Crud…I thought the thread had just about achieved enough fatigue….here comes the double down LOL….corner traps are our friend.
- ...
- 1008 posts total
@jond You talk about risk... Since the pandemic began, less than 600 children under the age of 18 have died from covid. In the same time span, 900 children under the age of 18 have died from pneumonia. Never before have children who are asymptomatic in the same classroom as sick children been sent home from pneumonia. Just an example... |
Strange, those who exercise their right to not take vaccine then complain about exercising it. Exercising individual rights means having to accept both the benefits and costs. The cost is that other individuals also have the freedom to exercise their rights, which means any single individual may not always get to freely exercise their rights. Countless judicial decisions uphold one party's rights, the losing party hasn't proved a preponderance of harms done to itself. Losing parties don't often care for judicial decisions. Here I'm speaking of rights which have costs. The costs one has to pay for exercising their right to not take vaccine is merely loss of some privileges. Privilege rights don't count for much in judicial system. One has to be able to understand the distinction between privilege and rights in order to understand justice. I highly doubt an individual who refuses to take vaccine and sues because of loss of privilege is going to prevail in any court in this country. You'd have to prove the vaccine is more harmful than beneficial by a preponderance of evidence. At this point, the vaccines are not experimental, and have proven to be of great benefit. It is likely one of most used pharmaceuticals existent, more than 6.2 billion according to one source. If this not the case, bring your case to the courts and prove it, proof that it saves lives makes for a pretty strong case. I understand there have been harms incurred by a small minority of vaccine recipients, I doubt any court in the entire world would judge those harms outweigh the benefits. So we have a preponderance of scientific evidence supporting vaccines which courts will accept as evidence. Lack of harms done to individuals refusing to take the vaccine, another win for vaccine advocates. Equal protection clause of Constitution that protects the rights of private parties to institute vaccine and mask mandates. Doesn't look like the courts or science are your friends. And don't forget two centuries of settled law that allows gov. entities to mandate vaccines. Which leaves you folks with individual choice to not take vaccine. No one is denying you this choice, you only have to pay the cost of losing some level of privilege. |
Australia Releases Tracker App That Requires Response Within 15 Minutes Before Authorities Arrive https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp8AcA4wodg This is the Australia of Steve Irwin......Crocodile Dundeee' mate. |
Which leaves you folks with individual choice to not take vaccine. No one is denying you this choice, you only have to pay the cost of losing some level of privilege.Your post make no sense... The vaccination decision is an act of freedom... Which means NO employers or state or President can FORCE people to take this choice at the cost of their job if not... The medical and legal reason are simple: the massive vaccination DECIDED by authorities is not a scientific decision but a political one... You dont seem to understand elementary epidemiology at all... An airborne mutating virus like sars-2 is NOT a polio virus for example...We need vaxx for at risk people and treatment for the majority of healthy people, like in another airborne mutating virus the "flu"... This is reason...And elementary epidemiology fact ... Forbidding all low cost treatments and promoting MASS vaccination is a crime.... |
- 1008 posts total