To add to this: Never forget, that what we call society is made up of individuals. If we’re to sacrifice the individual for the ‘greater good’ we’re probably going down the wrong path.
History has many examples of where this kind of thinking can end up.
2 Likes
yes…
but my intention was to convey that people “feel free” to do a lot of things. and there may be consequences.
for example rapists think they can just assault people, the state takes their freedom away completely.
A citizen of a country.
We have decided as a society that we can place individual freedom and liberty in a scale and value whose freedom is valued higher. (police and courts do this every day.)
That happens on a scale from incarceration to unable to partake in certain events.
(for example people involved in football violence may not loose their freedom via imprisonment, but may loose some freedom in the sense that they are not allowed to go to football matches.)
your mind went into overdrive from “free to refuse vaccine and vaccine passport, but cannot expect to be able to travel (and potentially commute disease) across borders.”
or “Potentially will be denied from being in an enclosed space (e.g. bus or taxi)”
to locking a person up.
If you accept that there are people out there who are immune compromised, - e.g. your young healthy covid sniffle will actually be fatal to them.
Then surely you also must understand that in failing to prevent yourself getting said sniffle, that you create a situation where it is too dangerous to leave their house for another.
Meaning that spreading false information and scare stories about the vaccine actually makes people less likely to accept a vaccine, and therefore causes the world to be a “less safe” place for a proportion of the population… such that they are restricted from taking part in it.
collectively we have decided that we don’t want to live in a society where it is dangerous to leave the house (hence why we incarcerate murderers)
So… I say to you…
I agree. “Freedom of the individual” is meaningless if it includes the freedom of the individual to rob other individuals of equal freedoms.
"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins."
– often attributed to US Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., but the quote is actually from the legal scholar Zechariah Chafee, and much later cited by the Supreme Court.
Mandatory vaccination has a long history in the U.S.: George Washington ordered mandatory vaccination against smallpox in 1775, 1776, and 1777 [1] [2]. He also ordered strict quarantine measures. Some historians think the U.S. couldn’t have gained independence as early as it did without mandatory vaccination.
[1] Henderson, Donald (2009). Smallpox: The Death of a Disease. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1-5910-2722-5
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5463674/
Just because there’s a precedence, doesn’t mean it was ever right or that we should continue to operate that way.
Ah okay, so you are comparing people who have commited a crime to people who are not willing to get vaccinated? Nice.
Am I misunderstanding you? You clearly mentioned yourself that you would have no problem taking some people the freedom to go out of their house away just because they don’t want to be vaccinated:
1 Like
Science is a methodology. Science cannot decree that vaccines are good or bad. Science is only able to produce data. One’s interpretation of that data is subjective (biased), naturally, simply by human nature. Ascribing good or bad is the human part.
Moreover, when science can answer a question, it’s a very specific one and it comes in the form of a hard proof, that’s reproducible, like a chemical reaction–I work with chemists. In fact, there are very few hard sciences. Cosmology, climatology, anthropology are all pseudo-sciences, despite what you’ve been told.
What we seem to have instead lately is a lot of scientism. Almost like a new religion. People ought to be wary of this.
2 Likes
I am saying criminals are a danger to society,
anti-vaxers are a danger to society.
how you deal with that, and the degree of freedom that may or may not be afforded to you, isn’t up to me.
OK, then you surely agree that (for example) the lateral flow tests etc work?!
They are literally based on a chemical reaction, easy repeatable science…
either Antigens are present, react with the test agent, and the line turns pink. Or they are not present and only control line turns pink!
Earlier in the thread you were arguing against it’s use, but now repeatable chemical reactions are “hard proof”?
FFS man! get your story straight!
1, We sacrifice the individual for the greater goo ALL THE DAMNED TIME. there are currently ~2.8 million people incarcerated in the USA. that’s 2.8 million individuals whose freedom has been sacrificed for a greater good!
2, Care to cite any? or is this just one of those things where we’re meant to think of Nazis?!
How is someone who is anti-vaccine a danger to society? If you take the vaccine and I do not how am I a danger to you? the only one at risk of getting the so-called virus is me correct? And possibly those that also do not wish to take the vaccine?
But we have the freedom to make that choice for ourselves. Hasn’t the mantra of the left always been it’s my body my choice? Or does that only apply when you want it to apply when it agrees with your own agenda?
So what do you care, you and all those that will take and/or took the vaccine that think they are safe now? Where is the threat to you? Aren’t you protected now?
Does your vaccine not work if I do not take it as well? Just like does your mask not work if I do not wear a mask? Because if that’s the case then your vaccine will never work because I’ll never take it and your mask will never work because I will never wear one. Deal with it.
As a general point about vaccines,
there are people in the general society who (for medical reasons) cannot be vaccinated.
and for example if you decide that you are young and can handle the measles.
That doesn’t mean that the person sitting next to you can.
So for example my friend who is allergic to eggs, cannot take the MMR vaccine as it contains egg protein because it is cultured in eggs…
measles is most dangerous before 5 and after 20… so if you are antivax, and don’t vaccinate your kids. when your 10 year old gets measles they will (likely?) be fine.
however when my friends contracts measure from your unvaccinated crotch fruit they will likely not be fine.
complications include brain swelling, deafness and death.
So here is the question.
Where does your right to potentially carry diseases fatal to others end, and other peoples right not to contract potentially fatal diseases begin?
Or should those who are vulnerable to loose their freedom, (have to live in isolation because there are people out there choosing to not be vaccinated? making the world too dangerous for them.)
The same is true with Covid, vaccines, they are not 100% effective against stopping spread (although so far have been proven to be 100% effective against causing serious infection - where the “seriously infected” are known to have more viral load and be greater spreaders.
so again there are people out there with compromised immune systems. so (not seriously ill) for you is fatal for them…
and again, we come back to the question, where does your freedom to not protect yourself, and therefore increase the likelihood that you will contract, carry and transmit a disease potentially fatal to other end?
You basically compare apple to oranges. The first measles vaccines appeared 60 years ago, the current used combi vaccine against MPR was introduced about 25 years ago. They are tested very well. They don’t have that bad side effects and are only inoculated two times in a lifetime.
I’m not the one comparing apples to Oranges…
Lunardigs is the one who brought in the MMR vaccines by talking about vaccines with egg proteins!
https://forums.puri.sm/t/another-closed-vaccine-thread/12969/7
(notice how that’s a separate thread now!)
you’re going to need to help me out here…
Are you?
Against taking vaccines (in gneraly)
Against taking the vaccines until more people have taken it (and how many years does it have to be?!)
Against having a vaccine card for international travel.
Against having to show private businesses that you’ve been vaccinated.
Against being recorded as having been vaccinated.
for the record, I can understand the arguments for being against all of these things in varying amounts. but, as I’ve said, if I choose to do something then I have to accept the consequences of that.
for example if I’m against showing that I’ve been vaccinated to private businesses.
I might be driving instead of taking the bus.
I might be going to the cinema that doesn’t ask instead of the one that does.
I might not be able to go out to the movies at all…
1 Like
Here in the US, we have HIPPA laws. These laws protect your medical information and from others who might want to steal your medical information. Those laws are actually enforced effectively here in the US.
I don’t plan to get any covid vaccines until after my 70th birthday or unless my health starts failing. I want to catch it, to get over it (or die trying), and to move on with my life. If anyone asks about any of my private medical information (like whether or not I’ve been vaccinated), I’ll refuse to discuss my medical information and will cite the HIPPA laws.
I have received (pre-covid) training at work that says that an employee’s medical business is private and that the employee is not required to share medical information with their employer. You just have to stand-up for your rights. The culture may have changed. But in most cases the laws have not changed.
3 Likes
I am curious to see how HIPPA comes into play with the immunization passport for state to state travel (if such a thing gets implemented). Internationally I don’t think citing hippa would do much other than annoy the person enforcing their laws and processes.
If traveling to Europe and they have a law requiring X it doesn’t matter if that violates US law since you’re traveling to Europe not the US.
There’s always the option of not traveling to places that you don’t want to comply with the laws of.
As far as the technology itself, I think it could be done in a responsible and privacy respecting way; I doubt that’s the path that will be headed down at first, and I do expect an analog option will continue to be available for the foreseeable future as there are still plenty of people that travel without bringing their phone but rather get a temporary phone for the region they’re visiting. I also expect that analog option will be slower to process and be treated as a point of warning; maybe not enough to stop you, but a point in that direction.
I asked several times to stay on the narrow topic of passports, because discussing vaccines resulted in flames a couple times before, yet here we have general vaccine discussion again. I’m afraid we have to try again in a few months, and I’m closing this thread for this reason.
2 Likes