Covid-19 miscellany

[Metaphor]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

 

[ZiprHead]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

What metric are you using to determine that?

What metric is anyone using when they decide it is right and proper to force medical procedures on unconsenting adult group A, solely for the benefit of group B?

That would be the metric that group A through their inaction is harming group B. What right does group B have to go around harming group A?

 

[ZiprHead]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

 

[repoman]

Why isn't infection treated in a similar manner to vaccination?

Wouldn't infection be similar to having an injected and nasal vaccine at the same time?

Because, no matter how many times the Republicans pretend they're the same they're not. Infection confers good protection against that strain, but provides little protection against variants. That's why we've never had a coronavirus vaccine before--standard techniques produce a vaccine that quickly becomes ineffective. The spike-protein targeted vaccines confer much broader protection--not merely against the strain they are engineered for but against variants also.

Note that while the current vaccine doesn't provide much protection against Omicron infection it still confers well over 90% protection against getting seriously ill.

Note that I am using Eric Motherfucking Topol, the guy who made sure that the vaccine EUA happened after the election. One of the most respected medical guys who is not senile like the HIV discoverer.

They didn't have the data earlier.

Do you have evidence of this? That the current vaccines give broader protection than an infection.

Well do you?

 

[Metaphor]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

What metric are you using to determine that?

What metric is anyone using when they decide it is right and proper to force medical procedures on unconsenting adult group A, solely for the benefit of group B?

That would be the metric that group A through their inaction is harming group B. What right does group B have to go around harming group A?

"Through their inaction".

First, Group A (the unvaccinated) is not harming Group B (the voluntarily vaccinated). Some people in Group B want to use the State to force a medical procedure on the unconsenting adults in Group A in order to benefit the people in Group B. Forcing a medical procedure on an unconsenting adult for the benefit of others is such a violation of bodily autonomy it would require circumstances that I cannot articulate.

 

[Metaphor]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

So, it's okay to dehumanise people who refuse to have a medical procedure done on their bodies? That's the morally right thing to do?

I shouldn't be so bothered by the dehumanisation, or rather I should be used to it. I'm talking to people who think 40% of the American population (Republicans) are morally bankrupt and openly say so.

 

[bilby]

Why are you listening to Newton, anyway? Einstein said he's wrong, gravity is variable.

These so called "scientists" can't even keep their story straight. Next they'll be telling us that Einstein was wrong too, and things sometimes actually fall upwards, or sideways.

 

[ZiprHead]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

So, it's okay to dehumanise people who refuse to have a medical procedure done on their bodies? That's the morally right thing to do?

I shouldn't be so bothered by the dehumanisation, or rather I should be used to it. I'm talking to people who think 40% of the American population (Republicans) are morally bankrupt and openly say so.

Where did I dehumanise anyone?

 

[ZiprHead]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

What metric are you using to determine that?

What metric is anyone using when they decide it is right and proper to force medical procedures on unconsenting adult group A, solely for the benefit of group B?

That would be the metric that group A through their inaction is harming group B. What right does group B have to go around harming group A?

"Through their inaction".

First, Group A (the unvaccinated) is not harming Group B (the voluntarily vaccinated).

Patently false.

Some people in Group B want to use the State to force a medical procedure on the unconsenting adults in Group A in order to benefit the people in Group B. Forcing a medical procedure on an unconsenting adult for the benefit of others is such a violation of bodily autonomy it would require circumstances that I cannot articulate.

It would also benefit the members of group A.

 

[TomC]

What metric is anyone using when they decide it is right and proper to force medical procedures on unconsenting adult group A, solely for the benefit of group B?

Who is "group B" in this context?

There isn't any real group B. The legislation is for everyone's benefit. The mandates would apply to me as much as anyone else. The difference is only that I did the responsible thing last spring, voluntarily.
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

So, it's okay to dehumanise people who refuse to have a medical procedure done on their bodies? That's the morally right thing to do?

I shouldn't be so bothered by the dehumanisation, or rather I should be used to it. I'm talking to people who think 40% of the American population (Republicans) are morally bankrupt and openly say so.

Where did I dehumanise anyone?

Maybe not you specifically--but there are a number of posters who have called the unvaccinated 'plague rats'. Calling somebody a rat is dehumanising.

 

[Swammerdami]

Not wearing a helmet should be legal since the only likely victim is one's-self; driving while drunk OTOH could easily lead to the death of another person.

Helmet laws are because society ends up caring for the brain damaged results.

As an adamant centrist, I am not going to offer an opinion on whether Loren or Swammi-out-of-context has the proper political stance here.

However, I have enough trouble expressing myself clearly without people taking my words out of context.

Toni and Mr. Moogly asked about libertarian thought. I responded. Serious question: When my remark is viewed in context does it appear I am personally opposed to helmet laws? Or that I am trying to explain what "many (libertarians)" believe?

Even when I agree something is a good idea, I don't approve of mandating it. Just as an example, I wear a helmet when I ride my motorcycle, yet I oppose helmet laws.

Saying something should be mandated is a whole second step above and beyond saying it is a good idea. Each of those two arguments is a separate argument.

I'm interested in how you decide when to mandate.

understand that. But I don’t understand your argument for NOT mandating COVID vaccines. Can you please share it?

Yes. How does JH come to the conclusion that vaccination for covid is good but vaccination for everybody is bad. Helmet laws are good but mandatory helmet laws are bad.

Vaccinations are good for you and me but bad for everybody. Helmet laws are good for you and me but bad for everybody.

What's the logic I'm missing?

I am not authorized to speak for Jason, but many agree that harming one's-self, albeit stupid, should be legal, while stupidly harming others may be regulated. Drinking bleach hurts only yourself and is a personal choice. Feeding bleach to others is illegal.

Not wearing a helmet should be legal since the only likely victim is one's-self; driving while drunk OTOH could easily lead to the death of another person.

Obviously I coukld have — and in hindsight should have — prefaced the final sentence with "In that view." Sorry: I do not devote as much editing scrutiny to Infidel posts as I formerly devoted to journal submissions. (I could also have solved this "problem," I think, by simply omitting the paragraph break between the comments about bleach and helmets.)

 

[Jarhyn]

Calling somebody a rat is dehumanising.

Treating other human beings as if their health and life matters less than you spending 30 goddamn minutes with a bit of cloth on your face here and there and having a sniffle for a day once every few months or years is dehumanizing them.

The reality is that many people are advocating this kind of selfishness for the sick pleasure of watching chaos happen and watching people die, and the remainder are the pawns of such.

 

[Metaphor]

What metric is anyone using when they decide it is right and proper to force medical procedures on unconsenting adult group A, solely for the benefit of group B?

Who is "group B" in this context?

There isn't any real group B. The legislation is for everyone's benefit. The mandates would apply to me as much as anyone else. The difference is only that I did the responsible thing last spring, voluntarily.
Tom

Group B is everyone who wants to force vaccination on Group A. People in group A don't want the vaccine, so forcing it on them is not a benefit to them. You are forcing it on them for your benefit, not theirs.

 

[Metaphor]

The reality is that many people are advocating this kind of selfishness for the sick pleasure of watching chaos happen and watching people die, and the remainder are the pawns of such.

Your fantasias are not reality.

 

[ZiprHead]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

So, it's okay to dehumanise people who refuse to have a medical procedure done on their bodies? That's the morally right thing to do?

I shouldn't be so bothered by the dehumanisation, or rather I should be used to it. I'm talking to people who think 40% of the American population (Republicans) are morally bankrupt and openly say so.

Where did I dehumanise anyone?

Maybe not you specifically--but there are a number of posters who have called the unvaccinated 'plague rats'. Calling somebody a rat is dehumanising.

Humans can be plague rats.

 

[TomC]

Group B is everyone who wants to force vaccination on Group A.

But it isn't solely for their benefit.

Reaching herd immunity will hugely benefit everyone. Ease up on the health care system and staff. Improve the economy. Open up social events, both public and private. Etc Etc

There is no group B. There's just "us".
Tom

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Are you under the impression that Covid is in the same league with Bubonic Plague? Typhus? Polio? Small Pox? Spanish Flu?

 

[Jarhyn]

The reality is that many people are advocating this kind of selfishness for the sick pleasure of watching chaos happen and watching people die, and the remainder are the pawns of such.

Your fantasias are not reality.

No, my observations directly of people who did exactly this sort of spreading of misinformation for the joys of watching people be touched and be harmed by the resulting chaos caused by this malignant imposed ignorance make that a reality.

Unless you want to call me a liar and say I hallucinated through my 20's.

 

[Metaphor]

People have a right to not be vaccinated but they do not have a right to wander about outside of their personal property endangering the lives of others, including those who cannot be vaccinated or for whom vaccination might not be sufficient protection, such as transplant patients.

I am not going through this again. You are not going to convince me that forcing medical procedures on unconsenting adults is a good and proper thing. It is not. It is evil.

Allowing plague rats to walk around killing people is evil, no matter how much you think we should tolerate it.

Dehumanising millions that you cannot force medical procedures on is evil, no matter how casually the tolerant left does it.

You keep saying that yet you have yet to rationally explain why. Repetition does not make you more right through the repetition.

So, it's okay to dehumanise people who refuse to have a medical procedure done on their bodies? That's the morally right thing to do?

I shouldn't be so bothered by the dehumanisation, or rather I should be used to it. I'm talking to people who think 40% of the American population (Republicans) are morally bankrupt and openly say so.

Where did I dehumanise anyone?

Maybe not you specifically--but there are a number of posters who have called the unvaccinated 'plague rats'. Calling somebody a rat is dehumanising.

Humans can be plague rats.

Calling humans 'plague rats' is dehumanising. It is a textbook example of it.