What should consequences be for those that decline the vax?

[GG Allin]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Because we give a **** about those who remain unvaccinated because they are either not eligible or not candidates through no fault of their own.

It's not all about us.

the 1% of 1%. And how is being vaccinated helping them if you can still spread it?

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by GG Allin

If the vaccinated can still spread the virus, which I've been hearing they can, why do the vaccinated care about who's unvaccinated?

I have begun to care less. I wish they weren’t clogging up hospitals and forcing non-emergency hospital procedures to be postponed, but I’m not losing sleep over it. You can lead a horse to water etc….

[john70t]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Because we give a **** about those who remain unvaccinated because they are either not eligible or not candidates through no fault of their own.

It's not all about us.

Pink Floyd - Us and Them

If you are 'vaxxed' and protected and now secure henceforth, good for you.
The vax works. Congratulations.

That is where your rights end in regards to me.

[Rikao4]

well they seem to think it gives them power over other's..
they did as told..
so should we..
I got a corrective collar for my dog when he got uppity..
guess I need to watch out for that..

Rika

[manbridge 74]

Originally Posted by john70t

There should be consequences for medical fraud by health officials and practitioners: They should lose their license and pension.

There should be consequences for mass murder: Especially for Governors deliberately putting Covid patients into nursing homes.

There should be consequences for Media outlets spreading racist insinuations, promoting domestic terrorism, and spreading fraudulent medical information as proven fact instead of believed facts: Lose their FCC license.

I find your post and your other similar posts here to be excellent. Remember when Dreyfus ripped his gas mask off in Close Encounters? You remind me of that scene.

Keep it up….

[group911@aol.co]

So let’s talk about what the right means when it talks about “freedom.” Since the pandemic began, many conservatives have insisted that actions to limit the death toll — social distancing, wearing a mask and now getting vaccinated — should be matters of personal choice. Does that position make any sense?
Well, driving drunk is also a personal choice. But almost everyone understands that it’s a personal choice that endangers others; 97 percent of the public considers driving while impaired by alcohol a serious problem. Why don’t we have the same kind of unanimity on refusing to get vaccinated, a choice that helps perpetuate the pandemic and puts others at risk?
?
Continue reading the main story
True, many people doubt the science; the link between vaccine refusal and Covid deaths is every bit as real as the link between D.U.I. and traffic deaths, but is less obvious to the naked eye. But why are people on the right so receptive to misinformation on this subject, and so angry about efforts to set the record straight?
My answer is that when people on the right talk about “freedom” what they actually mean is closer to “defense of privilege” — specifically the right of certain people (generally white male Christians) to do whatever they want.
Not incidentally, if you go back to the roots of modern conservatism, you find people like Barry Goldwater defending the right of businesses to discriminate against Black Americans. In the name of freedom, of course. A lot, though not all, of the recent panic about “cancel culture” is about protecting the right of powerful men to mistreat women. And so on.
Once you understand that the rhetoric of freedom is actually about privilege, things that look on the surface like gross inconsistency and hypocrisy start to make sense.
Why, for example, are conservatives so insistent on the right of businesses to make their own decisions, free from regulation — but quick to stop them from denying service to customers who refuse to wear masks or show proof of vaccination? Why is the autonomy of local school districts a fundamental principle — unless they want to require masks or teach America’s racial history? It’s all about whose privilege is being protected.
Krugman

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by group911@aol.co

Why, for example, are conservatives so insistent on the right of businesses to make their own decisions, free from regulation — but quick to stop them from denying service to customers who refuse to wear masks or show proof of vaccination? Why is the autonomy of local school districts a fundamental principle — unless they want to require masks or teach America’s racial history?

It’s all about Big Government. In the cases in this article it’s Big Government conservatives trying to impose their will on the citizenry. It is the reason for acquiring power - so you can force others to submit to your will.

[john70t]

Originally Posted by group911@aol.co

My answer is that when people on the right talk about “freedom” what they actually mean is closer to “defense of privilege” — specifically the right of certain people (generally white male Christians) to do whatever they want.

Once you understand that the rhetoric of freedom is actually about privilege,

It’s all about whose privilege is being protected.
Krugman

These are the only Krugman blurbs anyone needs to read to understand..

I won't go further, other than note the obtuse when you read between his lines.
His hatred of the White Race is right there.

[wildthing]

Left to die if they catch COVID. That's population control.

[Rawknees'Turbo]

I don't think there should be mandated consequences for those refusing to be poked, and on the surface I likewise do not think it should be my responsibility to protect the unpoked from my poked self by wearing a mask in their presence, but if doing so lightens the burden that the unpoked will possibly place on the healthcare system and their family and friends possibly affected, then I'm okay with begrudgingly doing my mask part. It doesn't look like that will be an issue here in TexASS as I think the gov signed an executive order forbidding schools and businesses from requiring masks (not sure what I will do if some places I go to "strongly suggest" wearing them - will probably comply to keep the peace, as that shiit is of no significant inconvenience to me, although I do not like wearing them in public and doubt their effectiveness).

[Tobra]

In case you guys missed it, I am talking about the government mandating vaccinations. Businesses request you be vaccinated. It is kind of a big difference, and NONE of the conservatives are talking about the government telling businesses what to do. It is not that complicated, try and follow along


Glad I made it anonymous. Wow, we have some straight up fascists here.

Originally Posted by masraum

Nothing forced. Consequences are that they might get sick.

If you are concerned about getting sick, vaccinated or not, you can continue to distance and wear a mask.

Rational and reasonable is not on the menu.

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

IIRC the other poll was binary, yes / no.

I voted for mandatory there due to the confines of the options.

It did not allow for nuance like unvaccinated but not by choice.

I'm reluctant to agree with the imposition of punitive actions for those who are unable to avail themselves of the choice, but that was not what was asked.

Poll not exactly binary, but pretty much.

You are not all that reluctant to impose punitive measures. You are saying the government should mandate it, except for people who are unable to take the vaccine.

Who gets to decide who is unable?

What is next?

Originally Posted by javadog

This is America. There should be no consequence for failing to get the vaccine. It’s not the governments role to force such a flawed product onto the public.

If businesses choose to ostracize unvaccinated people, I hope that bites them firmly in the ass, just like it generally does when they take some idiotic, leftist point of view.

Should be, but we have government mandates right now.

If wishes were fishes, nobody ever goes hungry.

There will be consequences

Originally Posted by Rikao4

no shortage of drivers..
or Camp Cmdr.'s it seems..

Rika

GD terrifying

Originally Posted by rcooled

It's a good thing that there wasn't such a backlash against getting the polio or smallpox vaccines back in the day.

Neither of which were investigational drugs when given to millions.

Originally Posted by wdfifteen

+1
Also, Government entities should not be able to override business decisions regarding the health and safety of customers and employees.

The government has done this since before you were born, and you are old.

Originally Posted by stevej37

I would want a little more cushioning for my behind.

Would not trouble you for long

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Right, I read that to.

Not sure it really tells us anything we could consider hard data.

So the same as the COVID 19 numbers.

Originally Posted by GG Allin

If the vaccinated can still spread the virus, which I've been hearing they can, why do the vaccinated care about who's unvaccinated?

What about all the people who actually had Covid? Why no wide spread news about secondary infections?

Seems to me, natural antibodies is the way to go.

Of course, but if rational approach was the game, we would have tested for antibodies prior to the jab, or at the very least not given it to people who already were proven cases.


Sort of stupid the way we did it, really stupid.

[manbridge 74]

I like the idea of privilege. It speaks to ones rights. It’s my privilege to stay healthy and avoid putting unapproved chemicals into my body for something that’s 99% recoverable. No government can take that privilege away...

It’s another’s privilege to get the vax. Or stay inside and whine about others exercising their own privilege.

Life goes on...

[stomachmonkey]

Originally Posted by Tobra

Who gets to decide who is unable?

I'm perfectly comfortable with who is doing it now, Doctors.

Unless you are intimating those in your profession are not to be trusted as a whole.

So the same as the COVID 19 numbers.

No not at all. That disclaimer read worse than disclaimers on prescription drug ads.

There is one number we really can't ignore, that 600,000 more Americans than should have, died, during a pandemic, with no other reason to support 600,000 more deaths than should have been besides a global pandemic.

My cat could work out that math.

Do I give a flying **** if someone's informed decision ends in a dirt nap for them? No, I don't. We tried to talk to them. They made their choice. Not gonna lose a wink of sleep.

Does leaning towards mandatory vaccinations make me a Fascist? We can argue that all day long and never see eye to eye and I don't give a flying **** about that either.

Who you should be asking is the families of those 600,000 and those still to come. I think their opinion has more merit than ours.

[upsscott]

Originally Posted by stomachmonkey

Abide by the decisions of businesses, institutions, who have elected to impose restrictions on access to or use of services.

This and take a greater risk of dying from Covid.

[group911@aol.co]

Really? What cave are you in? https://www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-desantis-cruise-ship-lawsuit-20210802-2thqqae42vcjvcsyp7ddxvklqu-story.html

Originally Posted by Tobra

In case you guys missed it, I am talking about the government mandating vaccinations. Businesses request you be vaccinated. It is kind of a big difference, and NONE of the conservatives are talking about the government telling businesses what to do. It is not that complicated, try and follow along


Glad I made it anonymous. Wow, we have some straight up fascists here.



Rational and reasonable is not on the menu.

Poll not exactly binary, but pretty much.

You are not all that reluctant to impose punitive measures. You are saying the government should mandate it, except for people who are unable to take the vaccine.

Who gets to decide who is unable?

What is next?



Should be, but we have government mandates right now.

If wishes were fishes, nobody ever goes hungry.

There will be consequences



GD terrifying


Neither of which were investigational drugs when given to millions.



The government has done this since before you were born, and you are old.


Would not trouble you for long

So the same as the COVID 19 numbers.



Of course, but if rational approach was the game, we would have tested for antibodies prior to the jab, or at the very least not given it to people who already were proven cases.


Sort of stupid the way we did it, really stupid.

[Bill Douglas]

I say old chap, should horse whip the blighters.

[island911]

Wow, a lot of psychos really want to come down hard on "Blacks" and "Hispanics"

Sounds racist too me.

[island911]

Tobra's next topics...

What should consequences be for those who own guns?

What should consequences be for those who are pro procreation?

What should consequences be for those who think for themselves? -that one really pisses off the Karens.

[red 928]

Originally Posted by Arizona_928

Exactly. Same with smoking or drinking. One accepts the consequences. Freedom to live one's life how they want to.

the freedom to pay their own medical bills

[wdfifteen]

Originally Posted by Tobra

In case you guys missed it, I am talking about the government mandating vaccinations. Businesses request you be vaccinated. It is kind of a big difference, and NONE of the conservatives are talking about the government telling businesses what to do. It is not that complicated, try and follow along

Technically, no, not what to do. But DeSantis in Florida has told schools, counties, municipalities, and businesses what they may NOT do, which amounts to the same thing.