Crazy4u
Enlightened
- Sep 29, 2021
- 1,318
Interesting thread OP. I understand where you are coming from.
I used to consider myself democrat. I changed my political stance to libertarian after covid mandates. I was disgusted by the inconsistent decisions and discrimination between small business owners and big retail establishments. I saw people around me get impacted by the poor lockdown decisions.
I felt less suicidal after the mask mandate was lifted. The cloth masks don't protect anyone from covid but were required for 2 years.
I used to consider myself democrat. I changed my political stance to libertarian after covid mandates. I was disgusted by the inconsistent decisions and discrimination between small business owners and big retail establishments. I saw people around me get impacted by the poor lockdown decisions.
I felt less suicidal after the mask mandate was lifted. The cloth masks don't protect anyone from covid but were required for 2 years.
Vaccinated people can still catch and transmit the virus...
FWIW, you are not likely to die of covid, even if you get it, even if you are very elderly, even if you are obese, even if you are immune compromised, even if you are unvaccinated, even if you are all of the above. Most people who get the disease survive. This is true even for the most vulnerable of subgroups.
You are probably going to be OK.
Yes but the rates at which they catch and transmit the virus are reduced.
I don't know where you're from (the US I guess?) but where I'm from, the statistics say otherwise. Our government publish on its website daily new cases and the vast majority (90%+) are double/triple-vaxxed. It's been like that for months now.
Shu
As above, So Below.
- Jan 21, 2022
- 2,487
No. Lol. You still transmit the virus just the same.
People have become so programmed and brainwashed.
Real talk. They have a good way of blowing things out of proportion and making it seem scarier than it is... also I doctor admit to me that they will diagnose any kind of respiratory issues as covid. So many people died from other causes but they claim it was covid.
Last edited:
Not according to the Harvard School of Public Health:
Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 cases clear more quickly, less likely to spread infection over time
People who are vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 but get breakthrough infections may be less likely to spread the virus because they shed it for a shorter period than unvaccinated people who are infected, …
Shu
As above, So Below.
- Jan 21, 2022
- 2,487
According to the Harvard School of Public Health vaccination reduces rates of transmission:
Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 cases clear more quickly, less likely to spread infection over time
People who are vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 but get breakthrough infections may be less likely to spread the virus because they shed it for a shorter period than unvaccinated people who are infected, …
Life_and_Death
Do what's best for you 🕯️ Right now, I'm stressed
- Jul 1, 2020
- 6,892
Please do not speak for me because I could die from it. Covid hurts the respiratory system and I have really bad respiratory problems. How am I suppose to live when I can't breath.
Obvious astroturfing. A brand new user posting a bunch of political BS on a suicide forum? Lol
Don't even dignify anti-vaxxers with a response. You can't change their minds because they've already decided what to believe. They're not interested in discussion.
Don't even dignify anti-vaxxers with a response. You can't change their minds because they've already decided what to believe. They're not interested in discussion.
Last edited:
Is this study only about Alpha and Delta variants or does it also include Omicron/BA.2 (dominant variants) ?According to the Harvard School of Public Health vaccination reduces rates of transmission:
Breakthrough SARS-CoV-2 cases clear more quickly, less likely to spread infection over time
People who are vaccinated for SARS-CoV-2 but get breakthrough infections may be less likely to spread the virus because they shed it for a shorter period than unvaccinated people who are infected, …www.hsph.harvard.edu
It says at the end of the article "(...)the authors caution that it was conducted in predominantly young, male, and healthy participants, and is therefore not representative of the general population. Further research in other populations is needed."
so I'm not sure how conclusive this study is...
I just checked today's new cases on our health ministry website :
2x/3x vaxxed = 3082
unvaxxed = 167
This vaccine just isn't as effective as some would have hoped.
Personally I'm not anti-vax, I'm just skeptical about this particular vaccine's efficacy... I would say that I'm more "anti-mandate".
Anyway, I really don't want to argue, so let's leave it at that. Let's agree to disagree.
Last edited:
I disagree. Surely the way to truly show respect for the plight of the oppressed is to argue in favor of the right to dissent, which is after all my whole point.
I assure you my crisis is real. My nightmares are real.
I am not an anti-vaxxer. I took the vaccine, as is clearly stated in my original post. I believe the vaccine is safe and effective. This is big part of why I have no fear of the disease. It is entirely correct to try and persuade people to take the vaccine VOLUNTARILY by convincing them that it is beneficial to do so. My objections are about the mandates and the coercion. This is ultimately about the shock of realizing that my community does not truly believe in the right of people to have dissenting beliefs.
Additionally, I need to make the important point that the very reason I am posting on this forum is because I feel I cannot discuss this openly with anyone in my real life, including my wife. Because everyone, literally everyone, is immediately disparaging if I raise this issue.
I feel utterly alone here, and am truly greatful for this forum as a place to talk about this, even if 90% of the response comments are unsportive. The few supportive comments I have gotten here really do mean the world to me. It shows me that not everyone in the world is a heretic-hunter and I am not totally alone.
Last edited:
An analogy to consider is let's say you have a large boat with 1000 people on it and the ship's captain says there is a mandate against starting fires on any part of the boat, but some people say we sould be able to start fires on our part of the boat, but you don't have to start fires on your part of the boat, that doesn't make sense, since the person starting a fire on one part of the boat can cause someone to die on another part of the boat. For covid what one person decides to do affects whether other people live or die- we're all in this same boat together- so that's why mandates make sense in this situuation. Now when there should or should not be mandates, considering the whole situation, is a judgement call- but to say that there should be no mandates when we are all in this boat together does not make sense.
"Let's agree to disagree" in this context, after you posted several points, seems to really mean "let me have the final word on these points".
It's not shocking when one person's decision to not pull together with the whole team can cause other people to die- it's not just a matter of a different point of view, but other people's lives do get affected.
I don't see how your fire analogy applies to the current situation. Vaccine mandates are not the end-all be-all, especially when those vaccines didn't prove to be as effective as we would have hoped for. Again, where I'm from, it's mostly vaccinated people who infect other vaccinated people. This was especially true during the holidays ; only vaxxed people could gather, but there was still a huge surge in cases (10,000+ everyday, 90% vaxxed).
I'm not trying to have "the last word", sorry if it came off that way. I'm just exhausted and don't have much energy to debate. And I don't want to hijack this thread either. I shouldn't have posted.
Last edited:
This is exactly the argument for burning witches: we must burn the witches because their beliefs and practices endanger the community.
If I worship Hecate and the majority think that endangers the community because their religion says it's consorting with the Devil, then does the community have the right to burn me? How is this not the 17th century?
If the only reason you are against witch burning is because you think witches aren't real, what are you going to do to your neighbors on the day you wake up and realize they are actually practicing real magic?
Last edited:
The virus is contagious and real. Hundreds of years ago people isolated due to the black plague and though there were ups and downs in cases and deaths over a number of years the efforts at quarantining and isolation were essential to ending the black plague. Saying that a person should get a vaccine which does not endanger them to prevent spreading disease to others is completely different. Taking a vaccine that does not harm a person is in no way analogous to burning a person alive- this analogy is faulty in every way.
It would depend on where you are talking about- the country that you are from is very relevant this this, since some vaccines have been much more effective than others. Moderena and Pfizer are the most effective vaccines and are available to all in the U.S. but with only 65% fully vaccinated the U.S. is still struggling. China is 89% vaccinated with a much less effective vaccine. It is not the per cent vaccinated but also which vaccines were used that are relevant.
Last edited:
You believe the vaccine is (relatively) harmless, for that matter so do I. That is not relevant. Many of the people being forced to take it truly believe it is very harmful, do we have the right do this to them for the sake of our safety? I am sorry, but I don't think so.
And even if the vaccine is harmless, clearly many of the other mandates were not. Lockdowns and business closures cost lives, it is not moral to sacrifice some people's lives to save others.
And I really don't think you're ready for the big spoiler at the end of the thread: IT'S. NOT. AN. ANALOGY.
85% of the population is considered adequately vaccinated. Most people received the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines.
Last edited:
Truthfully I think you would want to review the definition of analogy- one good definition I have found is- "a comparison of two otherwise unlike things based on resemblance of a particular aspect" - that's exactly what you did- or attempted to do.
Of course is you have the choice to risk ten lives or a thousand the more moral choice, if the people are randomly selected, is to risk the smaller number of lives.
If you would want to say which country this is I could research and comment on this further, then I could check further into the vaccinate vs non-vaccinated statistics. Anecdotally doctors and nurses in the U.S say most of the people with seveer cases/deaths are not vaccinated, but these statistics are not bei8ng reported in the U.S. as a whole, as far as I can tell, and this is a shame- the CDC should be doing a much better job of collecting and reporting this data, though maybe they can't due to the health care privacy of HIPPA.
Last edited:
A quick look at the site shows 90% have had one dose, 83% have had two doses, but only 51% have had three doses- two doses plus a booster. so this is an issue- two doses plus a booster is what is really needed to be fully vaccinated at this stage, the boosters have been available for a long time now.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, a lot of people (especially young adults) are reluctant to get the booster shot.
Well, I suppose there were fewer witches than Christians in Salem. So, better safe than sorry, light 'em up....
I also suppose I'll concede the problems are analogous (although wasn't your point that they aren't?)
The point I was trying to make with "not an analogy" is that the sanctity of heretics isn't some minor illustration for the purposes of clarification or rhetorical grandstanding. It is the main issue. The survival of humanity depends on how we choose to treat heretics. Covid is utterly insignificant compared to that.
No, I was not saying to cause deliberate harm to anyone, I am saying that it's better to risk a much smaller number of lives than a much larger number of lives, assuming the lives are chosen randomly. So there are a very small number of people who are adversely affected by the vaccines compared to a much larger number of people who are helped by the vaccines. Of course there are people with certain medical conditions who should not take the vaccines. And no one is saying to hold people down and force the vaccines into their arms. but some mandates, such as for doctors and nurses, clearly have much higher reward than risk. Other mandates, such as in the military where so many people live in such close proximity, also make sense. It's a judgement call for other cases- in my opinion for police officers there should not be mandates, but it's a judgement call.
We do not agree on this- you attempted to make an analogy here but it was not a good or effective analogy.
Literally not true. But I am glad that you agree with me that this position is immoral. (Another point of agreement!)
As for other mandates being a 'judgement call', well, yes, that's true. My concern is that requiring 6 year olds to wear masks in first grade classrooms showed remarkably poor judgement on the part of the relevant authorities. But, I suppose that's what I hope the upcoming election, which triggered the OP, will be about.
Of course, if the majority votes to continue this practice, to keep themselves safe, mind you, well then all I can say is... honestly, I cannot think of a way to end this sentence. But, I suppose I am at least on the right website.
Feeding Pigeons
Warlock
- Aug 5, 2021
- 776
The United States Postal Service isn't required to take the vaccine. They touch and handle packages that literally go everywhere in the country. Fuck off with this nonsense already.
Well over time it became clear that touching things that other people touch is an extremely unlikely route of transmission, so that's why attempts to deal with this concern have largely gone away (though not completely- there are still a lot of dumb rules based on touych because it's very difficult to get the institutions for 3200 million plus people to keep changing direction as we learn more about the virus). The surface that is touched is also a factor- cardboard and paper are even less likely routes of transmission. But really touch overall is so unlikely as a means of transmission.
Last edited:
