a Christian only topic of vaccine mandates

[JacksBratt]

Yes. Unvaccinated people are potential hosts in which the virus may mutate thereby providing new virus variants resistant to current vaccinations. This may affect others.

Are vaccinated people not the same in this case? Vaccinated people can carry and transmit the virus.

Why can the virus not mutate in them as well?

 

[The Barbarian]

Recently tested doesn’t mean that you aren’t infected. It just means that you weren’t during that last test.

But it does mean that you're not recklessly endangering others. Which is the point.

No. Just as if you were sober and driving, but were unaware that you had a perception problem that might be dangerous while driving. Yes, that's highly unlikely. But so is being vaccinated and infected.

But in this case you are infected and can pass it on.

And in this case the driver has an impairment of which he's not aware, and that can kill. But in both of these cases, there's no reckless endangerment.

So based on these answers, you don’t care about whether or not someone is infected.

I don't see how anyone could twist what I said into what you just said. I'm pointing out that if one takes reasonable precautions to avoid endangering others, then there is no reckless disregard for others. Could you fail as a driver, even with the best intentions, and kill someone? Sure. But the question is whether or not you took reasonable precautions to avoid it. Likewise, taking reasonable precautions to avoid passing on the virus apply here.

Is there perfect safety in any of these things? No, there isn't. Is that justification to take no precautions to protect others? No, it isn't.

You just want them to be vaccinated.

Turns out, that's the best precaution to prevent infecting others. Weekly infection checks is second.

Reckless endangerment has nothing to do with it.

If you think so, I would have to say you don't understand the issue very well.

 

[The Barbarian]

seeking.IAM said: ↑
Yes. Unvaccinated people are potential hosts in which the virus may mutate thereby providing new virus variants resistant to current vaccinations. This may affect others.

Are vaccinated people not the same in this case?

No, since vaccinated people are much, much less likely to be infected. That matters. Just as a sober driver is much, much less likely to kill someone in an auto accident. That matters, too.

Why can the virus not mutate in them as well?

Because the virus is much, much less likely to even exist in vaccinated people. Doesn't seem like a difficult thing to understand, does it?

 

[Bobber]

How many times have you seen someone try to hush or stifle someone that they are arguing with by labeling them a "conspiracy theorist" as if it's some sort of mental illness?

I think this has been one of the most dangerous things in the world by having a culture which does this. That means others can be disingenuous, lie and deceive and if they happen to be powerful enough to control the media or the flow of information than that culture is done from knowing any truth.

 

[The Barbarian]

I think this has been one of the most dangerous things in the world by having a culture which does this. That means others can be disingenuous, lie and deceive and if they happen to be powerful enough to control the media or the flow of information than that culture is done from knowing any truth.

This is the part that frustrates and angers the conspiracy theorists; they have freedom to express their conspiracy stories as they like. But the can't control all of the media, and so there are many critiques openly available. And in a marketplace of ideas, crank theories lose.

It's why many of them rail against a free and open press.

 

[JacksBratt]

I think this has been one of the most dangerous things in the world by having a culture which does this. That means others can be disingenuous, lie and deceive and if they happen to be powerful enough to control the media or the flow of information than that culture is done from knowing any truth.

This is exactly what is happening with the big tech. Thankfully people are catching on and Don Lemon and Brian Stelter's ratings are dropping to basement lows and they are now getting less viewers than many of the free lancing true journalists that tell the whole story.

YouTube is now removing the "dislike" button as the WH videos and releases have 90% dislikes. Also, the Fauci documentary had rave reviews from the "Rotten Tomatoes" but actual viewer ratings were turned off. When they were pressured into allowing them... the public gave it awful ratings.

Big Tech has made it obvious that you can say anything and everything against the right.. but... posts and video's that go against the left.. they get flagged, demonetized and removed.

If you control the media and the educational institutions... it only takes a generation to corrupt the minds of the populous.

 

[JacksBratt]

No, since vaccinated people are much, much less likely to be infected. That matters. Just as a sober driver is much, much less likely to kill someone in an auto accident. That matters, too.

Then why do the vaccinated need to where a mask?

Because the virus is much, much less likely to even exist in vaccinated people. Doesn't seem like a difficult thing to understand, does it?

Less likely but not impossible. Again.. why do the vaccinated need to continue to wear masks, if this is the case.

A Canadian doctor just stated, on the news radio, that vaccinated people do not have to worry about the non vaccinated.. It is the non vaccinated that need to be careful.. He was talking about getting together for holidays and meeting indoors as it is now colder outside.

He responded because people were refusing to invite non vaccinated people to visit. He said that they are no threat to the vaccinated. No more than a vaccinated person is. There is no need to shun the non vaccinated.

Bet he gets blow back for that.

 

[The Barbarian]

Mostly, the far right is outraged that there is a free press. Presently, anyone can put up their own website/media/etc. As noted above, the big complaint is that other media can't be forced to far-right propaganda. That's not censorship; they can say what they want, but they don't have the right to insist that other people help them say it.

 

[The Barbarian]

No, since vaccinated people are much, much less likely to be infected. That matters. Just as a sober driver is much, much less likely to kill someone in an auto accident. That matters, too.

Then why do the vaccinated need to where a mask?

Then why do sober drivers need to wear a seat belt? You really don't know? Seriously?

Because the virus is much, much less likely to even exist in vaccinated people. Doesn't seem like a difficult thing to understand, does it?

Less likely but not impossible.

You're less likely to get in an auto accident if the driver is sober. Less likely but not impossible.

Again.. why do the vaccinated need to continue to wear masks, if this is the case.

Again... for the same reason sober drivers still have to wear seat belts. Think.

A Canadian doctor just stated, on the news radio, that vaccinated people do not have to worry about the non vaccinated.

"A traffic safety engineer just stated, on the news radio, that sober drivers don't have to worry about drunk drivers."

No, I don't think so. There's still a small but significant risk that a vaccinated person can be infected. And if this guy is a doctor, he's a remarkably stupid one, since unvaccinated people are much, much more likely to be infected. And thereby are a hazard even if a small hazard to vaccinated people.

Bet he gets blow back for that.

Yeah, that was more than a little stupid, wasn't it?

 

[JacksBratt]

Mostly, the far right is outraged that there is a free press. Presently, anyone can put up their own website/media/etc. As noted above, the big complaint is that other media can't be forced to far-right propaganda. That's not censorship; they can say what they want, but they don't have the right to insist that other people help them say it.

I beg to differ.
They took down the twitter account of the President of the US. They took down Rand Paul's and others. The people that I view have to be careful not to use certain words and phrases or they will be demonetized or taken down.

Meanwhile, the Taliban has a site that is openly condemning Israel...

When this started to happen, new social media websites came out.. they were blocked from the "playstore" and the apple store.

When "Gab" started up outside of the grasp of this.. the banks would not allow them to use online money transfers like "paypal" and "credit". This blocked anyone from supporting them.

Tell me now that "anyone" can put up a website.

The whole deal with Stock car interview chant was a two fold exposure.

1/ The announcer proved that they tried to present disingenuous news with a false presentation of what the crowd was really chanting. She could have just ignored it and did the interview.

2/ It brought wide spread attention and allowed free range use, without censorship and vulgarity, of what the public feels. It allowed a portal without censorship and it has spread like wild fire.

The hard truth that the main stream media and big tech is the strong arm of the left wing propaganda machine is shining brighter that a full moon at midnight.

I am obviously right wing in view but I could care less if someone shouts left wing views... if the right gets a voice too. It's obvious that its the right that is hushed.

 

[JacksBratt]

No, since vaccinated people are much, much less likely to be infected. That matters. Just as a sober driver is much, much less likely to kill someone in an auto accident. That matters, too.



Then why do sober drivers need to wear a seat belt? You really don't know? Seriously?

Because the virus is much, much less likely to even exist in vaccinated people. Doesn't seem like a difficult thing to understand, does it?



You're less likely to get in an auto accident if the driver is sober. Less likely but not impossible.



Again... for the same reason sober drivers still have to wear seat belts. Think.



"A traffic safety engineer just stated, on the news radio, that sober drivers don't have to worry about drunk drivers."

No, I don't think so. There's still a small but significant risk that a vaccinated person can be infected. And if this guy is a doctor, he's a remarkably stupid one, since unvaccinated people are much, much more likely to be infected. And thereby are a hazard even if a small hazard to vaccinated people.



Yeah, that was more than a little stupid, wasn't it?

I don't find the driver analogy accurate.

Think of masks as life jackets.

If I'm a non swimmer.. I should wear a life jacket.

If I can swim.. I don't need a life jacket and don't need to wear one to protect the non swimmer.

 

[Hammster]

But it does mean that you're not recklessly endangering others. Which is the point.

I see. Virtue signaling is the point.

 

[The Barbarian]

But it does mean that you're not recklessly endangering others. Which is the point.

I see.

Well, let's take a look...

Virtue signaling is the point.

So you think driving sober is "virtue signaling?" You still don't get it. If you don't take reasonable steps
(vaccination, weekly COVID checks, distancing) to avoid infecting others, it's reckless endangerment. It's not about appearances, it's about the actual reasons for things like seat belts, DWI laws, and vaccinations.

Case in point: Kaaron Rogers, when asked, virtue signaled "I am immunized", when in fact he wasn't and hadn't been vaccinated at all. Did that save him? Apparently, not. It's about protection, not "virtue signaling."

 

[The Barbarian]

Mostly, the far right is outraged that there is a free press. Presently, anyone can put up their own website/media/etc. As noted above, the big complaint is that other media can't be forced to far-right propaganda. That's not censorship; they can say what they want, but they don't have the right to insist that other people help them say it.

I beg to differ.

Doesn't matter. You have a right to say what you please. You don't have a right to demand than anyone else give you a soapbox to say it on.

They took down the twitter account of the President of the US. They took down Rand Paul's and others.

That's what happens when people spread lies and misinformation. But it's their playpen, not Donald's or Rand's. They want to spread their stuff, they'll need to find a venue that will tolerate it.

When "Gab" started up outside of the grasp of this.. the banks would not allow them to use online money transfers like "paypal" and "credit". This blocked anyone from supporting them.

Yeah, that happens to inappropriate content sites, too. Turns out, you don't have a right to demand services from banks who don't want to be associated with you, either, (with a few exceptions specified by law). BTW, inappropriate content sites quickly found banks willing to work with them. I hear Donald has a good relationship with Alfa bank. Maybe they'd go for it. I guess Deutschebank isn't talking to him any more.

Tell me now that "anyone" can put up a website.

Yes. Would you like to see how?

The whole deal with Stock car interview chant was a two fold exposure.

It was kind of touching how the white supremacists thought that it would trigger normal Americans, wasn't it? One of the key elements of shrieking paranoia, is the belief that everyone watches you with great interest, and therefore spends an inordinate amount of time and effort to get you.

The hard truth that the main stream media and big tech is the strong arm of the left wing propaganda machine is shining brighter that a full moon at midnight.

Yeah, like that. When the final breakdown comes, it's a confused rant about how Fox News is now liberal. Fun to watch, but kinda sad, too.

 

[The Barbarian]

I don't find the driver analogy accurate.

That's the interesting thing about reality. It doesn't care what you or I think.

Think of masks as life jackets.

Except of course, life jackets only protect those wearing them. And masks mostly protect other people than the wearer. Otherwise, exactly the same. (I'm not trying to be sarcastic here)

If I can swim.. I don't need a life jacket and don't need to wear one to protect the non swimmer.

Somewhat right. Because unlike masks, life jackets don't protect other people. They only protect you. Well done.

I say "somewhat" because a lot of people who could swim, drowned in boating accidents, but hardly anyone wearing a life jacket has drowned. But wearing a life jacket won't protect other people from drowning.

I don't think you've thought this through very well.

 

[The Barbarian]

I beg to differ.
They took down the twitter account of the President of the US. They took down Rand Paul's and others. The people that I view have to be careful not to use certain words and phrases or they will be demonetized or taken down.

Meanwhile, the Taliban has a site that is openly condemning Israel...

There's Breitbart and OAN and Daily Stormer, and other weird extremist sites, too. Not just whacked out Muslim fanatics, who are regarded as heretics by most Muslims.

When this started to happen, new social media websites came out.. they were blocked from the "playstore" and the apple store.

Remember when we pointed out that private companies don't have to help you spread your POV? It's the law.

Tell me now that "anyone" can put up a website.

If Nazis, Marxists, Q Anon, KKK and the Taliban can do it yeah, pretty much everyone.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I would like to remind everyone that vaccine mandates have been in force in one form or another for decades. Vaccines against several childhood diseases are generally required for children to attend a public school. So let's not pretend that vaccine mandates are brand new because of covid-19. Any argument against covid vaccine mandates would have to be specific to covid vaccines and not general, applying to any and all mandatory vaccines.

 

[The Barbarian]

I would like to remind everyone that vaccine mandates have been in force in one form or another for decades.

Over a hundred years, if you don't count George Washington making smallpox vaccinations mandatory for the Continental Army.

 

[Bobber]

A Canadian doctor just stated, on the news radio, that vaccinated people do not have to worry about the non vaccinated.. It is the non vaccinated that need to be careful.. He was talking about getting together for holidays and meeting indoors as it is now colder outside.

He responded because people were refusing to invite non vaccinated people to visit. He said that they are no threat to the vaccinated. No more than a vaccinated person is. There is no need to shun the non vaccinated.

Bet he gets blow back for that.

Could be wrong but I think in Canada, which I'm a Canadian too, but I think the unvaccinated might be heading for more of a sense of being ostracized in the coming months. All vaxed people are going into sports events etc, etc, close proximity and if covid numbers go up they're going to blame the unvaccinated ...people that aren't even at the events. I hope not but we might be heading for the most unjustified accusation ever given in world history.

 

[Bobber]

I would like to remind everyone that vaccine mandates have been in force in one form or another for decades. Vaccines against several childhood diseases are generally required for children to attend a public school. So let's not pretend that vaccine mandates are brand new because of covid-19. Any argument against covid vaccine mandates would have to be specific to covid vaccines and not general, applying to any and all mandatory vaccines.

This is true. I grew up in the 60's and I remember a few times they lined us up in the halls and we waited our turn for a vax. Nobody even gave it a second thought. I think the argument of some though is that not enough test time has been done for these present vacs and I'm not sure of how much of that was done in the 60s.