Who has a neutral stance in this vaccine

[ChristineM]

What does more likely mean in this context (no ?) ... unvaccinated people have been more likely before the vaccine thing came up. You just lowered your risk. We're (unvaccinated) still at the same risk. Our risks won't be "more" likely unless we put ourselves in position-say work with COVID patients, travel, or high populated areas-that would make our risks and assessment of getting the vaccine more immediate than others.

Ok im done...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Nope, only what i consider valid. You can make whatever choice suites you, not my problem

That doesn't mean anything then. If you say evidence, you'd have to provide criteria we both agree on so we can agree your evidence is a valid "fact."

If not, it's only an opinion no matter how strong you believe it to be true (beliefs/opinions are not facts unless verified with objective evidence).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Oh right so all the excuses you've given, both valid and invalid arw not excuses at all,fair enough

You're playing with my words. Seems like you're trying to justify and discredit my reasoning instead of just accepting they are just reasons you disagree with.

I don't have reasons like medical exemptions. So, it's an intentional decision not to take it. The reasons you're referring to aren't excuses but justifications of why I made the decisions.

The excuses I'm referring to are those that one would make if they are trying to back peddle cause they're not comfortable making direct opinions that contradict the majority opposition.

 

[We Never Know]

@Unveiled Artist is certainly acting as if she's against the vaccine, but she insists she's "neutral."



A foolish statement.

One way that this matters: the vaccines we have now are effective against the variants of concern that are out there right now.

The more unvaccinated people there are out there, the more infections we'll have. The more infections we have, the more new variants will emerge. The more variants that emerge, the higher the likelihood of new variants that our current vaccines aren't effective against.

So yes: refusal to vaccinate could very well hurt vaccinated people.

Even vaccinated people can still get it and spread it. The vaccine makes it not hit the vaccinated person as severe.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

View attachment 52069


Ok im done...

I thought you where done months ago when you put me on ignore than took me off.

You know how I feel about the situation. I know how you feel.

What else are you trying to prove?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Unveiled Artist is certainly acting as if she's against the vaccine, but she insists she's "neutral."

I'm neutral about taking the vaccine. I can care less who does and does not. (Aka not an antivaxxer)

I'm not neutral about the attitude attached to it-telling people they are putting people in intentional danger because of the unvaccinated

Replace it with any topic.

You'll see a pattern I comment more on the attitude, emotions, and insults. The vaccine, only when someone asks me a direct question that's not emotionally charged.

 

[ChristineM]

I thought you where done months ago when you put me on ignore than took me off.

You know how I feel about the situation. I know how you feel.

What else are you trying to prove?

Yes i was then and during all the repeats of the same "please say im good for not having the vaccine threads" you have created.

I really don't know why i bothered with this one. A mistake i must learn from?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes i was then and during all the repeats of the same "please say im good for not having the vaccine threads" you have created.

I really don't know why i bothered with this one. A mistake i must learn from?

Not sure. The question was aimed at those who were neutral. Another was in a journal and you guys still wanted to debate even though it was a journal entry.

I can't win. You guys disagree with me... who cares really. It's not like disagreeing with buying a car of my choice. I only take people into consideration over my health from my health professionals and loved ones. If an general expert told me to take X pill, I'll go to my doctor first and see if its in my best interests.

 

[ChristineM]

Not sure. The question was aimed at those who were neutral. Another was in a journal and you guys still wanted to debate even though it was a journal entry.

I can't win. You guys disagree with me... who cares really. It's not like disagreeing with buying a car of my choice. I only take people into consideration over my health from my health professionals and loved ones. If an general expert told me to take X pill, I'll go to my doctor first and see if its in my best interests.

It was NOT a journal entry. It was in general debates.

I told you that at least twice.

And still you insist it was a journal...

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It was NOT a journal entry. It was in general debates.

I told you that at least twice.

And still you insist it was a journal...

The staff moved it.

Go back to it and read the first page. I reminded people for a good couple of pages. I addressed it with @Lyndon when she started the debate where it originally wasn't one.

This is sad #36 and #37

 

[We Never Know]

Who has a neutral stance in this vaccine argument?

Meaning you're not for or against it, but just choose what's best for you and others with no overarching opinion either way?

I don't feel anti/pro are needed. Maybe just those who take it and those who don't.

Does one need a side to make a decision and how is that justification true?

In my opinion there are 3 types of people when it comes to the vaccine..
1. The antivaxers/conspiracy people who think it implants a chip or it will kill us all.

2. The overvaxers that got it, want/demand you to get it because without it it will kill us all.

3. The ones who feel it isn't needed due to..
-already having covid(and have the antibodies),
-or are not around many people or out in public much,
-or feel they are healthy enough

I myself fit into 3. Already had covid and have the antibodies(was tested).

The overvaxers are just as paranoid as the antivaxers.

 

[ChristineM]

The staff moved it.

Go back to it and read the first page. I reminded people for a good couple of pages. I addressed it with @Lyndon when she started the debate where it originally wasn't one.

This is sad #36

So it was in general debates

 

[Unveiled Artist]

if the staff moved it please show the staff post in bold RED characters saying thread moved to ____

I posted it. This is sad Post 36

You said I believed you, but it could have been sarcastic cause I thought you checked it when I said look at the first page originally.

 

[ChristineM]

I posted it. This is sad Post 36

You said I believed you, but it could have been sarcastic cause I thought you checked it when I said look at the first page originally.

I changed my post. It was in debates when i joined.

 

[We Never Know]

Because these vaccines, even under emergency use authorization, have to go through all the normal clinical trials to prove that they're safe and effective.

Those trials are underways for kids as young as 6 months now. All indications are that the trials are going well, but they're not complete yet, so the vaccines won't be approved for kids until the trials are complete.

In my opinion that should have also been done from the start. Children are the most unsanitary. Touching everything, coughing and sneezing everywhere without covering their mouth, hardly wash their hands, touch other kids and their toys, around other kids(school, daycare, etc).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I changed my post. It was in debates when i joined.

Yeah. That's why I put this in political debates since I knew people would attack me anyhow even though the OP doesn't mention that.

There was another COVID thread going on so not sure why the same argument needs to be brought here.

 

[We Never Know]

I changed my post. It was in debates when i joined.

Still is in debates, political debates.

 

[ChristineM]

Yeah. That's why I put this in political debates since I knew people would attack me anyhow even though the OP doesn't mention that.

There was another COVID thread going on so not sure why the same argument needs to be brought here.

Yet you continue to post the same argument.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

So yes: refusal to vaccinate could very well hurt vaccinated people.

And society in general, like the economy.
Because as long as this pandemic problem remains, measures stay in place. It hurts tourism, travel, business, restaurants, concerts, theater, movies, ....

Half the world is still "on hold", and it costs billions everyday.

 

[We Never Know]

One thing I have done since the virus came out is I took a empty bottle of visine eye drops, filled it with alcohol and carry it in my pocket. Anytime I'm out I can sanitize my hands anytime I feel the need to.
It comes in pretty handy