Businesses Requiring Vaccine Passports

[Trailblazer]

When your decisions effect other people, things are different. In this case, things like not distancing, not cooperating with masks, not getting vaccinated effects others and puts them at risk.

I am not putting anyone at risk because I am not coming into contact with anyone.
For less than half an hour twice a week I am in a grocery store late at night socially distant with my mask on.

 

[McBell]

Preaching is telling someone they should believe or do something.
Please show me where I did that.

I prefer the dictionary definition over yours:

the giving of moral advice in a pompously self-righteous way.​

 

[Trailblazer]

Are there facts that someone "will" spread the virus if they don't have the vaccine?

No, there are no facts, there is just fear. This is fear-mongering plain and simple.

 

[Trailblazer]

I prefer the dictionary definition over yours:

the giving of moral advice in a pompously self-righteous way.​

Show me where I gave moral advice.
Who is giving the advice on this thread?
Those people who self-righteously believe that everyone should get the vaccine.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why should anyone trust your word over that of the multiple studies that have shown mRNA vaccines for COVID-19 to be safe and effective overall?

And what did I say that was wrong?

Who wrote those studies and who is financing them?

 

[Debater Slayer]

And what did I say that was wrong?

Who wrote those studies and who is financing them?

I was responding to your calling the vaccine "experimental" and "from a shady company," which could give the impression to a reader that the vaccines are unsafe or ineffective. Studies have demonstrated the opposite:

One dose of Pfizer or Moderna vaccines was 80% effective in preventing Covid in CDC study of health workers

Comparing the COVID-19 Vaccines: How Are They Different?

The studies were conducted by medical experts, including the CDC. As for who financed them, I can't speak to that, although the fact that there are different expert sources citing them should say something about their credibility and soundness from a professional point of view.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The shocking amount of willful ignorance it takes to still be paranoid about these vaccines makes me tired. If you don't yet know what's in it or how it interacts with the body it's because you haven't looked, or have only looked at fear mongering talking heads.

I'm beginning to think that if there was a zombie apocalypse, instead of it being over quickly by sheer number of guns, it would go on forever out of sheer contrarianness to be informed about how zombie bites work.

Anyway, I still have my vaccine card. I'm happy to submit it to whatever business wants me to show it before participating, maskless or otherwise.

What about just the decision to not take it?

Why would one need to be ignorant, dumb, or so have you for making a decision based on his or her own logical and justified reasoning?

 

[Debater Slayer]

That was a simple observation of perceived behavior, not a character assassination. Calling people selfish because they won't get the vaccine is a character assassination.

I don't think everyone who doesn't get vaccinated is necessarily selfish (sometimes they're merely misinformed or being unreasonable), but a "simple observation of perceived behavior" seems to me applicable to calling anti-vaxxers selfish in a lot of cases. If you want to be consistent, accusing others of being "self-righteous" for criticizing perceived behavior and motivation while doing the same thing isn't the best way to go about it.

Who is doing the preaching? I'll tell you who in case you don't know. It is the people who are preaching that everyone should get vaccinated or else they are selfish.

See above. I care far less about the adjective used to describe anti-vaxxers than I do the real-world effects of their decision. Whether or not they're selfish is a secondary issue to the fact that they could infect and kill or severely damage the health of a vulnerable person due to their misinformed decision.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

encourage those who are not vaccinated to get a shot and show people...

Is that one of the main purposes, to do it for other people??

 

[Twilight Hue]

The shocking amount of willful ignorance it takes to still be paranoid about these vaccines makes me tired. If you don't yet know what's in it or how it interacts with the body it's because you haven't looked, or have only looked at fear mongering talking heads.

I'm beginning to think that if there was a zombie apocalypse, instead of it being over quickly by sheer number of guns, it would go on forever out of sheer contrarianness to be informed about how zombie bites work.

Anyway, I still have my vaccine card. I'm happy to submit it to whatever business wants me to show it before participating, maskless or otherwise.

Well....

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why?

Because the virus is a high health risk.

Now you just dodged, I did not dodge in return. You know that is wrong. So Why Not?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Is that one of the main purposes, to do it for other people??

A person is free to put himself at risk. Not getting people vaccinated puts other people at risk, so yes, there are legal reasons to do this.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I only replied to your post flat out asking for an argument for it....

Easy, as I just said, unvaccinated people are a health risk to others. One has a right to put one's own health at risk, one does not have a right to put the health of others at risk.

 

[Trailblazer]

I don't think everyone who doesn't get vaccinated is necessarily selfish (sometimes they're merely misinformed or being unreasonable), but a "simple observation of perceived behavior" seems to me applicable to calling anti-vaxxers selfish in a lot of cases.

I care far less about the adjective used to describe anti-vaxxers than I do the real-world effects of their decision. Whether or not they're selfish is a secondary issue to the fact that they could infect and kill or severely damage the health of a vulnerable person due to their misinformed decision.

I am not an anti-vaxxer. I am just an individual who has chosen not to take the vaccine for now because I have no reason to do so since I am socially isolated.

You keep calling it misinformed just because people do not agree with the information that has been put out.
"they could infect and kill or severely damage the health of a vulnerable person" just because they won't get the vaccination. I do not agree with that assessment.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Easy, as I just said, unvaccinated people are a health risk to others. One has a right to put one's own health at risk, one does not have a right to put the health of others at risk.

Health risk to who? The unvaccinated? Then they should get vaccinated, if they're afraid of it. Then they're protected from it, right?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

A person is free to put himself at risk. Not getting people vaccinated puts other people at risk, so yes, there are legal reasons to do this.

It doesn't put people at risk. It's a perceived risk based on fear. Trailblazer, for example, doesn't go to much places if any (she said). She can't put people at risk because she hasn't put herself at risk to catch anything to spread. I literally see the same people in the same area in the same housing complex and environment.

Unless there is evidence that people who don't have the vaccine "are" asymptomatic and "will" spread the virus, it is a perceived risk--and when there is fear due to uncertainty and watching numbers rise-you project it on others not in your boat. It's a poor support to make everyone take this vaccine. It really isn't a legal matter unless it infringes on a person's rights to choose what's best for his or her well-being. There has to be more evidence than what we see on television and the people we take care of and so forth. Believe me. At least the minority want cold facts before taking anything they are not comfortable with... and peer pressure shouldn't be the motivator nor should the law.

 

[Trailblazer]

Because the virus is a high health risk.

I disagree. It is not a high health risk for me because given my lifestyle my chances of contracting it are slim.
But it is my risk to take.

Now you just dodged, I did not dodge in return. You know that is wrong. So Why Not?

Dodged what?
Telling everyone that they NEED to get the vaccine just in case is no different from Christians saying you have to believe in Jesus or you won't be saved.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Easy, as I just said, unvaccinated people are a health risk to others. One has a right to put one's own health at risk, one does not have a right to put the health of others at risk.

That's a huge generalization. It's perceived and based on fear. Unless you can prove for a fact people who are unvaccinated "will" spread the virus, the risk factor is based on population, general health of the person, age, and other-not-because they didn't take the vaccine.

 

[Trailblazer]

Health risk to who? The unvaccinated? Then they should get vaccinated, if they're afraid of it. Then they're protected from it, right?

That my friend was a double WINNER.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Health risk to who? The unvaccinated? Then they should get vaccinated, if they're afraid of it. Then they're protected from it, right?

There will always be some that have a legitimate reason for not being vaccinated. People with weakened immunity systems for example often can not get vaccinated. And until everyone that is able to receive the poke can and does get vaccinated the unvaccinated will be a threat. If you want to put others at risk then you also need to be willing to pay the price for doing that.