A Coronavirus Vaccine Won’t Work if People Don’t Take It

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
57,194
Reaction score
13,158
Points
113
Ten states have now reached the Biden administration’s goal to vaccinate at least 70% of adults against Covid-19 by July 4 with at least one dose, according to data published Wednesday by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Pennsylvania is the latest state to reach this benchmark, joining Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, Rhode Island and Vermont.

 


STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,598
Reaction score
882
Points
113
We might need to start a thread to journal all of the "victims" that lost their freedom during the pandemic, and are being "victimized" again by choosing not to get the vaccine while telling others to just comply.
 


Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
21,876
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
Why should we stop there --- we should physically force everyone to get it. Am I right?
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,846
Reaction score
4,101
Points
113
We might need to start a thread to journal all of the "victims" that lost their freedom during the pandemic, and are being "victimized" again by choosing not to get the vaccine while telling others to just comply.
Explain the second part of this, who is arguing this?
 


STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,598
Reaction score
882
Points
113
Explain the second part of this, who is arguing this?
Be more specific?

My point was/ is that there are some people out there that are complaining about freedoms lost when they could just get the vaccine. Amongst that group are some that are also saying that people should just comply when it comes to law enforcement.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,846
Reaction score
4,101
Points
113
Be more specific?

My point was/ is that there are some people out there that are complaining about freedoms lost when they could just get the vaccine. Amongst that group are some that are also saying that people should just comply when it comes to law enforcement.
You get freedom only if you take a shot is not freedom it is coercion.
I don’t exactly get the correlation. Are you arguing that to be consistent in opposing forced vaccines, that we must also oppose complying with law enforcement? That seems like a huge reach.
 



STPGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
6,598
Reaction score
882
Points
113
You get freedom only if you take a shot is not freedom it is coercion.
I don’t exactly get the correlation. Are you arguing that to be consistent in opposing forced vaccines, that we must also oppose complying with law enforcement? That seems like a huge reach.
No. It is telling someone else to comply while complaining about having to comply.

giphy.gif
 







Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
21,876
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
Since you posted this and initially highlighted the entire thing I am assuming you are against the banning of vaccine requirements on customers, employees or students from businesses, hospitals, nursing homes, K-12 schools, colleges, daycares, or others. Right?
As I said....
1622142039819.png
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
4,695
Points
113
Since you posted this and initially highlighted the entire thing I am assuming you are against the banning of vaccine requirements on customers, employees or students from businesses, hospitals, nursing homes, K-12 schools, colleges, daycares, or others. Right?
As I said....
View attachment 12961
It was highlighted in the tweet. But yes, if an organization wants to require vaccines for admittance, they should be allowed to. People can go elsewhere if they have concerns
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,846
Reaction score
4,101
Points
113
No I understand.
There are circumstances when an order from an officer to comply would be a violation of your rights. In most circumstances it would not be a violation. Forcing you to inject a chemical in your body is always a violation.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
49,846
Reaction score
4,101
Points
113
It was highlighted in the tweet. But yes, if an organization wants to require vaccines for admittance, they should be allowed to. People can go elsewhere if they have concerns
This is true, but it is interesting how fungible the rights of “private” business are depending on whether you are an R or D. Bake that cake. Progs suddenly forget “public accommodation” when it’s expedient to them politically.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
21,876
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
It was highlighted in the tweet. But yes, if an organization wants to require vaccines for admittance, they should be allowed to. People can go elsewhere if they have concerns
How about requiring "employees" and "students" to get it? The highlighted text also talked about "customers" from not only businesses, but also hospitals and nursing homes. We still cool?
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
4,695
Points
113
How about requiring "employees" and "students" to get it? The highlighted text also talked about "customers" from not only businesses, but also hospitals and nursing homes. We still cool?
You're right, the law that is ridiculously over broad and also bad for public health is actually ok because a tweet highlighted 2 particular words. This is not at all completely argumentative or entirely beside the point
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
21,876
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
You're right, the law that is ridiculously over broad and also bad for public health is actually ok because a tweet highlighted 2 particular words. This is not at all completely argumentative or entirely beside the point
I see you didn’t answer the question 🙄.
Are you are OK with vaccine mandates for employees of a business, students in a school, patients of a hospital, and residents of nursing homes?
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
4,695
Points
113
I see you didn’t answer the question 🙄.
Are you are OK with vaccine mandates for employees of a business, students in a school, patients of a hospital, and residents of nursing homes?
Maybe, yes, yes, yes.

Now, are you glad that this was your initial reaction to an obviously horrible law? And are you happy that the party you insist is not the main anti-vax problem in this country is making this stupid law a legislative priority?
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
57,194
Reaction score
13,158
Points
113
It was highlighted in the tweet. But yes, if an organization wants to require vaccines for admittance, they should be allowed to. People can go elsewhere if they have concerns
The Fellas now support Big Government trampling on the rights of private businesses as long as it "owns Libs".
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
21,149
Reaction score
3,501
Points
113
Maybe, yes, yes, yes.

Now, are you glad that this was your initial reaction to an obviously horrible law? And are you happy that the party you insist is not the main anti-vax problem in this country is making this stupid law a legislative priority?
My daughter-in-law is pregnant. In the first trimester of gestation, fever can cause birth defects.

Should she have to suffer the consequences of various entities making her presence impermissible b/c she doesn’t want to take that risk of getting a fever from the vaccine during pregnancy?

I don’t know the specifics of the law, but I suspect that it was designed broadly to overcome the creative ways that leftists have of pressuring people to do things that they don’t want to do. Freedom of choice is only important to lefties when it comes to killing unborn babies.

The point is, some people have very valid concerns about getting vaccinated. Why is it that lefties are so into “my body, my choice” on some occasions, but not in this situation where you are only putting people at risk who are choosing to take that same risk.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
57,194
Reaction score
13,158
Points
113
My daughter-in-law is pregnant. In the first trimester of gestation, fever can cause birth defects.

Should she have to suffer the consequences of various entities making her presence impermissible b/c she doesn’t want to take that risk of getting a fever from the vaccine during pregnancy?

I don’t know the specifics of the law, but I suspect that it was designed broadly to overcome the creative ways that leftists have of pressuring people to do things that they don’t want to do. Freedom of choice is only important to lefties when it comes to killing unborn babies.

The point is, some people have very valid concerns about getting vaccinated. Why is it that lefties are so into “my body, my choice” on some occasions, but not in this situation where you are only putting people at risk who are choosing to take that same risk.
Most vaccine requirements have exceptions for legitimate medical reasons but not "you can't tell me what to do! Freedom! MAGA! “ hissy fits.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
21,876
Reaction score
5,895
Points
113
Maybe, yes, yes, yes.

Now, are you glad that this was your initial reaction to an obviously horrible law? And are you happy that the party you insist is not the main anti-vax problem in this country is making this stupid law a legislative priority?
Are you joking? I don’t believe that it should be able to be mandated at schools and not sure it should be at businesses - so yeah, I’m a-ok with my initial reaction to this law. Your gibberish hasn’t changed that. The young is still the biggest thing holding us back from 70% too, btw.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
4,695
Points
113
Are you joking? I don’t believe that it should be able to be mandated at schools and not sure it should be at businesses - so yeah, I’m a-ok with my initial reaction to this law. Your gibberish hasn’t changed that. The young is still the biggest thing holding us back from 70% too, btw.
p6FVDlj.png
 



justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
14,206
Reaction score
4,695
Points
113
You only seem capable of comprehending half of the proposed law. Maybe half is enough for you to be pimping it. It isn’t for me. Let me help…..
View attachment 12965
I suppose you're a big fan of the original Biden infrastructure bill because at least SOME of it makes sense

Also, I am not pimping the law because of half of it. That's exactly what you're doing
 




Top Bottom