Businesses Requiring Vaccine Passports

[Unveiled Artist]

Instead of wearing gloves, I'm careful to not touch
entry points for viruses, eg, eyes. Washing hands
is useful.

true or do both?

 

[Revoltingest]

true or do both?

I do both.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Nothing is 100% guaranteed.

Which is why it is not a valid question to begin with and cannot be answered except that such a thing is not possible.

So, safe than sorry is fine but I do think you (and others) can be overboard with it.

It's not going overboard. Not unless you consider it overboard wearing loose fitting denim jeans in a place known for rattlesnake bites.
And it's also acknowledging the social responsibilities involved behind this, mainly, making sure we do not expose others to more a risk than necessary just in case we unknowingly carry the virus. Wearing a mask and keeping distant can literally save lives and prevent great suffering. And it's not much to ask, to keep yourself and others safe. The science is overwhelmingly conclusive on it.

Since we touch things all the time, I can see wearing gloves would be a good idea but I don't see many people do it.

That's because many months ago we learned that the risk of surface transmission is negligible so long as you wash you hands and don't touch your eyes or pick your nose until you have.
People aren't wearing gloves because we don't need to.
That is why it is important to stay current with information.
Cashiers, on the other hand, wear gloves a lot even before covid because money, overall, is pretty filthy amd germy. I never wore gloves handling it, but I can't fault those who do.

There's probably a minority who are ignoring everything but I'd find that rare cause they'd face it once they go out the door so they mind as well look it up.

There have been people who have died from it and denied even having it. That was in sparsely populated South Dakota when it was ravaged by covid. And that patient wasn't the only one to deny they have covid and covid is why they are sick.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Which is why it is not a valid question to begin with and cannot be answered except that such a thing is not possible.

Which question? The quote-section doesn't have a question.

Is it can you prove that people are at higher risk because they don't take the vaccine?

I know you can be at higher risk without the vaccine if you have the virus. Without contracting the virus, you're at a perceived risk. While I see its good to be safe than sorry, I rather worry about the actual risk not a perceived risk.

In other words, since I don't know if you have the virus (and I assume you believe you could be now?), I'm not too antzy to be around you (just an example). I don't believe I have a 100% chance to get it from you just by "thinking" you may have it (unless you can prove otherwise?). However, if I knew you had the virus, then I would not go around you because it "is" a risk of my catching the virus. So, with that risk, I would not chance it.

Since I only can judge by perceived risks unless I know someone around me has the virus, I can either jump in traffic and flinch away from people, or just be neutral, wear my mask, social distance, and call it a day. I'm not afraid of a perceived risk because it is not a fact and cannot be proven a true risk unless I knew that other person had the virus. Since I do not know, I'll wear my mask and social distance, but for me it's not that serious that I need to take the vacine.

Now your circumstance may be different just as the person beside you. We are are at risk of catching the virus but we are not all on the same risk level. So it depends on the individual person how he or she wants to address it (take the vaccine, don't, etc)...but it doesn't put anyone in danger just a perceived one.

When it comes to emotions and assumptions we are basically our own worse enemy. We could be thinking the other is doing this and thinking that about us, but we just don't know until we ask. So, we can either simmer in our thoughts and feel confirmed in our bias because we don't like what the other says (confirmed bias) or we can ask to check to see if our assumptions are correct.

Easier said than done.

It's not going overboard. Not unless you consider it overboard wearing loose fitting denim jeans in a place known for rattlesnake bites.

And it's also acknowledging the social responsibilities involved behind this, mainly, making sure we do not expose others to more a risk than necessary just in case we unknowingly carry the virus. Wearing a mask and keeping distant can literally save lives and prevent great suffering. And it's not much to ask, to keep yourself and others safe. The science is overwhelmingly conclusive on it.

I say overboard because of the jumping in the street and flinching around someone whose not even armed length of you rather than overboard over the situation itself.

Why do you put so much energy in thinking you "could" have the virus because experts tell you so? (To the point of telling people they're not caring for thinking the same as you?)

You may not be panicking, but the way you confront people who you think aren't wearing masks because they don't care or not taking the vaccine because they want to kill people is just as worse if not more under your control than the instinct of panic in a pandemic.

Your concerns are warranted. This conversation is calmer than others, but maybe if you understood from the other person's point of view and accept that answer it would be a bit better regardless how illogical you may think it is.

That's because many months ago we learned that the risk of surface transmission is negligible so long as you wash you hands and don't touch your eyes or pick your nose until you have.
People aren't wearing gloves because we don't need to.
That is why it is important to stay current with information.
Cashiers, on the other hand, wear gloves a lot even before covid because money, overall, is pretty filthy amd germy. I never wore gloves handling it, but I can't fault those who do.

Why wouldn't you need to?

Viruses are spread by contact... so why people can't think for themselves and wear them despite what the experts have not yet said?

Do we really need experts to tell us to wear gloves and wear masks because of the virus if we have researched the nature of the virus and understand-for ourselves-based on the information we read how its transmitted?

Some basics are just common sense and others we can make our own conclusions (like washing your hands) and not needing experts to tell you to do so.

There have been people who have died from it and denied even having it. That was in sparsely populated South Dakota when it was ravaged by covid. And that patient wasn't the only one to deny they have covid and covid is why they are sick.

That makes sense because the virus mimics other lung disease (as per what it is), so it's not denial. Most people aren't doctors so they may have some mild symptoms (and they do get better) and those who do not, like other illnesses, go to the doctors when they realize something is wrong more so than a nagging cough.

Its not denial. Ignorance may be the better word but I choose to use unknowledgeable. I mean, when my leg was swelling, I didn't go to the doctors cause I thought it was my running. I wasn't in denial, I just thought it was something that would go away. After two or some odd weeks when my leg blew up like a state puff the doctor said "go to the hospital immediately to see if you have a blood clot." Thank goodness I didn't have it, I have something else, but no doctor would say I was denying my symptoms because I'm not a professional and we make decisions based on what we know best.

Just because it's COVID, doesn't mean it's not the same reasoning.

 

[Dave Watchman]

Instead of wearing gloves, I'm careful to not touch
entry points for viruses, eg, eyes. Washing hands
is useful.

I touch everything.

Those produce baggies, I can't get them open without licking my finger.

What if I take the vaccine, but refuse the Vaccine Passport?

Will they be mad?

I didn't have time to read your thread yet.

So not sure if this was posted.

They're talking about it on another forum, the Naomi Wolf video from yesterday.

They think it's not about Covid.

They think it's not about the vaccine.

It's the Passport itself they want you to take.

Prior to Covid, there really wasn't anything out there that could provide the motivation for getting a large portion of the planet to sign up for something like this with such enthusiasm.

Some highlights from the video:

- "A hill worth dying on".

- This is quickly being rolled out around the world.

- This will be a social credit system like they have in China.

- China owns a lot of the social networks, like Zoom.

- The vaccine passport is based on the same platform as China's system.

- Very easy to add functionality to the passport.

- Not sure if the COVID passport has geolocation capability but if not it will soon have it. The government will come up with a reason to add it.

- Example: you go to a restaurant with others, everyone has to swipe their passports, then everyone at the table is reported to the central database as a 'meeting'. This will allow the government to generate and track all your associations with others. Heck, they will eventually use this to locate clandestine religious services, etc.

- Israel has already rolled out their passports.

- England is now doing this.

- In the US we have Cuomo and the Excelsior passport, and Biden is talking about a national passport.

- One of the functions they will add eventually is tying your PayPal, Google Wallet and Apple Pay to your card. This explains the push for digital currency. And if you become a dissident because of a book you bought or a place you went they can just shut off your ability to purchase anything, etc.

- You can easily see how this thing will become a social credit system to control your life.

- Another thing I though of is that you won't be able to go out in public without your 'passport' without being identified as such. They already have machines that can track you around a store by monitoring the position of your smart phone. The government will use the same kind of thing to determine if a person doesn't have their passport, then alert the national police SWAT team to arrest you.

- There is no end to the tyranny that can happen because of the passport. It's just the beginning. It's like taxes, taxes will never go down, they only go up and you get all kinds of new taxes. Well the functionality of your COVID passport will only get bigger and bigger and bigger. The government will come up with all kinds of reasons to add more things to monitor.

- A hill worth dying on, indeed.

 

[Revoltingest]

I touch everything.

Those produce baggies, I can't get them open without licking my finger.

What if I take the vaccine, but refuse the Vaccine Passport?

Will they be mad?

I didn't have time to read your thread yet.

So not sure if this was posted.

They're talking about it on another forum, the Naomi Wolf video from yesterday.

They think it's not about Covid.

They think it's not about the vaccine.

It's the Passport itself they want you to take.

Prior to Covid, there really wasn't anything out there that could provide the motivation for getting a large portion of the planet to sign up for something like this with such enthusiasm.

Some highlights from the video:

- "A hill worth dying on".

- This is quickly being rolled out around the world.

- This will be a social credit system like they have in China.

- China owns a lot of the social networks, like Zoom.

- The vaccine passport is based on the same platform as China's system.

- Very easy to add functionality to the passport.

- Not sure if the COVID passport has geolocation capability but if not it will soon have it. The government will come up with a reason to add it.

- Example: you go to a restaurant with others, everyone has to swipe their passports, then everyone at the table is reported to the central database as a 'meeting'. This will allow the government to generate and track all your associations with others. Heck, they will eventually use this to locate clandestine religious services, etc.

- Israel has already rolled out their passports.

- England is now doing this.

- In the US we have Cuomo and the Excelsior passport, and Biden is talking about a national passport.

- One of the functions they will add eventually is tying your PayPal, Google Wallet and Apple Pay to your card. This explains the push for digital currency. And if you become a dissident because of a book you bought or a place you went they can just shut off your ability to purchase anything, etc.

- You can easily see how this thing will become a social credit system to control your life.

- Another thing I though of is that you won't be able to go out in public without your 'passport' without being identified as such. They already have machines that can track you around a store by monitoring the position of your smart phone. The government will use the same kind of thing to determine if a person doesn't have their passport, then alert the national police SWAT team to arrest you.

- There is no end to the tyranny that can happen because of the passport. It's just the beginning. It's like taxes, taxes will never go down, they only go up and you get all kinds of new taxes. Well the functionality of your COVID passport will only get bigger and bigger and bigger. The government will come up with all kinds of reasons to add more things to monitor.

- A hill worth dying on, indeed.

I don't quite see public health as tyranny.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The comparison isn't a good one. There are places people who smoke can go without being denied entry.

And there will places the unvaccinated will go without being denied entry.

Do you think that your rights are being violated by entrepreneurs requiring vaccination to enter, or by creating vaccinated-only spaces in their places of business?

If "all" businesses denied people entry because they were not vaccinated (sounds like we're animals or something) there's a bigger problem than just going six feet from the building to smoke a cigarettes' or putting a piece of cloth over one's face.

First, all businesses will not do that.

Second, I don't mind eating with animals if they aren't a source of contagion. The country I live in routinely allows people to bring their pets to restaurants, but it is up to the entrepreneur. I don't mind a dog on the floor at the next table. Actually, I like it.

Third, why can't you order food to go and eat six feet away from the building like a smoker? Or take it home. Or eat in your car or in a park. You might rather stay in the restaurant, but so would the smoker.

It seems like what you want is to be able to sit beside people who don't want to sit near you, and you are indifferent to their concerns, but seem to think that others should accommodate you and just assume the risk. Is that correct?

And what is this bigger problem of which you speak? What problem will segregating the vaccinated from the unvaccinated cause for people that refuse vaccination that deserves to be called big?

You know who else I won't eat beside if I can help it? People with crying or screaming children. The last time we got up and moved to the other side of the restaurant for this reason, we got hate stares from the parents, implying that we were out of line for not wanting to endure their children. I guess that they thought we should behave like the kids' grandparents would, and just take it even though we could move - you know, it takes a village, and everybody in the restaurant needs to buck up and just sit there patiently so as not to offend the parents. Sorry, but if you child is tantruming, you should be moving the child somewhere else as you would in church or a theater.

I would do the same if I heard the people at the next table say that they hadn't been vaccinated. Or if they lit up a cigarette and nobody stopped them. Or if somebody was coughing up mucus at the next table.

Do you think that that is unreasonable? Or any more or less unreasonable than not wanting to sit near people 10x more likely to be infected than the vaccinated people I prefer to eat with? That number is based on the fact that if you and and another person are both exposed to the virus at the same time in the same way, but only I am vaccinated with a vaccine that prevents 90% of infections that would otherwise have been expected to occur, then you are ten times more likely to become infected and infectious from any given exposure. Sitting with beside one such person is as risky as sitting beside ten vaccinated people.

As I said, it's not personal. Get a vaccine or wait until the pandemic is over, and you're welcome to join us at our table.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why do you put so much energy in thinking you "could" have the virus because experts tell you so?

The only time I've put energy into wondering if I had it was for about the first week of the year because I was having some chest pains and tightness and some difficulty breathing. Other than that the energy gets put into observing others to know if I need to stay back from them or even request they back up (and in this case I do put my arm out to demonstrate how close they are, because it's generally within arms reach or near to it and my arm is not six feet long). And apart from that, trying to go to stores that don't have many people in them, when they aren't as busy, and those who have been good about mask enforcement. I've been doing that so the effort and concern is minimal on my end. Like gas stations, if the workers had no masks on customers didn't either, I quit going. I probably would be fine, but considering what is at stake it's just easier to go to a store where I won't have to worry about that.

You may not be panicking, but the way you confront people who you think aren't wearing masks because they don't care or taking the vaccine because they want to kill people is just as worse if not more under your control than the instinct of panic in a pandemic.

I do confront people when they get near me. Not really anymore, since I'm on the other side of this, but a couple people did get pretty crappy with me over it.

Do we really need experts to tell us to wear gloves and wear masks because of the virus if we have researched the nature of the virus and understand-for ourselves-based on the information we read how its transmitted?

The risk of surface transmission is so low that as far as our hands go we just have to be like we normally should be anyways (though the statistics before covid showed many people were not good with the handwashing).
And keep in mind, the masks help protect others. Surgeons and dentists, they don't wear them normally to keep what you have away from them, it keeps what they have off of you.

That makes sense because the virus mimics other lung disease (as per what it is), so it's not denial. Most people aren't doctors so they may have some mild symptoms (and they do get better) and those who do not, like other illnesses, go to the doctors when they realize something is wrong more so than a nagging cough.

They are tested, found to have it, have the symptoms of it, but insist to the doctors it must be something like lung cancer, COPD, or emphysema. Things that are very different from covid, but because these people believe it's not a risk, and with some believing it doesn't even exist and is all a hoax. it was very much denial because they had it and was in very deep denial about having it.

Its not denial. Ignorance may be the better word but I choose to use knowledgeable. I mean, when my leg was swelling, I didn't go to the doctors cause I thought it was my running. I wasn't in denial, I just thought it was something that would go away. After two or some odd weeks when my leg blew up like a state puff the doctor said "go to the hospital immediately to see if you have a blood clot." Thank goodness I didn't have it, I have something else, but no doctor would say I was denying my symptoms because I'm not a professional and we make decisions based on what we know best.

You wasn't denying you had it and you had reason to believe it may have been something else. That's a nasty problem with my health is that IBS mirrors so many things that many times I don't really know whats wrong with me until enough time has passed (sometimes half a day, sometimes weeks) to access if it is my IBS flaring up or something else going on.
But that is entirely different from having a disease and the symptoms of it and denying you have it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

And there will places the unvaccinated will go without being denied entry.

Do you think that your rights are being violated by entrepreneurs requiring vaccination to enter, or by creating vaccinated-only spaces in their places of business?

"There will be places the unvaccinated will go..."

Like black and white bathrooms?

The issue isn't a legal one, and I hope the government doesn't make it a health safety/discrimination issue. There will be a problem. I'm glad I'm not political, but if I were I wouldn't know how to digest this.

-

When they had black/white bathrooms, black people's rights weren't violated as per the laws at the time. People knew the blacks are supposed to go here and the whites there. It was "normal." (In the general sense of the word) Until our laws changed for the betterment of all people regardless of color of skin.

A perceived risk is not an actual risk.

But, no. I don't believe the unvaccinated rights are taken since it's not law that private businesses can deny entry to people. So, it's an ethical issue not a legal one.

First, all businesses will not do that.

Second, I don't mind eating with animals if they aren't a source of contagion. The country I live in routinely allows people to bring their pets to restaurants, but it is up to the entrepreneur. I don't mind a dog on the floor at the next table. Actually, I like it.

What!? What?! You don't mind eating with animals....? I don't mind a dog on the floor?

This sounds like an ethical issue not a legal one. Your ethics are different than mine. What?

Third, why can't you order food to go and eat six feet away from the building like a smoker? Or take it home. Or eat in your car or in a park. You might rather stay in the restaurant, but so would the smoker.

It seems like what you want is to be able to sit beside people who don't want to sit near you, and you are indifferent to their concerns, but seem to think that others should accommodate you and just assume the risk. Is that correct?

Perceived risk doesn't spread the virus and doesn't put you in danger. Actual risk does.

The bank I went to said they couldn't ask costumers if they had illnesses. They had to turn all people away who they perceived was sick. I mean, I have to try not to cough around people (with. my mask on) for fear someone would make some sort of unwarranted reaction or worse have the manager throw me out the store... and it could just be a dry throat.

You're putting intentions in my mouth. "should accommodate you..."

Where have I said those words?

And what is this bigger problem of which you speak? What problem will segregating the vaccinated from the unvaccinated cause for people that refuse vaccination that deserves to be called big?

You know who else I won't eat beside if I can help it? People with crying or screaming children. The last time we got up and moved to the other side of the restaurant for this reason, we got hate stares from the parents, implying that we were out of line for not wanting to endure their children. I guess that they thought we should behave like the kids' grandparents would, and just take it even though we could move - you know, it takes a village, and everybody in the restaurant needs to buck up and just sit there patiently so as not to offend the parents. Sorry, but if you child is tantruming, you should be moving the child somewhere else as you would in church or a theater.

Segregation is the right word.

This is borderline discrimination if not yet so.

I would do the same if I heard the people at the next table say that they hadn't been vaccinated. Or if they lit up a cigarette and nobody stopped them. Or if somebody was coughing up mucus at the next table.

Do you think that that is unreasonable? Or any more or less unreasonable than not wanting to sit near people 10x more likely to be infected than the vaccinated people I prefer to eat with? That number is based on the fact that if you and and another person are both exposed to the virus at the same time in the same way, but only I am vaccinated with a vaccine that prevents 90% of infections that would otherwise have been expected to occur, then you are ten times more likely to become infected and infectious from any given exposure. Sitting with beside one such person is as risky as sitting beside ten vaccinated people.

With the cigarette, if the place allowed people to smoke and I was next to them, I'd move or politely ask them to shift their cigarettes' away from me. I wouldn't treat them as if they were a dog.

I can't really function with the conversation now.... I wouldn't be surprised if they had laws with the ADA for people who can't get the vaccine exempt. I don't know how businesses would handle that, though... for risk of being sued if that were the case.

What about that 10%?

As I said, it's not personal. Get a vaccine or wait until the pandemic is over, and you're welcome to join us at our table.

I don't mind talking about business, laws, and ethical things in terms of what businesses have the right to do. I do mind talking about segregation of any sort and treating people like dogs because of a perceived risk.

 

[Dave Watchman]

I don't quite see public health as tyranny.

It is when I do it.

It's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, it's what comes out of your mouth.

It's a respiratory virus.

It's their aerosolized respiratory droplets, and micro droplets, that you need to steer clear of.

They can't catch me with my flip phone.

I took it over from my work.

Samsung Rugby

Besides launching the Moto G LTE on October 10, AT&T will also release a brand new Samsung handset - more exactly, a flip phone without smartphone capabilities. The handset is called Rugby 4, and is obviously the successor to the Rugby III that was introduced back in 2012.

The Rugby 4 is dust- and water-resistant (IP67), while also meeting the MIL-STD-810G standard for shock, vibration, temperature, low pressure, high-altitude, and other environmental conditions. AT&T didn’t reveal all the features of the Rugby 4, but we know that the phone comes with an enhanced speakerphone, built-in compass, and turn by turn navigation (requires subscription to AT&T Navigator). You can see the Samsung Rugby 4 in action in the (very short) video that’s embedded below:

Like its predecessor, the Samsung Rugby 4 (pictured on the left) is a rugged push-to-talk phone. It’s the first in the series to offer Wi-Fi connectivity, and will be sold for $269.99 off-contract, $99.99 with a two-year agreement, or just $0.99 (for business customers who choose an AT&T Enhanced Push-to-Talk rate plan).
​

A flip phone without smartphone capabilities.

There are still some available on Ebay.

No mark of the composite beast for me.

A rugged Push-to-Talk phone.

No Vaccine Passports here.

Texting is for teenage girls anyway.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The only time I've put energy into wondering if I had it was for about the first week of the year because I was having some chest pains and tightness and some difficulty breathing. Other than that the energy gets put into observing others to know if I need to stay back from them or even request they back up (and in this case I do put my arm out to demonstrate how close they are, because it's generally within arms reach or near to it and my arm is not six feet long). And apart from that, trying to go to stores that don't have many people in them, when they aren't as busy, and those who have been good about mask enforcement. I've been doing that so the effort and concern is minimal on my end. Like gas stations, if the workers had no masks on customers didn't either, I quit going. I probably would be fine, but considering what is at stake it's just easier to go to a store where I won't have to worry about that.

I do confront people when they get near me. Not really anymore, since I'm on the other side of this, but a couple people did get pretty crappy with me over it.

The risk of surface transmission is so low that as far as our hands go we just have to be like we normally should be anyways (though the statistics before covid showed many people were not good with the handwashing).
And keep in mind, the masks help protect others. Surgeons and dentists, they don't wear them normally to keep what you have away from them, it keeps what they have off of you.

They are tested, found to have it, have the symptoms of it, but insist to the doctors it must be something like lung cancer, COPD, or emphysema. Things that are very different from covid, but because these people believe it's not a risk, and with some believing it doesn't even exist and is all a hoax. it was very much denial because they had it and was in very deep denial about having it.

You wasn't denying you had it and you had reason to believe it may have been something else. That's a nasty problem with my health is that IBS mirrors so many things that many times I don't really know whats wrong with me until enough time has passed (sometimes half a day, sometimes weeks) to access if it is my IBS flaring up or something else going on.
But that is entirely different from having a disease and the symptoms of it and denying you have it.

I'll have to get back to you with this convo. I know people are angry that others don't want to take the vaccine, but in the general sense, I don't believe insults are warranted. I will get back to you.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The only time I've put energy into wondering if I had it was for about the first week of the year because I was having some chest pains and tightness and some difficulty breathing. Other than that the energy gets put into observing others to know if I need to stay back from them or even request they back up (and in this case I do put my arm out to demonstrate how close they are, because it's generally within arms reach or near to it and my arm is not six feet long). And apart from that, trying to go to stores that don't have many people in them, when they aren't as busy, and those who have been good about mask enforcement. I've been doing that so the effort and concern is minimal on my end. Like gas stations, if the workers had no masks on customers didn't either, I quit going. I probably would be fine, but considering what is at stake it's just easier to go to a store where I won't have to worry about that.

Did you find out about the chest pains and breathing?

That's reasonable.

I do confront people when they get near me. Not really anymore, since I'm on the other side of this, but a couple people did get pretty crappy with me over it.

I can understand that to an extent. Though, here we're not around people like that anyway... other than standing in line. We like our space. So, social distancing wasn't too big of a deal other than holidays and things of that nature. COVID or not, people should respect your space (though, some cultures are opposite than Americans when it comes to space).

The risk of surface transmission is so low that as far as our hands go we just have to be like we normally should be anyways (though the statistics before covid showed many people were not good with the handwashing).

And keep in mind, the masks help protect others. Surgeons and dentists, they don't wear them normally to keep what you have away from them, it keeps what they have off of you.

But they have their place. Surgeons don't wear masks when they are shopping or at a restaurant. Also, surgeons typically know what their patients are suffering from to know what type of precautions they need to take for the patient's wellbeing "and" the doctor's. Regular public, we don't know who has the virus, if majority at all. We just have intelligent guesses. Which are warranted.

They are tested, found to have it, have the symptoms of it, but insist to the doctors it must be something like lung cancer, COPD, or emphysema. Things that are very different from covid, but because these people believe it's not a risk, and with some believing it doesn't even exist and is all a hoax. it was very much denial because they had it and was in very deep denial about having it.

A lot of hospitals don't know how to treat COVID. Like the nurse at the hospital I went to said that if anyone said/have COVID symptoms they send them to the bigger hospital across town. Though, they are reported as a case before they are even seen by a specialist. She wasn't very happy about that, but I couldn't really ask her why given I was just there to get my leg examined cause of the swelling.

That's probably a very minority, though. You can't have a "hoaxed" virus that's affected people all over the world. The US government wouldn't shell out stimulus' if it were a hoax. Instead, it could have been planned. When Trump got it, I nearly laughed. It "felt" like they were trying to kill him off. Funny, he probably realized it too cause he was saying "I beat it. I don't have it." I know this isn't a political discussion, though I wouldn't say a hoax... but I do feel something is up and because we are marketing masks, having lockdowns that doesn't at all make the virus just disappear, and such, I think it's more complicated than that.

You wasn't denying you had it and you had reason to believe it may have been something else. That's a nasty problem with my health is that IBS mirrors so many things that many times I don't really know whats wrong with me until enough time has passed (sometimes half a day, sometimes weeks) to access if it is my IBS flaring up or something else going on.

But that is entirely different from having a disease and the symptoms of it and denying you have it.

If someone was having a nagging cough for awhile, it could be anything. What sadden me, though, is during the "hit" people (even my mother who they're trying to figure if she has breast cancer) didn't want to go to the ER because they were scared they may catch the virus there. They (the news) were saying people were having things like heart attacks and strokes and such because of this. The hospital is the first place I'd want to go if I had symptoms I'm warry of.

Take those instances, and shift it just going to the store. If people are afraid to go to the hospital, I can see why they wouldn't want to be around a bunch of strangers. I never had that issue when I first heard about it and looked it up, surprisingly. Probably because I'm not in a high populated town and not in stores as long...maybe five or ten minutes. I'm mostly outside walking, running, or so have you.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

At the end of the day, science has to answer this question about vaccine passports, because the welfare of the nation as a whole is at stake.

And the science says this: vaccines prevent serious illness (relieving the healthcare system) and death (that's a good thing), and help to prevent the transmission of the virus (which speaks to both those previous points).

While your freedom to choose what to allow into your body may be sacrosanct, your freedom to transmit that to others cannot be. The person who chooses not to protect themself by receiving the vaccine cannot be considered at liberty to potentially infect others.

We've all been to restaurants that advertise "no shirt, no shoes, no service." I don't see any reason why that couldn't include "no vaccine."

 

[McBell]

It is when I do it.

It's not what goes into your mouth that defiles you, it's what comes out of your mouth.

It's a respiratory virus.

It's their aerosolized respiratory droplets, and micro droplets, that you need to steer clear of.

They can't catch me with my flip phone.

I took it over from my work.

Samsung Rugby

Besides launching the Moto G LTE on October 10, AT&T will also release a brand new Samsung handset - more exactly, a flip phone without smartphone capabilities. The handset is called Rugby 4, and is obviously the successor to the Rugby III that was introduced back in 2012.

The Rugby 4 is dust- and water-resistant (IP67), while also meeting the MIL-STD-810G standard for shock, vibration, temperature, low pressure, high-altitude, and other environmental conditions. AT&T didn’t reveal all the features of the Rugby 4, but we know that the phone comes with an enhanced speakerphone, built-in compass, and turn by turn navigation (requires subscription to AT&T Navigator). You can see the Samsung Rugby 4 in action in the (very short) video that’s embedded below:

Like its predecessor, the Samsung Rugby 4 (pictured on the left) is a rugged push-to-talk phone. It’s the first in the series to offer Wi-Fi connectivity, and will be sold for $269.99 off-contract, $99.99 with a two-year agreement, or just $0.99 (for business customers who choose an AT&T Enhanced Push-to-Talk rate plan).
​

A flip phone without smartphone capabilities.

There are still some available on Ebay.

No mark of the composite beast for me.

A rugged Push-to-Talk phone.

No Vaccine Passports here.

Texting is for teenage girls anyway.

You do understand that ANY device that connects to the internet OR cellular service can be tracked, Right?
And that phone connects to both...
So your getting that phone will not stop you from being tracked.

 

[McBell]

I touch everything.

Those produce baggies, I can't get them open without licking my finger.

What if I take the vaccine, but refuse the Vaccine Passport?

Will they be mad?

I didn't have time to read your thread yet.

So not sure if this was posted.

They're talking about it on another forum, the Naomi Wolf video from yesterday.

They think it's not about Covid.

They think it's not about the vaccine.

It's the Passport itself they want you to take.

Prior to Covid, there really wasn't anything out there that could provide the motivation for getting a large portion of the planet to sign up for something like this with such enthusiasm.

Some highlights from the video:

- "A hill worth dying on".

- This is quickly being rolled out around the world.

- This will be a social credit system like they have in China.

- China owns a lot of the social networks, like Zoom.

- The vaccine passport is based on the same platform as China's system.

- Very easy to add functionality to the passport.

- Not sure if the COVID passport has geolocation capability but if not it will soon have it. The government will come up with a reason to add it.

- Example: you go to a restaurant with others, everyone has to swipe their passports, then everyone at the table is reported to the central database as a 'meeting'. This will allow the government to generate and track all your associations with others. Heck, they will eventually use this to locate clandestine religious services, etc.

- Israel has already rolled out their passports.

- England is now doing this.

- In the US we have Cuomo and the Excelsior passport, and Biden is talking about a national passport.

- One of the functions they will add eventually is tying your PayPal, Google Wallet and Apple Pay to your card. This explains the push for digital currency. And if you become a dissident because of a book you bought or a place you went they can just shut off your ability to purchase anything, etc.

- You can easily see how this thing will become a social credit system to control your life.

- Another thing I though of is that you won't be able to go out in public without your 'passport' without being identified as such. They already have machines that can track you around a store by monitoring the position of your smart phone. The government will use the same kind of thing to determine if a person doesn't have their passport, then alert the national police SWAT team to arrest you.

- There is no end to the tyranny that can happen because of the passport. It's just the beginning. It's like taxes, taxes will never go down, they only go up and you get all kinds of new taxes. Well the functionality of your COVID passport will only get bigger and bigger and bigger. The government will come up with all kinds of reasons to add more things to monitor.

- A hill worth dying on, indeed.

She reminds me of the people who keep predicting the end of the world.
She has been at this since 2008, so perhaps THIS time, maybe, perhaps, she might be right?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

This is borderline discrimination if not yet so.

It's not borderline. It is discrimination, but if you're using the word only to mean unfair or irrational discrimination, I disagree that it is either. We discriminate between minors and adults all the time, as with the right to drive, the right to vote, purchasing of alcohol or cigarettes, etc..

What!? What?! You don't mind eating with animals....? I don't mind a dog on the floor? This sounds like an ethical issue not a legal one. Your ethics are different than mine. What?

I don't know what to tell you there. I value dogs as much if not more than human beings, and I am not alone. My dog is a part of the family, and her needs are given the same attention as a child's would be. If you can't understand that, there is no value in me trying to explain it.

"There will be places the unvaccinated will go..." Like black and white bathrooms?

Yes, but not due to bigotry. Likewise with smoking. There are places the smokers will go, like black and white bathrooms, but this is not bigotry. It's rational.

How do you feel about unisex public bathrooms? I'll bet you support segregation there. It's rational, not bigoted or hateful.

You seem to be insisting that the unvaccinated be viewed the same as the vaccinated, and that making a distinction is unfair or immoral.

I'm surprised to see you reaching for so many appeals to emotion. I don't recall that coming from you in the past.

I do mind talking about segregation of any sort and treating people like dogs because of a perceived risk.

Treating people like dogs? Another appeal to emotion.

No, it is treating unvaccinated people as if they are an increased a risk of contagion, which is much more of a threat than a healthy dog.

How do you feel about segregating the contagious in isolation wards, or segregating people with immune deficiencies living in plastic bubbles from those with germs that might harm them. That's segregation, too, like black and white bathrooms, but also rational. Do you disagree? Is segregation automatically wrong to you whatever the context? You seem to be implying so.

 

[Dave Watchman]

You do understand that ANY device that connects to the internet OR cellular service can be tracked, Right?
And that phone connects to both...
So your getting that phone will not stop you from being tracked.

I doubt it.

I apparently do not understand that.

My little flip phone won't play with one of these:

And never when I turned it on did it ask me if GPS was enabled.

Or if it wanted me to give my location.

But even if it did, so what.

In other words, I wouldn't be connecting with the Viral Passport App system of checks and balances and good citizen or bad cityzen enablement or whatever it would be.

Just no plane tickets for me.

No soup for Dave.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Dave Watchman]

She reminds me of the people who keep predicting the end of the world.
She has been at this since 2008, so perhaps THIS time, maybe, perhaps, she might be right?

I never heard of her before.

I played her video again, audio only.

The first thing her Wiki page said was that she is a known conspiracy theorist.

And she was a Bill Clinton advisor.

And she's smart.

They're having an emotional discussion over her video on another forum.

I'm predicting the end of the world too.

They wanted me to scan a qr code in order to make a delivery at Wall Mart.

I couldn't so they brought out a hard copy for me to make my Covid declaration.

But I doubt this Vaccine Passport is the mark of the beast.

Because if you didn't have a smartphone, you couldn't take the mark.

But not being able to buy or sell without it, is a bit unnerving.

They quoted Biden as saying he wouldn't make it mandatory.

But it will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

Peaceful Sabbath.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not borderline. It is discrimination, but if you're using the word only to mean unfair or irrational discrimination, I disagree that it is either. We discriminate between minors and adults all the time, as with the right to drive, the right to vote, purchasing of alcohol or cigarettes, etc..



I don't know what to tell you there. I value dogs as much if not more than human beings, and I am not alone. My dog is a part of the family, and her needs are given the same attention as a child's would be. If you can't understand that, there is no value in me trying to explain it.



Yes, but not due to bigotry. Likewise with smoking. There are places the smokers will go, like black and white bathrooms, but this is not bigotry. It's rational.

How do you feel about unisex public bathrooms? I'll bet you support segregation there. It's rational, not bigoted or hateful.

You seem to be insisting that the unvaccinated be viewed the same as the vaccinated, and that making a distinction is unfair or immoral.

I'm surprised to see you reaching for so many appeals to emotion. I don't recall that coming from you in the past.



Treating people like dogs? Another appeal to emotion.

No, it is treating unvaccinated people as if they are an increased a risk of contagion, which is much more of a threat than a healthy dog.

How do you feel about segregating the contagious in isolation wards, or segregating people with immune deficiencies living in plastic bubbles from those with germs that might harm them. That's segregation, too, like black and white bathrooms, but also rational. Do you disagree? Is segregation automatically wrong to you whatever the context? You seem to be implying so.

Shrugs. I can't really understand associating the unvaccinated people with dogs and saying vaccinated decreases the risk of catching the virus (assuming you only care about people who are not dogs)... but I guess it's alright if majority of people agree with your assessment.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

At the end of the day, science has to answer this question about vaccine passports, because the welfare of the nation as a whole is at stake.

And the science says this: vaccines prevent serious illness (relieving the healthcare system) and death (that's a good thing), and help to prevent the transmission of the virus (which speaks to both those previous points).

While your freedom to choose what to allow into your body may be sacrosanct, your freedom to transmit that to others cannot be. The person who chooses not to protect themself by receiving the vaccine cannot be considered at liberty to potentially infect others.

We've all been to restaurants that advertise "no shirt, no shoes, no service." I don't see any reason why that couldn't include "no vaccine."

Potential isn't a fact.

Have they proven that the virus "will" enough people (the risk is near 100% high) to go through with such a thing?

I'm sure there needs to be more study and thought than just going off potential and perceived risks. At the end, it's not an individual decision so hopefully its decided objectively not on emotionalism.