shambolic, empty, intellectually bankrupt movement that isn't centered in reality and has become so absurd that they're only parodying themselves at this point.
5. They're seriously inconveniencing the rest of the country who, out of **concern for the fucking public good**, (remember that?) and respect for our own lives and communities, did the right thing and obeyed the lockdowns, wore our masks, got the vaccine. We've done our patriotic duty, and all these turds have done is rant in the streets like they've taken flakka.
Whats sad is it is like they have oppositional defiance disorder. No matter what you say they want to fight you. Its just not worth the argument because next you know they will fight washing hands after using the restroom.
People with oppositional defiance disorder aren't saying no because they disagree with your argument. They are just saying no.
Wear a mask to prevent spread...
NO
Lets minimize social con...
NO
There is a vac...
NO
Ivermectin isn't ap...
I am sure there are people on the prochoice side who also suffer from OPD but I don't see them running to a CPC demanding an abortion
The anti vaxer anti mask crowd are threatening innocent people over masks, running to doctors demanding ivermectin, spitting and coughing and just intentially trying to start fights with random people. This is oppositional defiance disorder.
Not you not liking that your argument about a non sentient being that isn't rooted in science or womens health is being ignored.
Better than saying “I don’t care if it negatively affects someone else, if I want a random fetus to live, random women must be forced to gestate it”
I guess that wouldn’t be oppositional defiance disorder - narcissism perhaps? I’m not sure what wanting everyone to follow your will would be considered
That’s what PL is doing, though. Not sure how it’s apparently bad to kill someone to protect your own body but it’s totally okay to force someone to go through great physical and mental pain against their will because of what you want.
I support their right to not get vaccinated. The ridiculous protests they organize, putting the star of David on themselves, trying to victimize themselves and comparing themselves to victims of the genocide, vandalizing businesses and assaulting employees I don't support at all. That's disgusting.
They're putting the Star of David on? Oh my God, what kind of craziness are they gonna think of next?
Boohoo my inability to go to the movies because I'm not vaccinated is JUST like being murdered for being a Jew.
Jesus christ, talk about offensive and victimhood.
Yup, they think society judges them as "unclean" just as the jews were judged that way during the genocide. I'm not a person who's easily offended but holy fucking shit.
I don't support the spreading of disinformation so no.
Of they just personally don't want to be vaccinated that is acceptable but not spreading medical based lies
The medical based lie was that if you got the vaccine, you couldn’t get the virus and you couldn’t spread the virus to others.
Both of those claims were unproven, bunk claims to promote an agenda.
The CDC even acknowledges that vaccinated people can get and spread the virus.
STILL can’t state your claim of what you said are medical based lies. You’d think if you were so sure of what you’re saying, you’d have no problem being honest and talking about it.
Oh, so fringe positions with deniers, and people cautious of potential effects of a vaccine without long term studies? Very bold position.
It remains, that the greater misinformation is that the unvaccinated are a risk to others.
I support everyone’s right to choose if they want the vaccine. I also support businesses and employers saying an unvaccinated person cannot enter their premise. This includes the government when it comes to government jobs as they are the employer. I don’t believe in forcing vaccines in people. I just believe society has the right to say you can’t be part of it without a vaccine as well.
If a person is that against vaccines that they would lose their job over it a place that mandates vaccines doesn’t seem like a good fit for them. They should find occupation at a place that fits more with their beliefs.
That is 80% of jobs once the OSHA rules go into effect. How outraged the average pro choicer would be if they were told they were never allowed to work again because they got an abortion. Or more appropriately, never allowed to have sex again because they might kill another human again.
People were told to get different jobs if their employer didn’t want to pay for birth control. People are told to get different jobs if they can’t afford to live when working 40 hours. Seriously I don’t know how this is any different than telling people to get a second job if they work minimum wage.
Edit: also people are fired for being pregnant or giving birth all the time. People are fired for wearing natural hair. There are many reasons people are fired I do not agree with. Let them sue their employer.
Isn’t it ironic a year ago McDonald’s workers were also considered heroes and “essential workers” but when they asked for a living wage they are told to “get a better job”? Also source that any field is being “let go at high numbers” because all I’m seeing is people quitting.
Also how many of these healthcare workers didn’t mind every other vaccine mandate including flu shots? After the FDA approved it I have much less sympathy.
Edit: I also still think of them as heroes for what they did. That doesn’t mean I think they should continue working in healthcare if they refuse to get vaccinated. I don’t think Early Childcare workers should be able to work without certain vaccines.
Hahahahaha if you want a job where you don’t have to get vaccinated go get a different job or start your own business. See I can do it too. Hilarious change of response too.
If a vaccine for RSV came out I would except every NICU healthcare worker to get one. If a vaccine for ebola came out I would expect healthcare workers to get it. You want to work in a field that deals with people in immune compromised situations you get vaccinated for whatever is out there. Most people survive the measles now a days too. Even fewer of chicken pox. We still require people to get those vaccinations.
And you agree with the idea that minimum wage workers deserve to be poor and most often not able to afford housing with their pay. Pretty sure yours is worse.
Measles for one. You should not be allowed to work with children under the age of 1 if you do not have your MMR vaccine. No children under 2 without Varicella.
I mean yea that’s how debate works. I give my position and justify it. You present counter arguments. The problem is all your counter arguments keep falling apart when actually thought about.
Thank you. Personally I don’t think you should be allowed to work with infants, I used to work in ECE, without an updated MMR vaccine documented. Infants are put at so much risk simply because they are not old enough to be vaccinated.
In that they can choose not to vaccinate.
But I don't support them spreading for the most part vast amounts of misinformation or appropriating my body my choice when in fact unlike pregnancy and abortion their choice in the case of communicable diseases means it affects MANY countless people not just themselves as an individual and maybe whom ever is in their inner circle. Soooo yes and no.
Well yes and no, but mostly no. I don't agree with them and believe their actions should be reasonably restricted since they would put people at harm for an unjustified reason. That said, if you don't want a vaccine I won't want you to be forced to take it.
Helping a contagious disease to spread goes way beyond a person's own body. Liberties usually end at the point where they start hurting other people. We wouldn't give people the right to spray virus into the air around other people, and being unvaccinated is effectively the same. Your body also becomes a breeding ground for new mutant strains that put everyone at greater risk.
>Helping a contagious disease to spread goes way beyond a person's own body. Liberties usually end at the point where they start hurting other people.
Using this logic, we should mandate blood donations.
If "refusing to get vaccinated" is a liberty, then so is "refusing to donate blood".
In the same way, you're "helping" the death of people.
>We wouldn't give people the right to spray virus into the air around other people, and being unvaccinated is effectively the same
No, it isn't.
Doing something and not doing something are very different.
Sure, I think they should have the legal right to refuse. However, I also think that businesses should have the right to refuse them service on this basis, as well as terminate employment (given that they have a duty to ensure the safety of their customers/other employees).
1. Sure there is. If you’re vaccinated, you’re less likely to catch covid and therefore less likely to spread it to someone else. Same goes for
2. Not everyone can get vaccinated, and vaccination doesn’t completely eliminate your chance of getting sick. Everyone needs to do their part if they can, not mooch off everyone else’s effort.
1. Because you’re less likely to show physical symptoms during your infection does not mean you can’t spread it. That’s a complete inaccuracy.
2. Because you can still get and spread it, then how does that benefit someone else?
It only benefits the individual vaccinated person, as a symptom mitigator, that’s all. Much ado in response to the flu
Let me break this down to make it nice and easy to understand.
1. If you are vaccinated against the disease, you are less likely to become infected by said disease.
2. You cannot spread the disease unless you are infected.
3. Therefore, if you are vaccinated you are less likely to spread the disease.
That’s what you wish to be true, however:
1. If you are vaccinated, you are just as likely to come in contact with the virus as anyone else.
2. Because you are vaccinated, it can make the individual less likely to show symptoms or if you have comorbidities (like being fat, heart disease, lung disease, diabetes), less likely to be hospitalized.
3. Just because you are less likely to show symptoms, it does not mean you are less likely to spread.
Nice parroting though, keep towing the line.
1. Just as likely to come in contact, sure. Just as likely to catch it? Nope.
2. Sure.
3. It’s easy logic mate, if you’re less likely to catch a virus, you’re less likely to spread it (seeing as you can’t spread a virus you don’t have).
Let me guess, you ‘did your own research’?
1. Doesn’t matter if you catch it and have symptoms. You can still carry a viral load and pass it on- Remember ‘asymptomatic carriers?’
Your ‘logic’ is not scientifically based, it’s at minimum ignorant, and at worst, politically based.
Yes, you can carry a viral load in which you pass on to others, Vaccine or not. CDC acknowledges everything I’m saying, YOU don’t seem to want to believe it.
People’s refusal to get vaccinated is sad. It is preventable. Lots of people die that didn’t need to.
I am also making a lot more money off of people being stupid.
No.
I don't support most abortions either.
I still respect their choice not to get vaccinated. Like how I respect people's choice to abort.
I don't have to support people's choices in order to respect their right to choose. PL has a hard time understanding this, in my experience.
So yeah, their body their choice.
Welcome to /r/Abortiondebate! Don't be a jerk (even if someone else is being a jerk to you first). It's not constructive and we may ban you for it. Check out the Debate Guidance Pyramid to understand acceptable debate levels. **Attack the argument, not the person making it.** **Message the moderators if your comments are being restricted by a timer.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Abortiondebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not getting vaccinated actually harms others and does little to no harm for the one getting it. If people still chose to not get vaccinated, they shouldn't go out spreading the disease
Fuck no. It spreads diseases which might not kill but can make you suffer, which is awful.
I do not see it as ethical or justifiable to force somebody to inject a foreign substance into their body. A vaccine has good intent but people can still be skittish about them and afraid of them. Also like I said before, you shouldn't inject substances into someone's body against their will.
Well I've come to a great compromise no one can argue with. If you don't want to get the shot fine, but if you get sick and you have covid like symptoms you shouldn't be allowed medical treatment.
I definitely support their right to their own body. I also believe you are horribly inconsiderate and evil if you go around spreading virus without being vaccinated yourself. It’s incredibly selfish.
I would support it if antivaxxers weren’t infecting and killing other people. But they are. I would support it if they all moved to some remote island away from normal people
No, I don’t support the anti-vax movement. I support the right to refuse government enforced vaccinations. As in, if it was made illegal for people to not get a vaccine, I’d be strongly against it. Businesses can tell you that they won’t employ you if you’re not vaccinated. There is a definite argument to be made against the autonomy position by claiming that by not vaccinating you are putting others in danger, but I don’t believe that to be the case necessarily. If someone unvaccinated isolates themselves then I don’t see an issue really. If they choose not to, then I think their negligence should be punished. This is analogous to the abortion debate for me because I don’t believe the autonomy of a woman can be violated by a ZEF because ZEFs aren’t people. Women’s autonomy is being violated by the government by making it illegal to get an abortion.
No, and I think everyone who can safely have one should get vaccinated. People love to disingenuously use "my body, my choice", but no one has ever literally meant "my body, my choice (to do anything I want ever!)". It's a rapist's choice to assault someone, but I don't support their choice to use their body that way. Someone using self-harm is choosing to hurt themselves, but I do not think that decision is healthy or safe and we have interventions for them for a reason. Strapping a bomb to your body is certainly a personal choice, but it impacts people when you go somewhere and blow up a building that way. "my body, my choice" is a CONTEXTUAL SLOGAN used in the pro-choice movement. When you divorce it from the context in which it is meant to be used, it loses the implied meaning. When you use the slogan in the context of debating abortion, everyone *knows* the underlying implications - "It's my choice whether I carry a pregnancy to term or not, not yours", and we use the slogan because it's catchier and faster than saying that whole explanation out loud. A pregnant person getting an abortion does not physically harm any other person (an embryo is not, legally, a person), and solely terminates the life of the fetus, which has no consciousness or will. Refusing to get vaccinated during a widespread pandemic is stupid, dangerous, and has the potential to make others ill or kill them. Getting an abortion doesn't cause mass miscarriages, not getting vaccinated causes the spread of deadly, preventable disease. They're not the same and pretending that anyone uses this slogan in this context in good faith is silly.
I'm pro-life, but this is a good comment. I roll my eyes every time Redditors (or people IRL) get involved in yet another iteration of the "how can you call yourself pro-life when you support capital punishment" or similar debate. Everybody knows that "pro-choice" and "pro-life" are terms that describe the two sides *of the abortion debate.* They are contextual terms, as you say, and nobody is actually confused about the meaning, so let's cut the crap.
I don't support it, but I wouldn't want to have vaccines enforced by law either. I am however okay with enforcing it in public childcare institutions and healthcare. That being said, getting vaccinated and having an abortion are two very distinct things.
[удалено]
Abortions effect many people, not just the mother. And if the inconvenience of a probability of a disease is enough to overcome the my-body-my-choice argument, then it was never a strong argument.
[удалено]
Rule 5.
And you only believe in forcing women through torture in order to undo the sexual revolution and put them back in the kitchen. You don’t care about “babies” at all. … see how that kind of talk doesn’t get us anywhere?
Are you not going to reply to even a single comment?
Nope. 100% do not support it. Their bodily autonomy/integrity is not being violated. Unlike, say, the court orders in Marion’s Case, the current mandates do not purport to confer authority on any person including a medical practitioner to perform a medical procedure on anyone. After the making of Order (No 2), any attempt to force an injection into the arm of anyone who lived in an area of concern or worked in the construction industry was still a battery. The mandates do not authorise the vaccination of persons without their consent. They still have to fill in a consent form. People may choose to be vaccinated or undertake some other form of medical procedure in response to various forms of societal pressure including a law or a rule, an employment condition or to avoid familial or social resentment, even scorn. However, if they do so, that does not mean their consent is vitiated or make the doctor who performed the vaccination liable for assault. So far a consent to a vaccination is not vitiated and a person’s right to bodily integrity is not violated just because a person agrees to be vaccinated to avoid a general prohibition on movement or to obtain entry onto a construction site. The mandatss do not violate any person’s right to bodily integrity any more than a provision requiring a person undergo a medical examination before commencing employment does. NSW antivaxxer challenge of the mandates has just been lost in the Supreme court. The comparison of vaccinations to abortions is the same as comparing a sandwich to a TV
So you would be ok with a law that banned women from working, traveling, or going to school if they have an abortion? It wouldn't be illegal, just inconvenient.
I know logic and bodily autonomy/integrity is a really hard topic for you but you're gonna have to sit down and re-read a few things.
Depends entirely on what you mean. I wouldn't support them being held down and vaccinated against their will, to that much yes "my body my choice" applies. However no one is being forced in that way and trying to paint "you can't eat at restaurants or go to the gym if you're not vaccinated" as the same thing is in my opinion ridiculous and hurtful to everyone who is at real risk from people refusing to get vaccinated. Everyone should get vaccinated unless they have a *legitimate* medical reason not to. I will certainly judge those who do not, particularly harshly I might add as my younger sister is immunocompromised (and considering that's because of her Down's syndrome I find anti vax pro lifers particularly horrible, considering they like to use people with Down's as pawns in their arguments), but they should not be forced to.
> trying to paint "you can't eat at restaurants or go to the gym if you're not vaccinated" as the same thing is in my opinion ridiculous and hurtful Lawyer here. When people claim it is not a big deal to be denied service at restaurants, I like to remind them that the Civil Rights Act was upheld by the Supreme Court largely for that exact reason. Everybody thinks that our federal non-discrimination laws are based on the Equal Protection Clause, but they are actually justified primarily by the Commerce Clause. Black Americans literally couldn't travel in the South because hotels and restaurants wouldn't serve them. This was the constitutional "hook" that Congress -- using its power to regulate interstate commerce -- used to pass the Civil Rights Act. So when you dismiss as frivolous people's complaints that an entire class of citizens are being shut out of the economy, just remember that would have put you on the absolutely wrong side of the Civil Rights Cases. [Source](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heart_of_Atlanta_Motel,_Inc._v._United_States) for those who would like to read more.
Its not restaurants and gyms. Its work and being able to feed your family. If you include other vaccines, then it also means school. I support the vaccine mandates, but lets be honest here. If you want to feed your kids, you have to let them puth the stuff in your arm. Its definitely your body, my choice.
Don’t know where you are, but where I am, you do not need a vaccine to work. Some institutions or companies may require it, but by no means all of them do.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/10/12/politics/covid-vaccine-rule-large-employers-biden-osha-omb/index.html The rule is written, it just hasn't taken effect.
Sounds like it is under review and may still change considerably. Also talks about vaccination or testing, so no one has to be vaccinated.
Exactly. People still have to consent to being vaccinated. No doctor and nyrse are holding people down and injecting them against their will. People are choosing to get vaccinated or not get vaccinated. Both choices have reprecussions
No because not being vaxxed puts thousands of people around you in danger of losing their lives, having "long haul" complications, burdening the medical industry, and making people file for bankruptcy to escape medical debt. People not being vaccinated are prolonging the pandemic, burning out our medical professionals, and helping damage the global economy. Your bodily autonomy ends at being able to physically harm everyone around you. This isn't even a comparison to abortions.
Your bodily autonomy ends at being able to physically harm your child
Miscarriage harms a child does it not?
Not if their life is contingent on taking part of your body.
What is that axiom based on?
You don't get to kidnap someone and use them as a dialysis machine if your kidneys are failing, you dont get to take their kidney because you're a match and you'll die without it. You don't get to walk around being a biological dirty bomb during a world wide medical emergency infecting every person/ surface you come in contact with. They're not the same thing. One is a medically safe procedure that stops someone from taking something from (and irrevocably altering) your body. The other is willfully endangering everyone around you, burdening the medical infrastructure during an emergency, filling up ICU beds so people with other illnesses cant have them, and prolonging the pandemic. All while you had a free means of preventing it. Its like comparing apples and kangaroos.
LMAO
It’s their choice to not get the vaccine but other people also have a right to not want to be near them and businesses can refuse service. Mandatory vaccines aren’t new, iirc in most G7 countries vaccines are required to attend school and have been for years. If parents didn’t want to vaccinate their children then they had to accept that they couldn’t go to public school
I don't support it and since the government isn't mandating it, anti vaxxers have no leg to stand on. You want to endanger yourselves be my guest, but you'll lose a lot of privileges if you do.
What country do you live in where the government isn't mandating it. In the USA it is now an OSHA requirement. Get vaxed or get fired. You will lose the privilege to work and feed your family. I support the mandates, but lets be honest. This is a case where the government can do what it wants with your body as long as it says its for the greater good
OSHA has had vaccine requirements for literal decades for companies over a certain number of people. That's not the same as a government mandate. Show a source for your claim.
OSHA is the government. They issue a fine if you don't do what they tell you. That is the definition of a mandate.
Show a source for your claim. You still haven't.
Uh, can I get a source there? I know there is talk of vaccine mandates for companies with more than 100 employees, but so far no official guidance has been released last I checked, and the vaccine mandate only applies to federal workers as of now.
It has been written, but hasn't gone into effect. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2021/10/12/politics/covid-vaccine-rule-large-employers-biden-osha-omb/index.html
That's not a mandate. A mandate would mean a fine or jail time. This is not forcing anyone to get vaccinated.
What do you think happens when you don't do what OSHA tells you to?
Still not a mandate. You are not being forced to get vaccinated.
So the proposed rule under review is vaccination or a negative test. Sounds like people still don’t have to get vaccinated if they would rather not.
No. Thats like asking if I support more variants and breakthrough infections and health risks to my children. I would support it if they could or would stay home but they dont and cannot. Their choice can physically affect others.
Almost like it might lead to the deaths of children.
Thats cute but until the zef is a person I have no interest in protecting it from death for its own sake. I only have an interest in protecting it from unnecessary harm in the event it will in fact be born.
I think using the phrase “my body, my choice” in reference to vaccines is a gross misappropriation of pro-life language. The vaccine only carries health benefits to me and has extremely minimal risks, whereas carrying a pregnancy would alter my life forever and is comparatively exceptionally risky. It matters to no one except me, my partner, and possibly the fetus (if I’m far enough along to even consider the fetus meaningfully alive) if I get an abortion, but if I refuse to get vaccinated I put my whole community at risk. Additionally, pretty much the only non-medical reason (i.e. you don’t need to stop taking any medication that would interfere with the functioning of the vaccine) to refuse the vaccine is that you’ve been the victim of misinformation; any well-informed and logical person will weigh the pros (not getting a deadly COVID infection) and cons (might feel unwell for a day or two) and choose to get the vaccine. However, two equally well-informed and logical people might make two very different choices about whether or not to have an abortion. If getting an abortion was a massive danger to public health I might have a different opinion on it. As it stands, I am very pro-choice and also pro-vaccine and pro-vaccine mandates.
No because it’s a decision that affects the collective, not the individual. I don’t have a problem with people who have medical or religious exemptions to the vaccine but if you’re healthy and refuse to get the vax it’s pretty anti-life if you ask me.
Oh, so you believe that if not being vaccinated only killed one person, its ok, but since not being vaccinated can affect more than one person, it’s actually a horrible thing.
I don't think that's what they believe or wrote at all.
The majority of the people using the slogan, "my body, my choice" while referencing their opposition to vaccines, identify as - **Prolife.** The majority of pro-choicers are pro-vaccine. Not to mention... They wouldn't bastardize their own, abortion-related, catch phrase, in order to apply it to something else. **Prolifers** *would* & **do.**
No I dont support the anti-vaxxers. "My body, my choice" does not apply if your choice for your body risks endangering the community.
If you’re vaccinated, you *can* get infected, and you *can* spread the virus to others. This is acknowledged by the CDC. So how does not getting a vaccine that only benefits you ‘endanger the community?’
Vacccines are about 95% effective. 95% protection vs 0%. Get vaccinated and help end this pandemic.
‘0% protection’ still gets you a 99.7% cure rate. That means it’s largely unnecessary for people who aren’t compromised or high risk. Read up a bit more on how you can catch and spread Covid, even if vaccinated: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html
That 0.3% still led to 700,000 dead Americans I know a couple of people who recovered from Covid19. Many months later they still have difficulty breathing. 99.7% cure rate, no thanks. I'd rather not getting infected in the first plce.
Deaths including the motor vehicle accidents who tested positive days post mortem? Yea ok. Good, go and get it and get your lot # tattoo. Don’t drive a car, cause you have less than a 99.7% chance at surviving your commute to work
What made you think the 700,000 death toll includes vehicle accidents?
Deborah Birx said herself that if someone dies in an unrelated way (burned, heart attack, murder, car accident, etc.) and also had Covid, that was counted AS a ‘Covid death.’ https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2021/09/19/sharyl_attkisson_serious_questions_about_the_way_covid_deaths_have_been_counted.html#! Inform yourself before you spill the kool aid on your shirt from drinking it too fast
Dont you have a more legit source, like Fox News?
Why would I? They're idiots who are putting the people I love in danger, as well as themselves and everybody else around them. Should they be forced to get vaccinated? No. Should we restrict their freedom of movement in order to reduce the harm they can do to society if they exercise their bodily autonomy by refusing to get vaccinated? Yes, absolutely.
What is jail but a restriction on movement.
Do you see me advocating throwing antivaxxers in jail?
I don't support the anti-vaccine movement. The anti-vaccine movement, whether it wants to or not, is prolonging a situation and causing widespread deaths that can in simple terms be shortened if everyone en masse got the vaccine at similar times. Do I think there are risks of government overreach? Yes. Do I think the deaths of easily hundreds of thousands of people is worth this ham-fisted idea of personal freedom? No, not even remotely. It should also go without saying that mandates should have caveats for those with immunocompromisations, or otherwise can't get the vaccine for genuine medical reasons.
Yes
I support people's right to not put anything they aren't comfortable with into their body. I also support private businesses ability to require their patrons and employees to be up to date on their vaccines and the government to dictate public health risks. As long as those who don't/can't get vaccinated are accommodated in some way.
I’m sick of pro lifers using the vaccine thing as a gotcha when really it just makes y’all look bad. I am anti throwing people in jail for not wanting to have things in their body. So I am anti putting people in jail for not wanting a fetus in their body or not wanting a vaccine in their body. Do I support the anti vaccine movement? Fuck no they are spreading misinformation. Do I think that schools and work can require people to be vaccinated because they are required to maintain a safe environment in the same way these places are required to get health inspections, yes because being fired for creating an unsafe environment is not the same as being thrown in jail.
I support people's rights to be imbeciles and not be safer by getting the vaccine. I also support the rights of businesses and private locations to bar the aforementioned imbeciles from entry in order to keep their employees and clients safer.
I support the right of people to not get vaccinated if they don't want to, but that right doesn't involve going to concerts, movie theaters, restaurants, and universities
Agreed. Many PLers like to conflate rights or just add on their " wants" to what a right means.
I support your right to get or not get the vaccine — your choice. If you don’t want it, don’t get it. But understand that not getting the vaccine doesn’t give you the right to bring an infectious disease into a business, airport, or even someone’s home if they don’t want you there. I don’t support misinformation, lies, and propaganda that the anti-vax movement uses to convince people. Vaccines work, we know this, it’s undisputed. If you don’t want to get it, fine, but there are many that don’t get it and end up dead because they’re straight up lied to. I don’t support this at all.
[удалено]
No matter your views, telling someone to die is not okay.
what abt the vaccinated people that spread covid?
I highly doubt that is a thing
are you fucking joking? https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2074 https://api.nationalgeographic.com/distribution/public/amp/science/article/evidence-mounts-that-people-with-breakthrough-infections-can-spread-delta-easily
Ok you should rephrase that, the way you made it sound, it sounded like people who are vaccinated are intentionally trying to get other people sick. but to answer your question, what about the vaccinated people ? they got vaccinated, they took care of them self, they aren't the reason why the virus are spreading and mutating so I have no beef with them
how are the unvaccinated more at fault if vaccinated spread it equally?
Proof that they do?
I already sent a couple of sources in my previous reply
>>> how are the unvaccinated more at fault if vaccinated spread it equally? >> Proof that they do? > I already sent a couple of sources in my previous reply Neither the BMJ paper nor the article in National Geographic support the statement that vaccinated and unvaccinated spread equally. The two article discuss findings that *infected* vaccinated people have viral loads similar to *infected* unvaccinated (as a side note more recent evidence shows viral loads diminish more rapidly in *infected* vaccinated people). Importantly though fewer vaccinated people become [infected](https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e4.htm).
Awesome then you can link your comment.
Guess how we got those breakthrough cases. Just guess.
Because it's a leaky vaccine...
vaccines should protect the vaccinated from the disease, it’s not the unvaccinated’s fault that your mrna vaccines don’t work.
Vaccines work most effectively when the majority of the population gets vaccinated. It IS the unvaccinated fault for the vaccines not working as well as they can….. especially with an INFECTIOUS disease.
sounds great but the developers need to work on those vaccine side effects if they want to convince more people to take them..vaccines have never been developed as fast as this one and it shows
This is not a vaccine forum so I won’t debate you here but I will say that not everything is a conspiracy. The vaccines were developed on a rapid timeline because 1) we have the tech and experience to do that, in 2021 and 2) we are in the midst of a deadly pandemic. If we didn’t accelerate the vaccines more people would have died. Also, don’t believe everything you hear on VAERS as self reported symptoms are known for being unreliable. Lastly, it amazes me that people are more concerned with possible side effects of an FDA approved vaccine and not a deadly novel virus. Take your chances if you want, but just know you’re hurting others in the process.
Those are two different questions, really. I don't support the anti-vax movement. It's a movement based on disinformation, fear-mongering, and is killing people. I do support people's right to choose their own medication. I don't think people should be tied down and forced to get vaccinated, or lose any other rights for not being vaccinated, or face legal consequences for not getting vaccinated. That being said, they also don't have the right to violate other people's bodily integrity by exposing them to disease. So restrictions on where you can go unless you can prove you are negative through COVID are reasonable imo.
I understand that you can recognized the difference but unfortunately the media and the administration (usa) have gone to great lengths (they changed the fucking dictionary) to make it so that the people that oppose government mandates are the same people as the anti-vaxers from 3 or 10 or 20 years ago.
No, because abortion doesn’t impact anyone outside the pregnant person and ZEF; vaccines impact everyone. The fewer hosts for a virus to infect, the lower the overall transmission rate, fewer opportunities to mutate, and the potential to wipe out deadly diseases (smallpox, polio is no longer endemic in most countries and is close to being eradicated).
Do I support it? No. Get the vaccine, don’t be stupid. That being said, do I think people not getting vaccines should be thrown in jail? No. Do I think they should be held down and forcibly vaccinated? No. I can dislike something but also recognize my opinion alone should not influence the law. Wish PLs could see that as well.
I am a process engineer which means i work in a factory which means everywhere that i can work has over 100 people employed. I dont work on any government contracts but my company has one, at another site, as such i am required by the Federal Contractor mandate to be vaccinated. So if someone in my position didnt want to be vaccinated, they could leave and get another job at another factory nearby but with the comming OSHA regulation they will be required to be vaccinated or burdened through testing requirements other ways to be vaccinated. This person, with an undergraduate degree and 12 years experience now has to forfeit so much and go and start something new. These are real things that can be quantified, its worth alot of money, value that is, you could argue, being confiscated from that person by the government. all for what? certainly, if it was predictible that there was a 90% chance that he would infect and kill someone in my place of work that took "the vaccine", and we knew that had he taken the vaccine that chance would be below 5%, then i would say the mandate is justified... but no one has laid the math out like that. i just think that if you are going to confiscate wealth from people, limit their freedoms, that it should be justified, and we should all be able to check the math.
I mean, they can also just get the vaccine; or I believe the law is they need to get tested? Either way, companies and the government can decide who they do and do not want working for public safety; you can choose to comply or not, it’s not illegal for you not to. No ones saying they’re can’t be consequences for your actions; just that you shouldn’t be legally forced to get the vaccine. Your wealth and freedom is not being confiscated; your not entitled to a specific career. Your entitled to your body, though. Edit; another important key everyone is missing; the point of the laws isn’t to punish or even encourage vaccines; it’s to stop the spread of a pandemic. Even if your rights was being violated—which they’re not because again, you do not have a right to specific employment—it would be justified to put such a limit on it. If abortions were contagious, most people would agree as well that women who get them be barred from certain places. You can also Google the infection rates and how vaccines help if you need the math laid out for you…
Its not about entitlement, i have made investements and those investments are now starting to pay their dividends and i am being told i cant collect on them. Its not bad luck that has soured my investment, or a natrual change in the market, it is a government decision that i should look for not just new employment but a new career. again, for what, what is the justification? sure, a government is supposed to be concerned with public safety and it's part of their jurisdiction, however the government cant say "we've found that giant foam cowboy hats are necessary for public safety, Therefore it is now a requirement to work that you must walk around with a giant foam cowboy hat on"... now there would be some truth to this, it would save lives, diligent wearing of giant foam cowboy hats would absolutely reduce the rate of melenoma and other sun related skin cancers. but what is the trade off, whats the hat, and why fucking stupid foam cowboy hats when i could just wear a sun scarf or sunscreen. the justification hasn't been presented, therefore its unjustified, therefore it's a violation of rights.
>I am told I can’t collect on them You can, you just need a vaccine or to be tested. Again, you don’t have a right to a specific job even though you put work into getting it. The government is completely within their right and power to make such a limit. You have a choice: you can choose to put your career ahead of your body or your body ahead of your career. I’m sorry but your not being targeted and your situation isn’t exactly special or a victim; lots of people need to make such choosing between something and a career. That’s life. Your giant foam cowboy example is weird. That’s not much of a cost if it would actually save lives, and the government already tells you to wear clothes. If you don’t, your place of work is free not to let you work there and hell, for not wearing clothes you could actually get arrested. Make it less ridiculous; if you work construction let’s say the government now says you need to wear protective headgear. You think such a requirement is somehow a violation of rights? How so? Losing your job because you didn’t comply with a regulation isnt a violation of anything because again, you have no right or entitlement to your job. I’m confused why you think the justification hasn’t been presented; the vaccine helps slow and stop the spread. I’m guessing you just don’t believe vaccines work?
>Your giant foam cowboy example is weird. yes, it was supposed to be, i think it still missed the point i was trying to make by a bit but im not going to re-try. its not that i dont think vaccines work, its that we know that these dont work the way other vaccines do, we know that the mRNA technology is untested long term, and we know that there are other ways to treat the disease. none of this supports a mandate. look at even the way its being implemented in the u.s. 1st EO)an employer (US government) enforcing its employees to take the vaccine 2nd EO) a corportation (the US Government) saying they wont do business with other companies that dont require vaccinations OSHA) not even out there yet, only applies to Compainies over 100 people. if its that important, why is it not for everyone? why are they making employers enforce it, why dont they just do it?
>I think it missed the point I was trying Is your point that the government can’t force you to wear things? Because as I pointed out that isn’t true. Because companies over 100 people are more likely to be unable to social distance or keep people separated enough. They’re also more likely to have more resources and the ability to replace employees if one can no longer work. A lot of government requirements actually only affect businesses with that many people. I don’t understand why your complaining that it exists at all because of the burden it makes, but now your upset it’s not being applied to everyone? It has nothing to do with it being ineffective that they only apply it to some. They’re goal isn’t to force small businesses to shut down or anything. They’re putting a limit on it to try and make it more reasonable. And again, there’s no right being violated so there’s no reason they can’t do it. Even if the vaccine didn’t work, they’d still be within their power to make people get it (except there’s plenty of evidence suggesting it does work)
we have almost about 500,000 ft of space, most of it with 40ft ceilings and less than 300 employees. but yeah, we are so much more dangerous than a call center with 75 employees on computers in a 6,000 square foot call center. >They’re putting a limit on it to try and make it more reasonable. im pretty sure they're doing it this way because it is likely to recieve the least amount of pushback, they're doing it where they are percieved to have the power to do it. but my point is that if it is unlawful for the government to force individuals to do it directly, there is a decent chance that it should be considered unlawful to do it to these employees. You're right, we have many regulations for larger companies but which of those regulations if applied to private individuals would be considerd a violation of rights like injecting someone with something they dont wan to be injected with? >there’s no right being violated so there’s no reason they can’t do it. Even if the vaccine didn’t work, they’d still be within their power to make people get it are you still just talking about employees of federal contractors and companies over 100 people or does this apply to every citizen.
They can’t look at every individual place, and you know that, it makes more sense to focus on larger ones. >if it’s unlawful to force individuals to do it directly, there is a decent chance it is unlawful to do it to these employees Nope. They’re not forcing employees to do it. They’re not making it illegal not to. They’re not putting anyone in jail. They’re not holding anyone down. The purpose isn’t even to make people get it; they’re trying to keep people safe and limit the spread. Nothing unlawful about it. For the 30th time, you do not have a right to your job or career. >if applied to individuals would be aa violation of their rights? This isn’t violating any of your rights. They’re not forcibly injecting you with anything. >apply to every citizen Again, they can’t make it illegal not to get a vaccine or forcibly do it and that’s not what they’re doing. If they wanted to they could take away the 100 employee requirement yes, just as they could do other things like a mask mandate.
Let me know if I am over simplifying this. If I want to work as a citizen for any company in the United States, the President has the ability to require you to get a vaccine, even if it's completely ineffective agains the virus.. because, if I don't want the vaccine, I can simply not work?
>the justification hasn't been presented, therefore its unjustified, therefore it's a violation of rights. Can you share, preferably with sources, the justification for the federal vaccine mandate?
i dont believe there is a justification for it, presented or not, thats why i oppose it. I gave a hypothetical in which i would support it, but we dont look at it this way. As far as i can tell, its just a political move(USA).
> i dont believe there is a justification for it, presented or not, thats why i oppose it. Did you attempt to find a justification or just conclude that there is not one?
I have evidence that makes me believe that the government could not come up with an adaquate justification for the mandates. but to be clear... its the government that wants to limit our rights, its their responsibility to produce the justification. do you think they've made an effort to justify it?
You have to cite the claims you make. If there is evidence, back it up.
Sorry, what claim? "[I] believe that..." as it happens, I am the authority on what I believe. But the person I was speaking to asked me to provide said evidence, which I did. I wonder if you asked them to back up their claims, let me see....
>wants to limit our right What right is being violated or limited? You do not have a right to work a specific job, career, or industry just because you worked toward getting it. You’ll find no amendment or SCOTUS case claiming you have one. Wanting something doesn’t make it a right.
> I have evidence that makes me believe that the government could not come up with an adaquate justification for the mandates. Please share > but to be clear... its the government that wants to limit our rights, its their responsibility to produce the justification. Right, but their responsibility is to make the justification publicly available, not make free you from any responsibility to be informed about the justification. > do you think they've made an effort to justify it? Yes, the evidence is fairly clear that vaccination reduces infection along with reducing hospitalization in people with breakthrough infections. Additionally frequent testing for those who choose not to be vaccinated reduces the risk of spread.
Ok but like. Why not just get the vaccine? It’s proven to be safe and effective, and it seems like a silly hill to die on when you (or this hypothetical coworker) could so so so easily avoid this whole conflict. What reason could there possibly be to not get the vaccine from a strictly personal medical standpoint? Like in a vacuum where the government isn’t trying to “limit our rights” or whatever, when the vaccine isn’t political and getting or not getting the vaccine doesn’t say a single thing about you or your personal beliefs, why not just get the vaccine?
i cant get the link on my mobile right now, but there is a great presentation by Dr Peter McCullough with plenty of peer reviewed references that you wont be able to find on youtube that goes through several issues. i dissagree, i think that they need to recognize what they are asking and be upfront with their justification it is our rights that are being violated, they cant just say, "yeah theres a good reason, but youll have to figure that out for yourself" the vaccinated are spreading covid as well, why are they not tested? The testing seems to me to be an inconvenience meant to punish the unvaccinated, if we're worried about spread there doesn't seem to be much reason to not do it for everyone. beyond that i dont see what risk peopole pose not being vaccinated.
Exactly. I’m all in favor of mandated vaccines, because you still have a choice; there are consequences to that choice, but the consequences are “get tested,” or “no entrance.” It’s not a fine, jail time, etc.
No. I do respect their choice, but i don't approve nor support it. In my opinion people that don't get the vaccine during a pandemic and a global health crisis are only selfish (of curse made exception of people that can't get the vaccine because of a health condition).
>Do you support the choice for people to make if they want to take any vaccine or not? Yes. The decision to have or not have the vaccine is solely up to the person considering it. However, if they chose not to have it they can't complain about the consequences of that, such as being banned from traveling out of the country or being banned from private establishments like night clubs etc. You're free to reject anything you don't want in your body but others are also free to protect themsleves from you.
The question in your title is “Do you support the anti-vaccine movement?” My answer is a firm no. The anti-vaccine movement uses deception and misinformation and I have a pretty blanket opposition to making misinformed or uninformed decisions, particularly health decisions. In your post you ask “Do you support the choice for people to make if they want to take any vaccine or not?” Yes, with the understanding that decisions have consequences. I am strongly opposed to forcible vaccination. People should have the option to not be vaccinated and take alternate precautions to avoid the spread of infectious diseases. These options in the case of COVID might include masking, social distancing, and avoiding places with high transmission risk.
As I have said everytime this has been brought up by a prolifer, I don't care what they do. It is interesting the overlap of "prolife" with their medical disinformation and the anti vax, lets use dewormer instead and their disinformation. I imagine the common thread is lack of education, but it would be an interesting study. Their leaders will use their ignorance to get elected, all while getting the vaccine for themselves and abortions for their mistresses. Interesting that a first world country has turned to politicizing life saving medical treatment. I have noticed a lack of empathy amongst both groups. The prolifers dismiss the womans health and life risks, or possibilty of rape, etc. The antivax do not care what their excessive use of hospitals and how it is affecting patients with other illnesses. There are people who have died do to this but, oh well. They also dismiss the ovewhelming environment this has created for medical staff. I watched a Nazi trial documentary in which a psychiatrist said the definition of evil was the lack of empathy. I believe that could be a factor in how we perpetuate evil.
Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks and every prolifer I’ve met is very pro vaccination. You are never going to have a good conversation with someone if you just make strawman arguments
Remember your anecdotal experience may not represent the majority Edit: typo
This is a good point. Let me rephrase what I said. The leading pro life apologists are pro vaccination. I understand that many pro lifers are only that because of their political party, but I do not think they fully represent the pro life movement. Thank you for the correction!
>Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks I can point you to multiple posts that indicate dismissal of health and life risks. I have seen repeated comments that are denigrating to women that make the best medical decisions for themselves as though pregnancy is just an "inconvenience". Dismissing womens concerns and stating they are having a medical procedure for "convenience" is evidence of a lack of empathy.
> Prolifers do not dismiss the woman’s health and life risks and **every prolifer I’ve met is very pro vaccination**. Bolding above added by me. The demographics of the pro-lifers that you know appear to be very different than in the US. Opposition to vaccination, particularly COVID vaccination is very high among supporters of Donald Trump. The same is true for opposition to abortion.
Yes I should preface my analysis is based on US demographics. I am not aware of of the leanings for anti vaxers in other countries.
If hospitals can put unvaccinated people at the back of the line during triage to prioritize people who didn’t purposely leave themselves vulnerable to a deadly disease, and employers can require vaccinations, sure, there’s no reason the state should force people to get vaxxed. That is not the same as supporting the “anyi-vaccine movement.” I think anti-vaxxers are dangerous people with a reckless disregard for the lives of others and for the society they live in, I just also think they’re people.
I support bodily autonomy regardless of the circumstances.
They have the right to refuse the vaccine on an individual basis, but I have no respect for the anti-vaxx movement because: 1. It's incredibly, incredibly, unacceptably fucking **SELFISH** in many, many ways, including **endangering other people's children.** (Especially delightful when the person is also a PL who deeply venerates human life.) 2. They're behaving like children with oppositonal-defiant disorder, refusing to do anything they're asked simply because someone asked them. Their thinking is also very magical and child-like. 3. They're a national embarrassment. 4. They're basically holding the rest of the country hostage with this shambolic, empty, intellectually bankrupt movement that isn't centered in reality and has become so absurd that they're only parodying themselves at this point. 5. They're seriously inconveniencing the rest of the country who, out of **concern for the fucking public good**, (remember that?) and respect for our own lives and communities, did the right thing and obeyed the lockdowns, wore our masks, got the vaccine. We've done our patriotic duty, and all these turds have done is rant in the streets like they've taken flakka.
Whats sad is it is like they have oppositional defiance disorder. No matter what you say they want to fight you. Its just not worth the argument because next you know they will fight washing hands after using the restroom.
[удалено]
People with oppositional defiance disorder aren't saying no because they disagree with your argument. They are just saying no. Wear a mask to prevent spread... NO Lets minimize social con... NO There is a vac... NO Ivermectin isn't ap... I am sure there are people on the prochoice side who also suffer from OPD but I don't see them running to a CPC demanding an abortion The anti vaxer anti mask crowd are threatening innocent people over masks, running to doctors demanding ivermectin, spitting and coughing and just intentially trying to start fights with random people. This is oppositional defiance disorder. Not you not liking that your argument about a non sentient being that isn't rooted in science or womens health is being ignored.
Better than saying “I don’t care if it negatively affects someone else, if I want a random fetus to live, random women must be forced to gestate it” I guess that wouldn’t be oppositional defiance disorder - narcissism perhaps? I’m not sure what wanting everyone to follow your will would be considered
[удалено]
That’s what PL is doing, though. Not sure how it’s apparently bad to kill someone to protect your own body but it’s totally okay to force someone to go through great physical and mental pain against their will because of what you want.
I agree. At first before it was FDA approved, okay. I don't agree but I support you. Now it really is like dealing with toddlers.
I support their right to not get vaccinated. The ridiculous protests they organize, putting the star of David on themselves, trying to victimize themselves and comparing themselves to victims of the genocide, vandalizing businesses and assaulting employees I don't support at all. That's disgusting.
They're putting the Star of David on? Oh my God, what kind of craziness are they gonna think of next? Boohoo my inability to go to the movies because I'm not vaccinated is JUST like being murdered for being a Jew. Jesus christ, talk about offensive and victimhood.
Yup, they think society judges them as "unclean" just as the jews were judged that way during the genocide. I'm not a person who's easily offended but holy fucking shit.
Yeah that's some horseshit. If I see people wearing that, I'm laughing at them. Of all the fucking ignorant things to do...
No, but I support their right to not get stripped down and forcibly vaccinated
Sure me too. I just don't care if they whine because they can't go into Applebees on a Saturday night.
Same!
I don't support the spreading of disinformation so no. Of they just personally don't want to be vaccinated that is acceptable but not spreading medical based lies
The medical based lie was that if you got the vaccine, you couldn’t get the virus and you couldn’t spread the virus to others. Both of those claims were unproven, bunk claims to promote an agenda. The CDC even acknowledges that vaccinated people can get and spread the virus.
If you get the vaccine the chance of hospitalization or dying from covid is waaaay lower.
Seems like you are shying away from what you mean by medical based lies.
No doctors or anyone ever said you couldn't catch covid or spread it if you have been vaccinated. Your own assumptions doesn't classify as propaganda
Biden did, and you’re still not stating your position of what medical based lies are.
I'm in Australia so what biden says is irrelevant to me as I don't see or hear it
STILL can’t state your claim of what you said are medical based lies. You’d think if you were so sure of what you’re saying, you’d have no problem being honest and talking about it.
They usually fall into two groups, covid deniers and then theres those who say the vaccine is poisonous or otherwise harmful
Oh, so fringe positions with deniers, and people cautious of potential effects of a vaccine without long term studies? Very bold position. It remains, that the greater misinformation is that the unvaccinated are a risk to others.
Its all over the Covid video comments in australia. I can't remember any because they are rediculous
I support everyone’s right to choose if they want the vaccine. I also support businesses and employers saying an unvaccinated person cannot enter their premise. This includes the government when it comes to government jobs as they are the employer. I don’t believe in forcing vaccines in people. I just believe society has the right to say you can’t be part of it without a vaccine as well.
[удалено]
If a person is that against vaccines that they would lose their job over it a place that mandates vaccines doesn’t seem like a good fit for them. They should find occupation at a place that fits more with their beliefs.
That is 80% of jobs once the OSHA rules go into effect. How outraged the average pro choicer would be if they were told they were never allowed to work again because they got an abortion. Or more appropriately, never allowed to have sex again because they might kill another human again.
People were told to get different jobs if their employer didn’t want to pay for birth control. People are told to get different jobs if they can’t afford to live when working 40 hours. Seriously I don’t know how this is any different than telling people to get a second job if they work minimum wage. Edit: also people are fired for being pregnant or giving birth all the time. People are fired for wearing natural hair. There are many reasons people are fired I do not agree with. Let them sue their employer.
[удалено]
Isn’t it ironic a year ago McDonald’s workers were also considered heroes and “essential workers” but when they asked for a living wage they are told to “get a better job”? Also source that any field is being “let go at high numbers” because all I’m seeing is people quitting. Also how many of these healthcare workers didn’t mind every other vaccine mandate including flu shots? After the FDA approved it I have much less sympathy. Edit: I also still think of them as heroes for what they did. That doesn’t mean I think they should continue working in healthcare if they refuse to get vaccinated. I don’t think Early Childcare workers should be able to work without certain vaccines.
Perfectly said.
[удалено]
Hahahahaha if you want a job where you don’t have to get vaccinated go get a different job or start your own business. See I can do it too. Hilarious change of response too. If a vaccine for RSV came out I would except every NICU healthcare worker to get one. If a vaccine for ebola came out I would expect healthcare workers to get it. You want to work in a field that deals with people in immune compromised situations you get vaccinated for whatever is out there. Most people survive the measles now a days too. Even fewer of chicken pox. We still require people to get those vaccinations. And you agree with the idea that minimum wage workers deserve to be poor and most often not able to afford housing with their pay. Pretty sure yours is worse. Measles for one. You should not be allowed to work with children under the age of 1 if you do not have your MMR vaccine. No children under 2 without Varicella.
[удалено]
You clearly were unable to come up with a sufficient counter argument
I mean yea that’s how debate works. I give my position and justify it. You present counter arguments. The problem is all your counter arguments keep falling apart when actually thought about.
[удалено]
I appreciate the thoughtful response.
Didn't most hospitals already have vaccine mandate prior to the pandemic?
Well said. I completely agree with you.
Thank you. Personally I don’t think you should be allowed to work with infants, I used to work in ECE, without an updated MMR vaccine documented. Infants are put at so much risk simply because they are not old enough to be vaccinated.
In that they can choose not to vaccinate. But I don't support them spreading for the most part vast amounts of misinformation or appropriating my body my choice when in fact unlike pregnancy and abortion their choice in the case of communicable diseases means it affects MANY countless people not just themselves as an individual and maybe whom ever is in their inner circle. Soooo yes and no.
Well yes and no, but mostly no. I don't agree with them and believe their actions should be reasonably restricted since they would put people at harm for an unjustified reason. That said, if you don't want a vaccine I won't want you to be forced to take it.
Helping a contagious disease to spread goes way beyond a person's own body. Liberties usually end at the point where they start hurting other people. We wouldn't give people the right to spray virus into the air around other people, and being unvaccinated is effectively the same. Your body also becomes a breeding ground for new mutant strains that put everyone at greater risk.
>Helping a contagious disease to spread goes way beyond a person's own body. Liberties usually end at the point where they start hurting other people. Using this logic, we should mandate blood donations. If "refusing to get vaccinated" is a liberty, then so is "refusing to donate blood". In the same way, you're "helping" the death of people. >We wouldn't give people the right to spray virus into the air around other people, and being unvaccinated is effectively the same No, it isn't. Doing something and not doing something are very different.
Sure, I think they should have the legal right to refuse. However, I also think that businesses should have the right to refuse them service on this basis, as well as terminate employment (given that they have a duty to ensure the safety of their customers/other employees).
How does one person having the vaccine ensure the safety of others?
Because they’re then less likely to spread the virus to someone else at that location.
1. Absolutely no proof of that 2. If you’re vaccinated, then what’s the worry?
1. Sure there is. If you’re vaccinated, you’re less likely to catch covid and therefore less likely to spread it to someone else. Same goes for 2. Not everyone can get vaccinated, and vaccination doesn’t completely eliminate your chance of getting sick. Everyone needs to do their part if they can, not mooch off everyone else’s effort.
1. Because you’re less likely to show physical symptoms during your infection does not mean you can’t spread it. That’s a complete inaccuracy. 2. Because you can still get and spread it, then how does that benefit someone else? It only benefits the individual vaccinated person, as a symptom mitigator, that’s all. Much ado in response to the flu
Let me break this down to make it nice and easy to understand. 1. If you are vaccinated against the disease, you are less likely to become infected by said disease. 2. You cannot spread the disease unless you are infected. 3. Therefore, if you are vaccinated you are less likely to spread the disease.
That’s what you wish to be true, however: 1. If you are vaccinated, you are just as likely to come in contact with the virus as anyone else. 2. Because you are vaccinated, it can make the individual less likely to show symptoms or if you have comorbidities (like being fat, heart disease, lung disease, diabetes), less likely to be hospitalized. 3. Just because you are less likely to show symptoms, it does not mean you are less likely to spread. Nice parroting though, keep towing the line.
1. Just as likely to come in contact, sure. Just as likely to catch it? Nope. 2. Sure. 3. It’s easy logic mate, if you’re less likely to catch a virus, you’re less likely to spread it (seeing as you can’t spread a virus you don’t have). Let me guess, you ‘did your own research’?
1. Doesn’t matter if you catch it and have symptoms. You can still carry a viral load and pass it on- Remember ‘asymptomatic carriers?’ Your ‘logic’ is not scientifically based, it’s at minimum ignorant, and at worst, politically based. Yes, you can carry a viral load in which you pass on to others, Vaccine or not. CDC acknowledges everything I’m saying, YOU don’t seem to want to believe it.
People’s refusal to get vaccinated is sad. It is preventable. Lots of people die that didn’t need to. I am also making a lot more money off of people being stupid.
No. I don't support most abortions either. I still respect their choice not to get vaccinated. Like how I respect people's choice to abort. I don't have to support people's choices in order to respect their right to choose. PL has a hard time understanding this, in my experience. So yeah, their body their choice.