Businesses Requiring Vaccine Passports

[ADigitalArtist]

Who are you to judge other people?
This entire thread is a disgrace, name-calling, judging.

Someone who has picked up a book on the subject.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Because those people would still be a risk to other people that do not understand how the world works. Once again, you can put yourself at risk. You cannot put others at risk even if they chose not to get the vaccine too.

Okay, now this this really silly. "People that do not understand how the world works"? What does that mean, who are they and how many of them are there?

If we don't want the vaccine, we're accepting whatever risk there is. I don't really care if I get Covid but it's probably not going to happen, anyway.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You know. I don't think any person here who won't take the vaccine has judged anyone for taking it?

Because it's be pretty hard to make a convincing argument for judging someone for making the socially conscious responsible decision.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Okay, now this this really silly. "People that do not understand how the world works"? What does that mean, who are they and how many of them are there?

If we don't want the vaccine, we're accepting whatever risk there is. I don't really care if I get Covid but it's probably not going to happen, anyway.

You don't care if you get COVID but hopefully realize that you can infect someone who could die or become bedridden from it, right?

 

[Trailblazer]

Yes, since scientific evidence is not up for personal opinion, anyone who doesn't "agree" (I prefer "accept" because agreement implies a valid alternative opinion) is either misinformed or being outright irrational, in my opinion.

Evidence of what? I am not denying that the vaccines offer protection from the virus.
And anyone who says there is no possible long term risk from the vaccines is illogical since the long term has not occurred yet.

What assessment? That the virus could kill or severely damage someone's health, much less a vulnerable person's? That's been thoroughly evidenced throughout the last year and a half as well. It isn't my assessment; it's simply one of the facts we currently know.

Facts you currently know of. Sorry, that is not long enough for me. To each his or her own.

 

[Debater Slayer]

You know. I don't think any person here who won't take the vaccine has judged anyone for taking it?

Dangerous irrationality and misinformed decisions aren't on equal logical or ethical footing with responsible research and respect for factual consistency. It would be absurd to make a misinformed or unreasonable decision and judge others for not doing the same.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Vaccines do diddly if a large enough percentage of a population won't take them, because the virus has ample opportunity to mutate in unresistant bodies into vaccine resistant strains and then the pandemic starts all over again, except now with a harder to treat version which may be more infectious and more deadly.

I thought that most people wanted the vaccine? Aren't people like me a minority? I mean, I've heard the stats saying that most or half of EMTs, nurses and other medical care workers refuse to get the vaccine but the general stats I see on the news seem positive and going up every day?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No, statistics make it a fact. It is amazing how people will deny reality when it disagrees with their superstitious beliefs.

Making a choice not to take the vaccine after reading the same statistics doesn't make either side ignorant. We just made different decisions. Not from superstitious beliefs.

You're mixing some things up. We both read the same sources. Both our decisions are justified. A lot of us aren't saying the info is false. We're saying based on our own reasoning we choose not to follow every fact we read.

It's not based on sup. beliefs.

 

[Trailblazer]

You don't care if you get COVID but hopefully realize that you can infect someone who could die or become bedridden from it, right?

Very soon anyone who wants a vaccine will be able to get a vaccine.
If they are vaccinated a non-vaccinated person can infect them?

 

[Debater Slayer]

Evidence of what? I am not denying that the vaccines offer protection from the virus.
And anyone who says there is no possible long term risk from the vaccines is illogical since the long term has not occurred yet.

Of course, as with any other medicine or vaccine, there are bound to be long-term risks. It is a matter of probability, severity, and risk versus benefit. I would take a 1/100,000 (or even less) chance of a serious complication from a vaccine over a 3%-5% fatality rate or other severe complication from the virus.

Facts you currently know of. Sorry, that is not long enough for me. To each his or her own.

How long is long enough? When 500,000 more Americans have died? Or when nearly three more million have died worldwide?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

You don't care if you get COVID but hopefully realize that you can infect someone who could die or become bedridden from it, right?

Lots of things could happen in life, should we destroy society over them? I wear a mask and generally keep my distance. I don't like being around people for the most part, anyway. I'm not susceptible to guilt-tripping.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Not all of us are saying vaccines do not work.

We are saying they are only appropriate in certain circumstances.

1. If you're in a high populated environment, it would be appropriate.
If you live alone, it would not.

2. If you are at high risk, it would be appropriate
If you are not, it is a personal choice but not essential

I take it you're a medical professional qualified to make such assertions about vaccines?

I'm not sure how this came from my statement, quite honestly. I never made assertions of the effectiveness of the vaccine. I'm just saying it should be a personal decision and taking the vaccine is appropriate in some situations but not in others. Ask a doctor if medication should be given to all people because science says it works. He'd look at you funny.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

I thought that most people wanted the vaccine? Aren't people like me a minority? I mean, I've heard the stats saying that most or half of EMTs, nurses and other medical care workers refuse to get the vaccine but the general stats I see on the news seem positive and going up every day?

You need around 80% for vaccine herd immunity and a *quarter* of the polled are refusing the vaccine. Worse in America because so much scientific illiteracy and political fearmongering here.

Further, the worst ratios are clustered in Southern states, where refusal is much higher.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I wondered when religion would enter in.

Of course this is no different than arguing about religion.

No, the facts are not all in after a few months of the vaccinations being administered. That is not even logical. Long-term effects cannot be known in a few months. But nobody cares because they are so scared of dying. Why not just be honest? This not about saving other people, because there will be enough vaccinations for everyone who wants one very soon, and then nothing unvaccinated people do can ever hurt them because they are completely protected, or so they believe, and no, the science is not in on how long they are protected. This whole thing is uncharted territory and I do not generally go into uncharted territory unless I have a very good reason for doing so.

You brought religious level denial into this. Don't complain when you make that sort of error and it is pointed out to you.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Lots of things could happen in life, should we destroy society over them? I wear a mask and generally keep my distance. I don't like being around people for the most part, anyway. I'm not susceptible to guilt-tripping.

It isn't guilt-tripping. It's an appeal to a very real and proved possibility, although sometimes we do need to feel guilty if we refuse to take certain measures out of courtesy and respect for others' safety.

Getting vaccinated doesn't "destroy society." In fact, since long-term lockdowns could do exactly that, accelerating the safe opening up of public places and businesses by getting vaccinated seems to me the logical thing to do if one doesn't want society to be destroyed.

 

[Trailblazer]

Making a choice not to take the vaccine after reading the same statistics doesn't make either side ignorant. We just made different decisions. Not from superstitious beliefs.

They always start hitting below the belt when they cannot respond to our arguments. The escalation is fairly predictable.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Dangerous irrationality and misinformed decisions aren't on equal logical or ethical footing with responsible research and respect for factual consistency. It would be absurd to make a misinformed or unreasonable decision and judge others for not doing the same.

How do you know this based on someone else's choice not to take the vaccine?

Why can't people make informed decisions to not take the vaccine that every other person is running to take?

Each person's situation is different. No doctor would give all people the same medicine just because it works in and of itself. It depends on the person, the nature of their illness, side affects, and so forth. Likewise, taking the vaccine is appropriate depending on the lifestyle of the person, whether they are at high risk, they are working with people who have the condition or ill people in general, and other like factors.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I think it's interesting that people seem bent on forcing the Covid vaccine on everyone but we actually have medications to treat/manage and even prevent HIV infections, but I don't see PrEP being forced on everyone. Hell, many people still can't even afford it and these drugs have been available for years. Even though if you gave it to everyone who was HIV-, it could literally wipe out HIV in a generation. And HIV still has no cure (once you have it, you'll not have it), has nearly a 100% fatality rate and has killed at least 32 million people.

I just don't understand some things.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Making a choice not to take the vaccine after reading the same statistics doesn't make either side ignorant. We just made different decisions. Not from superstitious beliefs.

You're mixing some things up. We both read the same sources. Both our decisions are justified. A lot of us aren't saying the info is false. We're saying based on our own reasoning we choose not to follow every fact we read.

It's not based on sup. beliefs.

It makes one either ignorant or extremely selfish. Those refusing to be vaccinated put everyone else at risk. They have no grounds to complain if they have to pay a price for their ignorance. Please note, calling those people ignorant is giving them the benefit of the doubt. They might just be evil selfish people.

 

[Debater Slayer]

How do you know this based on someone else's choice not to take the vaccine?

Why can't people make informed decisions to not take the vaccine that every other person is running to take?

They can; I just don't see any indication of that in the reasoning you've given in this thread. You're merely making nebulous, poorly reasoned claims and overreaching by making assertions about a medical issue without any professional references or studies as if you were an expert or some other authority on the subject.

Each person's situation is different. No doctor would give all people the same medicine just because it works in and of itself. It depends on the person, the nature of their illness, side affects, and so forth. Likewise, taking the vaccine is appropriate depending on the lifestyle of the person, whether they are at high risk, they are working with people who have the condition or ill people in general, and other like factors.

Yet more assertions with no studies or expert opinions to back them up. This is beyond intellectually irresponsible given the seriousness of the subject in question. At least try to post links or citations to reliable evidence if you're going to make so many claims about something outside your field of expertise.