When you are creatively bankrupt, and you want to make money off the internet, what do you do? Make a dating site, the most hackneyed idea of the modern age. The crackpots have created a dating site called “Unjected,” which is exclusively for people who haven’t been vaccinated. Imagine: in addition to getting a venereal disease, you could get measles, polio, covid, smallpox, or ebola from a date! You can trust your partner to be ignorant, deluded, and uninterested in hygiene or good health. If you’re really lucky, maybe you can go on a date with RFK jr!
The only reason they give for wanting to avoid vaccinated people is their slogan, unvaxxed are hotter
, a subjective opinion that can have no evidence to back it up. Unless, that is, they mean that the unvaxxed are more likely to run a fever.
I’m not interested in dating ever again, but if I were, education and intelligence would be my major criteria for a partner, and this is a site that excludes that category.
Would his wife, Cheryl Hines, be coming along as a chaperone?
This is actually a really great idea.
It means that the blatantly stupid and crazy people now have a flashing red neon sign on their foreheads that says, “Danger, stay away”.
Don’t walk away, run.
A way to filter out the plague rats from your orbit. We the vaxxed get our DNA altered the easier and much safer way thank you very much nutcases. We force our immune systems to do their own research on the stuff that may make you sicker or kill you.
I wonder what the unjected think of tetany or preventable cancers. Higher chances of dementia. Iron lungs. Blissfully unaware.
Shouldn’t that read “the uninjected?”
So, they plan on narrowing the gene pool further and transmitted deadly diseases to one another. What could go wrong?
Sounds like a good way to eliminate some not-so-smart people from the gene pool.
Since ha has had 3 marriages and over 40 affairs, which he brags about, the potential “chaperones” would constitute a crowd. As well as not actually being able to stop him, he even propositions women at his phony “Children’s Health Defense” “nonprofit” that helped to make him so wealthy.
https://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/3111886/rfk-jr-three-women-alleged-affairs/
https://ew.com/biggest-bombshells-from-new-rfk-jr-book-11950880
stuffin @4
Problem is their recklessness will make the vaccinated sicker. Vaccines vary in effectiveness. Much of the benefit comes from herd immunity.
The more measles becomes prevalent, the higher the chance a vaccinated person contracts the virus and becomes sick. Vaccination however long ago will keep them maybe from getting super ill. Has a vaccinated person ever died from measles? Perhaps not:
https://www.today.com/health/disease/mmr-vaccine-measles-deaths-rcna200097
They can at least spread it in some cases:
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/childhood-vaccines/although-it-s-uncommon-vaccinated-people-can-spread-measles-study-finds
I agree with other commenters that said:
I hope it succeeds wildly. That may help relieve our decaying society of some absolutely destructive imbeciles!
It’s a movie trailer. I’m pretty sure it’s a parody of unvaxxed dating sites. Although in the current political climate it’s hard to tell.
Addendum. Encourage them to get guns and tell them holsters are for sissies. As they stick their magnum 44s inside their belts we can look forward to the gene pool getting improved.
Not exactly sure what’s getting weeded out in the gene pool of the ignorant and gullible, by unjected unfortunately dying due to preventable illnesses. Getting close to eugenics rhetoric there…
They do miss out on exploiting the neat evolutionary trick which gives our immune systems the ability to make up for the vastly different generation times between microbes and us known as adaptive immunity. Vaccines help weed out immunocyte genetic variants that aren’t quite matched to injected antigens and the surviving populations in B cells get more finely tuned by matching their antibody genes to potential pathogens. Pathogens can do the same thing as vaccines but at much greater cost in illness, suffering, and potential death.
In some cases measles can clean the slate on immune memory. Not a good place to be. Amnesia.
Stuff like SARS-CoV-2 seems to be awakening dormant viruses previously held at bay.
https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-can-wake-dormant-viruses-body-large-study-confirms
@birgerjohansson, # 10: Pretty sure their gene pool has been pissed in.
christoph, easy enough to check. So I just did.
I see it’s both a site (apps for Android and for Apple) and a prospective promotional movie.
They are crowdfunding it: Goal $100,000 USD, Raised $1,887 USD
(https://www.givesendgo.com/unjected)
Quite niche, of course.
—
I pity the fools (heh) who use/used it, but:
https://www.theverge.com/2022/7/25/23277788/unjected-anti-vax-dating-debug-mode-data-covid
@7 – Hemidactylus
According to your linked articles I am not too concerned.
-Measles infections after vaccination are rare, and there are no documented cases of healthy, fully vaccinated people dying from the virus.
-Breakthrough infections are very rare but do happen — usually because the person did not develop an immune response after vaccination (rare in healthy people) or their immunity waned over time.
-Measles transmissions from vaccinated cases, although relatively uncommon, must be considered in public health investigations, as such transmissions can contribute to outbreaks.
-The most common symptoms among the 19 transmitters with symptom information were rash (16 people), fever (11) and cough (11). Most vaccinated people who spread measles experienced milder symptoms and a shorter illness than those who weren’t vaccinated. Most often, cough, breathing, or talking likely caused measles to spread.
I’m guessing these last statements means transmission from infected vaccinated people is to unvaccinated people (causing the potential outbreak).
Fucking plague rats. Imagine claiming to be worried about a tyrannical government that will hunt you down while at the same time putting yourself into a data base that will last forever? When this data base is leaked, and it inevitably will be, it will be a great way to eliminate an awful lot of plague rats from a lot of private lives and public places. You signed up here voluntarily? You don;t get to be served/employed/treated/whatever here.
AND a great list of people to be first into the quarantine gulags when a real plague, again inevitably, comes along.
A sane society would take all these people and force vaccinate them against the everything right now so as to protect the rest of us. Then any disease caused by them in the past would be investigated , they would be charged with murder or attempted murder for starters and we could work out the rest of the list later. But that’s too much to hope for.
These irresponsible swine are the worst. More so than Magats or Nazis or anyone else. Simply because theirs is a body count that is so easy to tabulate and verify. They’ll be extra hot after I brand ’em with their vaccine certificates right on their antivax foreheads. In Minecraft or a sane society.
That is equivalent to claiming ‘A sane society must be coercive so as to protect the rest of us.’, which is, um, adjacent to certain authoritarian values.
christoph @12: Remember last summer when RFK Jr posted pictures and videos of himself swimming in a sewage-contaminated stream with his grandchildren?
They are obsessed and delusional. Pure blood and pure semen, not that they have any way of telling either apart from a sample from someone who has been vaccinated.
@ John Morales, # 13: Thanks for clarifying. Makes me happy that I’m too old for dating.
@ microraptor, # 17. Yep, I remember that. And yet a lot of MAGA types still think he’s a good choice for his job at HHS.
@15: Bodily autonomy — which includes consent and refusal of medical intervention — is an important value. You may be aware of a certain other hot button issue that it applies to. We don’t get to invoke or ignore such values based on whether we agree with the consequences for particular cases.
@ 21
Let me put it another way:
Taking away a woman’s reproductive rights or a trans person’s access to gender-affirming care is BAD.
Forcing people to take a vaccine to protect the population from life threatening diseases is GOOD.
What’s that? Hypocrisy? Double-standards? Authoritarian?
I really don’t give a fuck.
Akira @#21
I’d say it’s balancing the rights of the individual against the rights of the community they live in, and I come down on ‘vaccinate or you don’t get the right to interact freely with your community.’
Ach, Akira @#22
@22. Akira MacKenzie : Yup. Spot on.
Social contract. We live in a society and we agree to not jeopardise others and live by certain reasonable rules like, among others, don’t threaten other peoples lives by being fucking douchebag reality / science deniers.
If someone poses a threat to the rest of us by choosing so poorly that their choice puts the lives of amy other people in danger needlessly then, well, we stop them doing that.
Your freedom to swing your fist in the air / choose to spread virii and other pathogens end at my nose / body.
if your behaviour puts the lives of others in society at risk especially without their consent, well, NO, you do NOT get to get away with that.
Oh and two words here :
Typhoid Mary.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Mallon
You don’t get the freedom to choose which side or the middle of the road you drive on or to be mentally impaired or unlicensed at the wheel of vehicles. You shouldNOT get the choice to ignore epidemiological reality and spead potentially fatal diseases to ohsr who did not choose to risk death by contact with willfully ignorant reality deniers.
PS. I’d give them a choice – get vaccinated or get out and don’t coem back unless you do choose toget vaccinated.
Don’t want the vaccine? Then then you don’t get to live here – find somehwere else to go. That simple.
Exile as an option – voluntary or compulsory – does seem under rated these days. Maybe the ancient Athenians were on to something there?..
I’d even extend that to science deniers and thsoe that lad misinfo / disinfo campaigns generally ideally.
Also, yeah, I’m tired now & yeah, hit submit instead of preview again. Hope y’alll get the gist anyhow.
Being part of a society – and looked after by that – means you don;t always get to be a totally selfish douche who ignores the intrests of everyone else in society and causes them harm or risk of that. Ethics #101 I’d have thought.
@ ^ Fix : lad = spread.
Those that spread misinfo / disinfo knowingly and run campaigns doing such to advance their own intrests at everyone else’s expense and risk.
Yes, denyng reality and lying about it should b considered a crime at leats in some contexts where doing so leads to serious harm and risk of that to everyone else. .
@22 et al: I was certainly in favour of the kind of vaccine mandates implemented during covid — health care, certain other workplaces, etc. And I’d make a point of avoiding the unvaxxed, and maybe tell them why — social penalties are also appropriate. But coerced medical treatment? That’s a bridge too far.
stevewatson @29: Maybe I’m missing something, but how are vaccine mandates (even if only for certain people) not coerced medical treatment? (and absolutely justified coerced treatment, IMO).
Rob, there are examples of people quitting their jobs or being sacked for not vaccinating during the hot phase of COVID.
So that is in the category of pressured, but not coerced.
e.g. https://www.npr.org/2021/10/24/1047947268/covid-vaccine-workers-quitting-getting-fired-mandates
That’s indeed mandated, but not forced. Right?
Forcing would mean something like tying them down and jabbing them against their will.
(Is that what you were missing?)
John, ‘forced’ (in the physical sense of tying down, etc) is not the same as ‘coerced’.
“I will fire you unless you do X” is not forcing by your definition, but it certainly is coercion.
Semantics are my playground, Rob, and I did not provide an idiosyncratic definition.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion
One can argue that not all coercion is forcing, but surely all forcing is coercion. Categories.
Right? Physical forcing (vis absoluta) and coercive forcing (vis compulsiva) are both forcing, but what what I quoted @16 is clearly the former.
….and I unfortunately used “coerced”. OK, let’s not get tied up in arguments over definitions: I am in favour of enforcing vaccination through social and employment (including for this purpose, school attendance) penalties, against actually imprisoning people or physically restraining them to administer the shot.
Looks like others have said what I wanted to say to defend my 15 pretty adequately. Ta guys, partic Akira, as usual. I’d force, tie down, whatever, all anti vaxxers. To equate this to forced abortion or eugenics (not here, but seen it by anti-vaxxers) is contemptibly idiotic, the false equivalence does not need explaining.
@stevewatson in particular: When your loved one dies of a preventable plague talk to me then. Or go look at a video of a dying 2 month old whooping cough victim. When that’s your kid, bleat about ‘forced medical interventions’ then. Too emotional, how dare I? Stevor beat me to it, but Typhoid Mary was a literal asymptomatic carrier who refused to get treated. Killed an obvious and countable bunch of people who would otherwise be alive and well. The stereo-type comes from an actual thing that happened. Body. Count. In the millions for COVID, and that was/is the training wheels version of what is inevitably coming.
I feel similarly as I do to anti abortion protestors outside clinics
Protestor: ‘But my freedom of speech is being infringed’
Judge: ‘Yeah dude, that’s what happens when you harass vulnerable young women on what might well be the worst day of their life. Fucking deal with it. Next!’
I lean toward heavy handedness when it comes to vaccine policy. Measles outbreaks are getting ridiculous and at some point can’t we say parents who refuse to vaccinate their own kids are negligent and endangering their lives? Shouldn’t someone step in to protect the kids from parental ignorance?
COVID was pretty bad for older people, but let’s say we get a future influenza, coronavirus, or other pandemic where the pathogen has a 30-50%+ kill rate. There’s a decently effective vaccine developed yet people are spreading lies and refusing to get vaccinated. Should they be forcefully coerced violating their precious rights and body fluids?
@37 Hemidactylus Why wait? They should be forced right now! Because right now they are being wilful petri dishes for pathogens that are mutating, as opposed to dying, as we speak. They are walking death labs. IMO we were lucky that COVID mostly got more transmissible instead of more deadly, No thanks to the religious and the stupid who flouted crowd mandates. First to get the tie down and blow dart treatment for mine.
@36. indianajones : “Protestor: ‘But my freedom of speech is being infringed’
Judge: ‘Yeah dude, that’s what happens when you harass vulnerable young women on what might well be the worst day of their life. Fucking deal with it. Next!’”
Me to the anti-choice protestors: Your freedom to speech is NOT bein infringed – your NOT-a-right to harass and attack others is being prevented. Speak all you like but elsewhere NOT where you are causing problems for others who have their right to peace, security and respect. Oh and stop lying and bullying others.
Also note you have the right to bodily autonomy, everyone does. You get to decide for yourself for your body but you do NOT get to control someone else’s body. What’s so hard to understand about that?
On that bodily autonomy question regarding anti-vaxxers; they have the right to their bodily autonomy but so too does everyone else.
Again, the “right to swing fists in air ending at other people’s noses” principle applies if your choices threaten the bodily autonomy of others, then you don’t get to do that at least not in society.
Choosing not to get vaccinated is like to choosing to drive on the wrong side or right in the middle of the road.
You don’t get to legally do that because it puts the lives of others as well as just yourself at high risk.
So iof you don’t get vaccinated then you face the conseqeucnes which should keep you away form everyone else and prevent you from harming them imfringing ontheir bodiuly autonomy to not get sick potentially fatally. So total physical isolation and social pressure wuld be my suggestion along with education and, well, what they did to Typhoid Mary. Prevntative imprisonment until they decide to dothe right thing. Or exile somewhere else preferably far away from all others until they see reason and agree to respect everyone elses right to not have their live sput at risk by wilful plague carriers by choice.
TLDR; “It’s for the greater good”.
Unapologetic people demanding forced vaccinations are basically
voting for the face-eating leopard partynormalising forced precautionary measures, creating a structural precedent that future governments will use to restrict further personal liberties. Habituation is pernicious.(I could do a reductio but if my point is still opaque, there is not much point)
cf. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/political-science/articles/10.3389/fpos.2022.929991/full
↓
Becoming authoritarian for the greater good? Authoritarian attitudes in context of the societal crises of COVID-19 and climate change
@ Morales
Histrionic slippery slope argument. Stevo nailed it
Unless you’re going to argue road rules “normalise forced precautionary measures, creating a structural precedent that future governments will use to restrict further personal liberties”, you can consider your argument refuted.
StevoR, “You don’t get the freedom to choose which side or the middle of the road you drive on or to be mentally impaired or unlicensed at the wheel of vehicles.”
Actually, you do. Sure, there are consequences, but you are not physically constrained and forced to drive properly.
Right? Coercion via punishment, but not forcing.
It’s really not that complicated. Concept at hand is physical autonomy.
Punishment for breaching road rules/vaccine rules, one thing.
(Obs, some people don’t get that distinction, but there it is nonetheless)
Vaccination is also one of the areas where liberal and leftist Americans have generally lost their mind and have become mad. Forced vaccination is violation of personal freedom and bodily autonomy. Even coerced vaccination borders on that. Obviously, this is only with respect to the adults.
They might earn a decent buck on the side/main hustle of selling user data to insurance companies.
@40 StevoR
Ising that same argument you could say nobody should be allowed to walk outside at all. Vaccinated or not, you’re a vector for disease.
@erik333 @46 No, And it is obvious why.
@lotharloo @44 Yes, it is ‘violation of personal freedom and bodily autonomy’. I don’t care. So are most crimes taken to their extreme. Stupid driving will get you in jail, too. Lots of things will get you restrained. Forced vaccination is not unprecedented, nor should it be. Ok erik333, I have changed my mind, I’ll indulge you with the obvious. If you don’t take reasonable measures to minimise your vectoricity in the face of known and extreme risk to others under your own steam, then yeah, you don’t get to walk around. Outside, inside or anywhere else. Cos yr a wilful fucking plague rat.
Suppose one has to paint a power pole
Ever done any Occ Health and Safety training erik333? In Australia, one does ones best, by law, to minimise hazards. So, painting a power pole. One of the big metal ones, 66kV or whatever. E.S.I.A.P First option is Elimination. Don’t do the painting at all. If not that then Substitution. Substitute the falling hazard by painting via drone. Isolation. Put a physical barrier between you and the power lines. Administration. Train to know what you are doing, have a spotter to know when you are up, when you come down, and to keep an eye on things and respond if something happens. Personal Protective Equipment. Wear an approved harness and hook it on properly.
Or screw it: Send a kid up there in board shorts with a spray can and hope for the best. That’s the difference. Capiche?
Oops, it’s been a few years for me, I forgot Engineering, between Isolation and Administration. Umm, in this case a safety switch on the power lines so if you do earth them it kills the power in less than a 50th of a second. Not used cos in this case (66kV) you’d be dead anyway, but it’s just an example to demonstrate the wider point.
@indianajones
I have no idea what that deranged drivel that you wrote means. It certainly does not help your case against my argument that Covid made a lot of American liberals lose their fucking mind to think it’s okay for a government to forcefully inject it’s citizens with medications that they don’t want.
@49 It should be ok ‘for a government to forcefully inject it’s citizens’ rather than let them go around endangering others to the point of killing them in some pretty impressively nasty ways. If you disagree, fine. I suggest you do better than calling it deranged drivel or accusing people of losing their minds though.
Or if that’s the bit you didn’t understand, then very very quickly: OH&S legislation says, approximately, that everyone shall take reasonable measures to ensure everyone don’t hurt themselves. The regulations that sit under the legislation and are drafted to give guidance to everyone how to do it say ESIEAP. And if you don’t follow the regulations, that breaches the legislation and bet yr arse that you can go to jail for that and that everyone will be forced to follow rules. I’d treat vaccines the same way. Only instead of jail, it’d be a jab. With a lollipop to follow so as to make you feel better about the lil booboo.
indianajones:
… or to forcefully sterilise them, or to forcefully lobotomise them, or to forcefully inseminate them*.
It is the very justification used for eugenics, you know.
You clearly missed my point about principles, you have gone full utilitarian.
Those are historic examples, for the ‘greater good’, and it is people like you that enable that, by endorsing the practice.
—
* https://www.icc-cpi.int/sites/default/files/RelatedRecords/CR2022_01224.PDF
There’s a lot of nonsense being talked in this thread about “forcefully injecting”, lol.
No. But there is this concept of the “social contract”. Don’t want to vaccinate? Fine. Bye. You don’t get to use public roads, schools, hospitals, police, fire department, currency. These things are for people who sign up to the social contract that you don’t knowingly endanger others.
Don’t like it? Fine. No probs. Fuck off and live in the wilderness. You are not welcome in society.
No one is making you vaccinate. You choose whether you will do the bare minimum to be accepted in society or not.
@Silentbob:
You are another brain dead American leftist. Covid has broken your brain if you think that is a reasonable position.
You also misunderstand the concept of social contract.
In a free society, people are allowed to have wrong opinions, be suspicious of medical companies and so on.
You don’t get to force your way down their throat.
Silentbob isn’t American, they are Aussie.
I’m fine with government having vaccination as a prerequisite for school attendance, traveling internationally, being a member of the military, etc…
I’m not ok with forced vaccinations. Public education is a much better method, as was done with making polio vaccination a public health issue. It would be more effective to enact some criminal penalties for pushing misinformation. Lying that results in dead people shouldn’t be protected by free speech.
There are people who legit cannot get vaccinated. There are others immune compromised. Refusing to be vaccinated throws them under the bus.
I have absolutely no sympathy (zero) for refusers who endanger others. When it comes to a public health situation, especially like measles, where vaccination is key to winning the battle…tie the fuckers down and jab them or use blow darts. I don’t give a fuck about your precious body fluids.
RFK Jr should be in prison yet Fauci gets the shade.
Good grief! Here is another actual historical example.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell)
—
Hemidactylus, you do get those people who wanted that (and other stuff, see above) used the very same rationalisation?
Fuck.
Here is another example, very same thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_for_the_Prevention_of_Hereditarily_Diseased_Offspring
I’m sorry but vaccination and sterilization are different things. Vaccination protects people with immunity disabilities from getting illness imposed on them and being involuntarily checked out of the gene pool by people who refuse to take their disabilities seriously enough to do the right thing. I cannot see the legitimacy of comparing compulsory sterilization and vaccination. Unkindly go fuck yourself John. Go drink raw milk with RFK Jr and the rest of the plague rats.
To compare compulsory vaccination that exempts those who cannot receive vaccination due to some legit medical exemption to eugenic sterilization for some cheap bullshit propaganda point puts you into the lowest of the low. You really stooped to make a point given I know exactly what Buck v Bell was. Fuck you POS!
Note what POS John Morales snipped out from my reply then made some BS point about Buck v Bell:
Only a lowly kind of garbage would ignore that. But we are talking about the obtuse sniper John Morales so I am not completely surprised by this antivax level sneer by him.
Rights vs common good shreds progressive income taxation and a wealth tax just as it makes compulsory vaccination with legit medical exemption likewise evil. One wonders if John Morales would protect techbros from a wealth tax because an illegitimate Buck v Bell analogy also.
@hemidactylus
No. a free and just society cannot force anyone to have a medical procedure. This includes vaccines unfortunately. John is merely taking your argument to its extreme. Forced medical treatments are not within the purview of a democratic society, period.
Wow. Aggressively missing the point about bodily autonomy. Principles.
Perhaps something more elliptical, more allusive, less harsh for the likes of you:
—
Heh. One does, does one? I don’t, and I am one.
Whyever would I do that, and how would I even attempt it?
(Simple, that was; you do amuse when you attempt orotundity, and speak of yourself in the third person)
lotharloo @54
Fuck you. That I cannot even be sure if I have access anymore to a well updated COVID or flu shot in the near future because health policy is being winged by some brain addled fool who promotes steaks, sauerkraut, and cold baths in his jeans drinking raw milk with Kid Rock is an unprecedented problem.
Wrong opinions debilitate or kill others. We have a situation where permissiveness has become the paradigm of choice and long controlled diseases are making a significant comeback. When I entered university in the early 90s I was required to receive another measles shot. I wonder why…
I know exactly why. Do you? Fucking timeline it.
That sort of diligence has been superseded by paranoid delusional narratives about life saving preventative measures.
I guess a virus with a 30-50% kill rate unless one is required to take the effective vaccination is too fascist a scenario to envision. The actual fascists would pretend it didn’t exist and recommend horse paste.
While we’re at it we should dismantle the whole forced to pax taxes scheme.
Funny that Aussies are forced to vote. Get rid of that too.
And definitely think the US 2nd amendment is very important. Good that people can conceal carry, stand their ground, and not get vaccinated. Because god given rights.
@62 John Morales
You are still too disingenuous to acknowledge my saying:
Because that runs counter to the bullshit lying narrative you spun on me. Talk about your Aggressively missing the point. GFY.
Hemidactylus:
Such misunderstanding! Not forced, coerced. You entirely miss the point.
We get fined a token amount for not getting our names crossed off the list.
That is to what it refers. No forcing, rather penalty after the fact.
You don’t want to vote, you pay your fine. No forced voting.
cf. https://findanexpert.unimelb.edu.au/news/5161-why-dick-doodles-on-the-ballot-paper-are-their-own-election-statement
Tethys got it right, I more or less did resort to a reductio, but some minds are well and truly closed.
Hard to credit the obliviousness of some people to the concept of principles, but hey.
Anyway. Basically, if one does not want to vote, one pays the penalty, but is NOT FORCED TO VOTE.
If one wants to speed on the road, one pays their penalty. And that is that.
You are clearly an authoritarian by nature; me, I’m the opposite.
(It’s why my religious and cultural inculcation didn’t take; freethinker, I)
—
Care to try to adumbrate this alleged “bullshit lying narrative”? :)
@ Morales
We’ll just skim over the fact that repeated breaches mean losing your licence and eventually jail time.
So authoritarian!!! *faints*
@ Morales
“Authoritarian” definition:
(https://www.dictionary.com/browse/authoritarian)
What if one favours individual freedom up until the point where it harns others which is obviously the scenario under discussion?
How is that “authoritarian” as opposed to moral? Or are you just talking shit for the sake of trolling?
@Tethys 61 ‘merely taking your argument to its extreme.’
So merely don’t do that then. If regulators can’t tell the difference between a vaccination and a hysterectomy, then I guess we’re in trouble after all. And then expand your idea of what a democracy might be able to include and what other freedoms, among the many it already does, it might be able to slightly curtail.
@Hemidactylus Yup. Just Yup.
@ Forced vs coerced: Oh look another rabbit hole, designed only to eat time by making a pointless distinction between 2 very similar concepts that need not be distinguished for the purposes of the discussion at hand. Imagine that.
indianajones, you are cute.
<snicker>
Yes, let us not actually distinguish between a forceful injection and a punishment for not being injected.
Not at all significant!
Let us not actually distinguish between not allowing you in a social space because you are not vaccinated and being forcefully vaccinated. Etc.
Way to miss the whole point!
Also, way to waste your time; instead of actually assessing the claim, you just said it was a time-waster because YOU saw no significance with the acknowledged distrinction.
This is the claim I critiqued:
Clearly, my #57 is much too abstruse for you. Fair enough, you can’t help that.
Historical examples of just that, applied, they carry no weight for you.
Jocular version, same.
(Ah well. People like you help to make the average, no?)
—
Driving was mentioned, so here is an analogy.
There are laws about not driving drunk, driving in the appropriate lane, etc (cf. my #43).
There are laws about not stealing, not jaywalking, etc.
(perhaps a bit of jocularity? Since you wasted my time with your spurious objection)
So… cars should have AI drive-by-wire systems that would prevent drivers from being in the wrong lane, or speeding, and breath sensors to disable the vehicle if alcohol is detected. Etc.
Well, this thread’s gotten interesting. How about we dissolve the social contract entirely and let everyone endanger everyone else in the name of personal freedom? Anti-vaxxers, don’t bother replying, I’ve learned who to killfile.
Braveheart John @66 says:
“You are clearly an authoritarian by nature; me, I’m the opposite.”
You even posted an article about this but clearly didn’t read it. I had long ago and numerous sources on authoritarianism. I am not an authoritarian by nature (obligate), part of the 30-33% who will vote for a fascist. Mine is quite facultative, instrumental, or narrowly constrained upon one greater good issue that supersedes personal autonomy.
Given I said this: “There are people who legit cannot get vaccinated. There are others immune compromised. Refusing to be vaccinated throws them under the bus.”… I am thinking about the most vulnerable or marginalized in a population who indirectly benefit from others getting vaccinated. Braveheart “Freedumb” John would rather throw them under the bus much as the eugenicists who pushed for Buck v Bell did a century ago. Sink or swim am I right?
Also I made this sort of argument twice on this thread, which was also not acknowledged:
1: “COVID was pretty bad for older people, but let’s say we get a future influenza, coronavirus, or other pandemic where the pathogen has a 30-50%+ kill rate. There’s a decently effective vaccine developed yet people are spreading lies and refusing to get vaccinated. Should they be forcefully coerced violating their precious rights and body fluids?”
2: “I guess a virus with a 30-50% kill rate unless one is required to take the effective vaccination is too fascist a scenario to envision. The actual fascists would pretend it didn’t exist and recommend horse paste.”
Do yeah let’s get hit with a pandemic via a virus having a much larger kill rate that promises to stack the bodies like cordwood and see how many of these principled Braveheart “Freedumb!” screamers like John become facultative authoritarians in that circumstance. The obligate authoritarians will follow dimwitted liars like lemmings and pretend the threat doesn’t exist and/or flout protective measures as is their god-given right and consume horse paste or bleach.
Hemidactylus: Under your scheme, healthy refuseniks would be forcibly vaccinated, right? So, cops come to their door and take them away to be held down and vaccinated, or would they bring medics with them and do it in situ?
How would that look on the nightly news, and what do you think the short, medium and long-term consequences would be, politically? I don’t think you’ve thought this through.
e@73 Rob grigjanis Your understanding under my scheme, and I’m pretty sure me and Hemidactylus are in very very close agreement, is correct. As I posited way up @15, a sane society would shrug it’s shoulders and move at sight of said news reports and would have no political consequences whatsoever. You know, like how people shrug at NSWPOL thugs laughing at doing their thing (just for an example this week).
I believe that forced vaccination, under even the worst terms described above, not only should be done, but could be. These people are plague rats, not protestors in opposition to palestinian genocide after all. See my NSWPOL example. Should be an easy sell. To quote a NSWPOL member on hearing how someone had been punched in the head while they were down by the colleague walking next to them: ‘so funny’.
Oh, one last thing? I don’t mind treating plague rats a lot worse than I would treat genocide protestors. I recognise no equivalence between the 2 and see no inevitability of a police/thug state resulting from plague rats being forcibly made to not hurt or kill other people. As I have explained in detail above, but just in case. I also condemn Hamas and roll my eyes at anyone insisting that I do so.
@68. Silentbob
This ^ Quoted for truth.
The adage of Your right to swing your fist ends at my nose applies.
Everyone should have freedom to spursue happiness, engage in free speech, live their lives as they please up to the point that their doing so interefereswith others being able to do the same. That’s the line for me. Do as you please but don’;t harm others or risk their lives.
That includes following road rules, enviornmental rules – eg polluting waterways, safety rules at work and, yes, getting fucking well vaxxed unless there’s a genuine health reason you cannot.
Bodily autonomy applies but like free speech vs hate speech and libel there are some reasonable limits when it comes to jeopardising the bodily autonomy of others eg the right to be safe from deadly virii , bacteria etc..
If what you are doing hurts no one else or poses no risk to someone else, eg. having an abortion or choosing not to be sterilised or growing your hair a certian length, having piercings, tattoos, wear a burqua or bikini or nothing, etc.. fine. Up to every individual.
If, OTOH, you want to do something that risks the lives and health of others eg. not being vaccinated, deliberately turning yourself into a bioweapon by huffing ebola virii then wlking round spitting everywhere, rollling in sewage and then walking around unbathed shaking yourself off afterwards, dumping rotting meat into restaurants randomly, spreading disinformation about healthcare eg lying about medical producres like vaccination, etc.. well yeah, NOT cool or acceptable at all.
The social contract above other things is that to live in a society you don’t hurt others in that society. .
@67. Silentbob :
Or potentially in a single breach one ends up crashing into and killing yourself and others or giving yourself and / or others life ruining injuries.
Which is why we have the law. In theory to protect everyone from people who do things labelled “criminal” because they hurt or threaten to harm others.
Also fines are, of course, a mere nusiance for those rich enough and means something is legal for a fee so, there’s also that injustice. (Unless fines are set as perecentages of income / assests etc.. to avoid this which sadly they usually are not.)
… but the right to stick your needle does not end at my skin, right?
So long as it’s the law.
(Does the law forbid a copper from punching a suspect in the nose?)
@ ^ John Morales : Totally different situations and false equivalence fallacy but also yes the law does forbid police assaulting protesters & their are consequwences for that .
See :
Source : https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2026/sep/03/palestinian-australian-eyad-shadid-sues-nsw-police-punched-at-herzog-rally-ntwnfb
I think he use of exile a spunishment could be a good idea her ewher eif someone isn’t willing to follow the conditions of the social contract i.e. choosing tobe a plague rat then they should not be welcome in society and ejected from it.
Coercion not physical forcing but if you don’t get vaccinated without very good cause then you don’t get to stay in society.
Clarity fix :
I think The use of exile as punishment could be a good idea here where if someone isn’t willing to follow the basic conditions & requirements of the social contract i.e. choosing tobe a plague rat & risk the helath and lievs of others insociety then they should not be welcome in society and ejected from it until and unless they do agree to meet the minimum conditiosn for living in society.
Tsk, StevoR.
Quite the evasive move. Quite indicative you don’t get it.
“Does the law forbid a copper from punching a suspect in the nose?” is quite a direct question.
Proper responses are ‘yes’, ‘no’, or ‘depends’, then some sort of justification.
Instead, you output “yes the law does forbid police assaulting protesters”, which would have been appropriate had that actually been my question. Never mind you were the one who introduced ‘assaulting’ and ‘protesters’ — two rather specific criteria.
FWIW, here is an illustration of how forbidden that is: https://mappingpoliceviolence.org/
Get it?
The bit about assaulting protesters is not by me.
That is you seeking an ‘escape hatch’, some special circumstance where it does not apply. Proper answer would have been one of those three. (I know which one).
On the other hand, you would literally require every single person who is vaccinable to be forced to vaccinate against any and all infectious diseases. I am not the one forcing anything on anyone, I am the one advocating for consequences.
I am not the one who is extreme, I am the one pointing out the authoritarians are they.
Call it karma, if you want.
You want a blanket rule for every one on general precautionary principle.
I have no problem with forcefully injecting a specific individual who is determined to mingle with a transmissible disease, but i don’t want that for non-necessary cases.
(Yes, no, or are you unsure?)
Anyway, I do get your desire: every single person in some polity must be forced to vaccinate against any potential transmissible disease. No excuses other than being non-vaccinable (half-fingered’s attempted justification).
To be fair, the rate of serious adverse reactions is exceptionally low, affecting roughly 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 1,000,000 doses.
Less serious ones, around an order of magnitude less.
So, the population of the USA is 349 million, so only 349 to 3,490 people would have serious adverse reactions.
A tad redolent of Omelas, no?
And this is just routine precautionary stuff on one axis.
The principle becomes precedent, as I noted initially.
Historical examples of such are ignorable by you. Fair enough.
@80. John Morales
Evasive? Really? Thought I was being very direct and clear there.
Paraphrasing for clarity : The situations of ”sticking a needle into ones skin” (vaccination) and “a copper punching a suspect in the nose.” (Police brutality – police assault) are very different and NOT equivalent.
Context John Morales. Context
Comparing the two situations – people getting vaccinated compulsorily to protect the rest of the society versus a cop bashing suspects – is a false equivalence.
Additionally and separately the answer to your question ”Does the law forbid a copper from punching a suspect in the nose?” is yes. Yes the law forbids police brutality and police are not allowed to punch people in the nose – or for that matter anywhere else.
What am I not answering directly about, being evasive about & not getting there?
Yes. “Yes” was my answer to that which is therefore by your definition there a proper response.
I thought that was what you were alluding too.
Correct. I thought you were alluding to that but perhaps I was wrong. Fair enough.
That last bit is you not me. I would not insist on against any and all infectious diseases.
Depends upon the context and specifics there.
Not quite. Every possible person in a reasonable society with a proper social contract must reasonably vaccinate against deadly diseases to protect others against the spread of those diseases. Context matters again.
No. Omelas relies on the suffering of a single individual to work.
See : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Omelas
Vaccinating those who can be vaccinated to protect others is a different thing from that.
Huh/What historical examples do you think I am ignoring and haven’t addressed or are applicable here?
The sterilisation thing? That’s different.
Oh fer fucks sake. Whelp, guess folks can see where the italics broke.. Sigh.
@StevoR
It is yet another authoritarian and deranged opinion. Not only your level of despotism is off the chart (exiling someone from their friends, family, culture and potentially separating kids from their parents) but also the argument is built on terrible grounds. The driving force of your entire argument are the two words “choosing” and “risk”: “choosing to be a plague risk”. This is absolute nonsense and this combination can be used to justify a lot of authoritarian interventions because there are a lot of activities in normal life that have potential “risks” to others, under some definition of “risk”. Just to illustrate the point, let’s do a thought experiment:
Assume neuralink develops a chip that when installed, it can stop traffic accidents by taking control of user’s body and stopping them from making a mistake. Let’s assume that the hardware and the software are verified by independent bodies, and there is agreement that the installation of this chip on everyone would significantly reduce death and injuries caused by traffic accidents and thus in overall the benefits would highly outweighs the potential side effects and risks. Now we get to define a “chipless” person a “risk” to the health and life of others and so the same arguments can be applied here: a chipless driver has “chosen” to be a “risk”.
The issue that exists with your argument is that the social contract generally acknowledges that by living in a society, you have accepted the potential “risk” of receiving an airborne disease from someone else. We have created specific spaces for people who should be protected against this risk (hospitals and so on) but we do not believe those measures should be applied to everyday life. We have regulated practices such as smoking to reduce the risks to others while allowing people who choose to smoke to make that choice for themselves. If you are naturally a pluralist, you would try to find a way to coexists with others.
So when it comes to vaccination, the solution is to try to convince as many as you can to make that choice. There are a lot of people who are suspicious of vaccination because they do not trust multibillion dollar companies but in this case, the mistrust is applied to the wrong place. In the place where I live, the vast majority of people chose to vaccinate themselves. So it is definitely possible.
Finally, as the last point, I am very tired of discussions getting dominated by Americans (or America-adjacent countries such as UK and so on) where not only the rightwing has gone off the chart, but also a non-negligible fraction of the left has also lost its mind and they support absolutely bonkers positions (e.g., as evidenced by the posts here, things such as forced vaccination or banishment).
@Lotharloo Vaccination=/=-mind control chip. Not even close. Vaccination risk vs non vaaccination risk is so tiny as to be dismissable. As opposed to any other thing vaccination has been compared to here. Forced vaccination =/= forced anything else Just as marriage equality =/= pet marriage, despite the bleatings of some of the marriage equaity opponets a few years back. As a pluralist I do think I can live with most others, but there are exceptions for me, just as there are for everyone else. My ones make sense, and I mean that objectively. Those who would risk others health as well as their own up to and including the inevitable death of others who justify their stance on the grounds of ‘pluralism, you got your opinion, I got mine, but fuck those (insert race/sexual preference/gender here) do not object to some pluralities in an objectively correct way.
I have yet to see a single comparison of forced vaccination to x that holds up. They are almost all slippery slope fallacies that don’t exist, or comparisons to things that are much worse and easily avoided but painted as clear inevitabilities, or spurious appeals to ‘But my freedoms!’ without acknowledging that many freedoms of many sorts are constrained in various ways without an inevitable descent into North Korea style state control. All of them in ways that would be way more difficult to remedy than by judicious application of a wowwy pop.
Seat belts kill people too. And in way higher numbers that 1/!M or (usually a lot) less
@83. Lotharloo :
As an alternative to violating their bodily autonomy by forcible injections or imprisonment. Yes. In exile they have the freedom to do as they please except for returning. They can stay in touch with friends and family and receive supplies etc.. from them just not come back to where they pose a threat to others by their own volition. An exile that they can end voluntarily by agreeing to do the bare minimum to live with others by getting vaxxed so they don’t spread a certain set of avoidable diseases unto others. What alternative do you propose?
Would you take away the freedom and allow them to cause serious harm even death to many others due to their own rejection of the basic social contract here and their denial of basic science.
Would you rather a reverse despotism where people are at the mercy of plague carriers choosing to be plague carriers? Where a Typhoid Maddison or few thousand or million Typhoid Maddisons are at Liberty to infect and kill others? Where no one is safe from preventable diseases because some are given the “freedom” to spread those diseases against the wishes & at the expense of others and those who could be protected by herd immunity even if they personally for legitimate reasons can’t be vaccinated are at risk without their choosing that risk?
Sometimes compromises are necessary and when so let’s make the compromise as reasonable, fair and good as possible.
How very Sam Harris of you. Let’s not. Let’s talk about the actual real situation under discussion here using the actual cases and scenarios stemming from the specific circumstances and context rather than making up some far-fetched Trolley type hypothetical.
Yes, but lets make that risk less rather than more. Let’s make it avoid that risk to others if if we can reasonably do so.
Absolutely. Education should be a major priority and debunking and not permitting misinfo and disinfo should be a priority too.
But if you have a Typhoid Mary type person who is selfish enough to do the wrong things and ignore the basic facts when it comes to vaccines then there should be consequences for them. If they want to pose a threat to the lives and health of many others then I think society should have the right to say NO to that on behalf of the rational people in that society.
I am an Aussie.
Yeah, that’s a separate issue.
OTOH, the entirety of reichwing pretty much seems to have gone totally bonkers right now so maybe prioritise that?
@StevoR:
What you are doing is basically stretching the meaning of the words to absurd levels which is funny because it is the exact same thing the rightwing.
Before going forward though, it’s very dishonest of you to do this ..
when I also added “or America-adjacent countries such as UK and so on” and so you can pretty much count yourself as being included in America-adjacent. What you have in common with Americans is the absolute inability to live in the same society with people of opposite point of view. How you are achieving this though is through the same tactic that they are doing of stretching the meaning of the words to absurdity. Let’s have a look:
I mean, it’s pretty ridiculous. These words have strong intentionality and also where the dangers are not only exaggerated but also you have taken every other options from the rest of the society than to lie down and die (via being “at the mercy of plague carriers” or they are being “at liberty to infect and kill”).
You are right now a lunatic because the reality is that a lot of people chose to not get vaccinated because they do not trust the intuitions including mega corporations and the medical system. There is a giant chasm between the actual reality what is going on in your brain. You need to wake the fuck up before you join the TFG crowd.
@indianajones:
This is probably the laziest attempt at argumentation that I have ever seen. In the thought experiment, the mind control chip is evaluated by independent committees to be generally safe and trustworthy. So care to engage instead of just declaring that it’s not the same because you say so?
I’m guessing that’s because you’ll just say “ah but that’s not the same” and refuse to engage because you say so.
@Lotharloo Sure. A mind control chip, even a safe and trustworthy one, can interfere with you in whatever mind controlly way forever. Definitionally. I mean if it can’t then the example has no meaning, because then it would be a mind control chip with absolutely no potential for abuse, ie not a mind control chip in any meaningfully bad sense. Or something. I mean it’s your example, you do you, but I think that you are defining the badness of your equivalence out of existence and calling it a counter example. Not to mention that there’s no such thing as mind control chips under any definition, meaningful or not, to talk about here in reality world at all btw. A vaccination will give you a sore arm and a sniffle for a few days. Maybe and at worst in any statistically meaningful sense. In my posited sane society it also gets you a wowwy pop whose benefits far outweigh it’s costs. The only permanent effect is a WAY lesser probability of being a plague rat.
Muh guy, I am willing to engage with you, but you are gonna have to stop with the insults. So far you have told me I have used meaningless gibberish, lost my mind, been lazy, and of not engaging properly. I am happy to engage in a good way, I realise that my position is not the most popular one getting around, and that it is up to me to defend it. But, you know, how about playing at the ball, not the player? How about just a little bit of an assumption of good faith instead of going to insult as a first resort huh?
@indianajones:
You are not really engaging with the argument though.
Because this is just jibberish. I even read it three times, in good faith but there is nothing here to respond to.
But sure, let’s deal with the reality. In reality, COVID vaccination slightly help reduce the spread vs just contracting the virus:
So in reality, vaccines don’t stop the spread only decrease the rate, and if you catch the virus once, and you get comparable reduction in chance of spreading to others. And since most people have gotten the virus at least once anyways, there is really no point and so based on these, a reasonable person would not jump to conclusions that “LET’S FUCKING BREAK IN T HEIR HOUSES, HOLD THEM DOWN AND FORCE THE NEEDLE INTO THEM”, or as Steveor would say they are “at liberty to kill” and “we are at their mercy”.
Another way then. Your mind control chip doesn’t exist and wouldn’t make your point if it did. By defining it as necessarily safe and trust worthy, it loses all it’s teeth as an example. It would be like saying I wouldn’t mind a safe and effective torture method. The thing that makes it torture, ie the victim saying anything at all without regard to truth to make it stop, is what stops it being safe and effective. Similarly with even a hypothetical mind control chip. It is the mind control that is inherently bad. Besides THAT it would be a better example if vaccines had some kind of long term bad effect in the same way a safe and effective mind control chip would have. They don’t. And thirdly, your point would be better supported if you had an actual real world example to point at. I have yet to see one that holds up. Your example sucks, but I’m willing to entertain others if you have any.
And one study in a spectacularly confined setting showing that, surprise surprise, the spread of infection is pretty bad for one disease there despite vaccination doesn’t say vaccines, all of ’em, are ineffective either. I don’t know enough about the statistics an mathematics of epidemiology to now whether 36% is better than nothing and would in fact save lives. But I suspect it might. And that is pretty close to a worst case scenario for transmission, again I suspect. Anyway, the point, which remains pretty well unmolested and undenied I think, is that more people died and continue to die, in their millions, than would have or will have to because of unvaccinated people. This is just true, and some of those will even be vaccinated people which sucks. Even in your hyperbolic examples of ‘BREAKING INTO HOMES’ etc that is a society I would willingly live in, noting how relatively rare it would be (same as seat belt refusers functionally don’t exist now) rather than living with willing plague rats.
I get that you don’t find my arguments compelling, but I don’t think they are unclear. If they are, and you want me to clarify, I’m happy to try. But I have lost my patience with insult. Even if you consider it ‘jibberish’, ask a question. As opposed to giving it an insulting label. Again if you would like me to clarify that is.
Huh, would ya look at that? No really, just the picture tells the story. And I consider plague rats worse than this guy and yet they get better treatment than the temporary restrain this guy had to endure. And there’s his exposed arm right there and all….
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/08/racist-plane-real-estate-agent-tied
indianajones. A sane society wouldn’t need to force vaccination on its citizens. Sane citizens would happily carry the burden of the wellbeing of their fellow citizens so would willingly volunteer their arm or arse for a jab. Your posited sane society is about as real as lotharloo’s posited mind-control chip.
Anyway, back in July of 1933 (the 14th to be precise) the Nazis brought in their “Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases”, leading to forced sterilization of many groups including the mentally and physically disabled, Roma (Gypsies), people with black skin etc, and murder (in the T4 euthanasia program 200,000 disabled children and adults were killed outright). The Nazis considered this a perfectly sane position to take. It was, in a way, a vaccine to protect the Aryan race.
My point being: who defines the Greater Good and how can we be sure that they can be trusted?
Vaccination refusal is not so much a health issue as it is an educational one. Lots of people have never seen the diseases that our heretofore successful vaccination programs have all but eliminated. Their suspicion is therefor understandable.
More acceptable to me than forced vaccination is the dis-empowerment of those who stir up the nest with deliberate misinformation.
@Nick A society with sane policies then that contained the occasional contrarian fool.
‘who defines the Greater Good and how can we be sure that they can be trusted?’ Not who but what. The evidence. And the evidence for the greater good the nazi’s had was rubbish, their conclusions were motivated by hate, and the standards by which they judged evidence weren’t worth having. What is worth having? Evidential standards and evidence which make predictions that, having been checked, are in accordance with reality. Vaccines meet this standard, many many times over. Better than a bunch of other things we already employ force for just incidentally.
Ahem.
To be fair, the rate of serious adverse reactions is exceptionally low, affecting roughly 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 1,000,000 doses.
Less serious ones, around
an ordermultiple orders of magnitudelessmore.(I double-checked myself there)
So, the population of the USA is 349 million, so only 349 to 3,490 people would have serious adverse reactions.
Per dose. How many people only ever get one dose off a vaccine?
It’s a lower bound for expected ‘serious adverse reactions’, not an estimate.
The evidence of adverse side effects comes from reputable science. Feel free to confirm that.
So, yes, redolent of Omelas.
(Ah, right. StevoR, maybe look up the term ‘redolent’ before disputing it)
@84:
so only 349 to 3,490 people would have serious adverse reactions.
Per dose.
That is science. But hey, hundreds to thousands of people clearly is dismissable to motivated ideologues.
(Like Nazis, right? Mirror darkly)
@89. lotharloo : “or as StevoR would say they are “at liberty to kill” and “we are at their mercy”
Dude. That is a statement of fact. .
Are you an actual anti-vaxxer? Did you sleep through the covid pandemic or something?
Those who are anti-vaccine spread the illnesses into the population including people who are vulnerable and can and actually do end up causing their deaths or serious health issues sometimes fortherestofntehir lives. Are you okay with that?
^ or serious health issues sometimes for the rest of their lives..
I love how Morales has given up on the “authoritarian” argument and is now resorting to “adverse reactions”. X-D
Dude, zero people approve of causing adverse reactions in this thread. Stop flailing
Like, srsly dude, you’re allowed to say, “okay I concede my argument was stupid, thanks for educating me on the social contract and costs vs benefits”.
You don’t have to keep flailing on the hook forever. X-D
Yes, StevoR. Those who are vaccinated can become ill, including people who have dependents.
cf. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK575579/
↓
Appendix 4
Adverse event definitions
TABLE 63
[…]
serious adverse reaction: Any AE or adverse reaction that at any dose:
• results in death
• is life-threatening
• requires hospitalisation or prolongs existing hospitalisation
• results in persistent or significant disability or incapacity
• is a congenital anomaly or birth defect
• is another important medical condition
But hey, just a few hundreds to thousands of people must suffer that for preventative principles.
That is the –minimum– guaranteed pain for your prescriptive normative forced vaccination routine.
Did you even pick up it was per dose? Some vaccines need boosters (another dose) and of course there is more than a single vaccine. There are many.
You know how if you travel overseas you are recommended/required some vaccinations?
No worries in your happy world; every one would be vaccinated against everything, just in case, right?
No biggie.
(Shame there is no vaccination for cluelessness)
@ ^ John Morales : “No worries in your happy world; every one would be vaccinated against everything, just in case, right?”
No. I already stated otherwise in my #81 :
See upthread : https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2026/09/02/unjected/comment-page-1/#comment-2311368
Yeesh.
Yes, some diseases are rare or only likely to affect certain groups of people in certain circumstances e.g. only those who come in contact with bats are likely to catch bat borne diseases like Lyssavirus. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyssavirus ) I’m talking about common vaccines for formerly common illnesses like measles, polio, pertussis, etc..
Do I need to cite the classic old Vaccine Song again or invite you to check out an old graveyard and note the high infant and child mortality that vaccines have addressed?
Also, yes, I know about adverse reactions – & that they are very rare. Oh and, of course, I know about booster shots having gotten my flu booster last week and regular covid boosters too. So?
Plus, of course, I know that vaccinated people can also get sick e,g. with covid – just NOT usually anywhere near as badly.
Education and willing adoption by everyone who can doing their bit to get vaxxed is ideal but what do you do about those who refuse to do the bare minimum?
Your right to anti-vaxxer irrationality stops at the bodies of everyone else in society.
Fines aren’t much use against rich douchebags who can afford them and aren’t much help for these who can’t get vaccinated for legitimate reasons who then don’t have the immunity. Jail seems a bit harsh & putting to death even more so & definitely NOT hence my idea of exile – perhaps to a dedicated unvaxxed area where everyone else is unvaxxed by choice and they can see for themselves what their medical science denialism gets them without taking others who haven’t chosen this with them.
@Stevo 100 Not only that but the numbers being used actually make the case for our side here. If there are going to be 3490, at absolute worst, adverse reactions in the US (for some reason), then lets show the numbers for (spins the wheel) Diptheria! 5-10% fatality rate if treated properly. Or 50-100 thousand per million infections. Didn’t look up what the merely life changingly awful but not fatal events per million is. And just as people get more than one vaccination, they might get Diptheria more than once. And they might get more than one sort of vaccinable disease. More than once. The specifics I just mentioned go up or down per disease but here’s the real point. 3490 is indeed an easily dismissable number when compared to other numbers that, just in fatalities, are (checks dumb monkey fingers, may have got it slightly wrong, doesn’t matter) 5 or 6 orders of magnitude higher. Even more is possible/likely/inevitable when comparing like for like adverse events. But you know, nazi logic apparently.
Ahem. You’re utterly inverted the claim. Quite remarkable.
Not at the absolute worst, at the absolute best. That is, only one dose of one vaccine per person.
A floor, not a ceiling.
Gotta love the parenthetical there, some obscure unstated reason, you thing? Heh.
The reason is the prevalence of adverse side effects.
—
Most amusing, since I am in no sense an anti-vaxxer. Not one bit.
All I’ve been doing all along is to point out the problematic nature of this forced vaccination regime that was proposed.
In fact, one prong is the right to bodily autonomy!
Ah well.