Moderators: zimpy27, infinite11285, Clav, Domejandro, ken6199, bisme37, Dirk, KingDavid, cupcakesnake, bwgood77
JayMKE wrote:If you don't respect the concept of bodily integrity then you are no different than a rapist.
JayMKE wrote:Literal sheep without independent thought is scary ****.
JayMKE wrote:I am not a kool aid drinker like yourself
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
AthensBucks wrote:Lowry is done.
Nurse is below average at best.
Masai is overrated.
I dont get how so many people believe in the raptors,they have zero to chance to win it all.
Neutral 123 wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:It's absolutely appalling someone would try and equate a vaccine with rape. Of course when you realize you have no real arguments you attempt this kind of blatantly false correlation to try and claim some sort of moral high ground you don't actually possess.
But let's do better please.
And the irony of repeating the same talking points over and over that every other anti-vaxxer does while labeling others sheep is so rich. Just so incredibly rich.
Really? What's the difference between forcing an injection and forcing sex?
Neutral 123 wrote:nikster wrote:JayMKE wrote:Considering the NBA operated just fine for two postseasons during covid with masks/social distancing/testing, what’s the logic of mandating a vaccine on players now that doesn’t even prevent spread?
Also what’s the point of local ordinances that only apply to home players?
Well when you outright deny some of the basic benefits of getting vaccinated i can see why you would be confused
Suspected benefits. That has NOT been proven sufficiently that the so called experts are saying this with certainty.
The current vaccines are promised to reduce serious disease.... That's it.
People who are vaccinated against Covid-19 are less likely to spread the virus even if they become infected, a new study finds, adding to a growing body of evidence that vaccines can reduce transmission ( . . . )
Neutral 123 wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:It's absolutely appalling someone would try and equate a vaccine with rape. Of course when you realize you have no real arguments you attempt this kind of blatantly false correlation to try and claim some sort of moral high ground you don't actually possess.
But let's do better please.
And the irony of repeating the same talking points over and over that every other anti-vaxxer does while labeling others sheep is so rich. Just so incredibly rich.
Really? What's the difference between forcing an injection and forcing sex? You do realize that there's a history of forced breeding programs for the greater good of society? How is that different from forced injections for the greater good of society? And like I said, this stuff has ACTUALLY happened. No one is speaking theoretically here. The exact same worldview has led to just that.
AthensBucks wrote:Lowry is done.
Nurse is below average at best.
Masai is overrated.
I dont get how so many people believe in the raptors,they have zero to chance to win it all.
Texas Chuck wrote:You have to go to school as a child. This is not remotely rape.
In the US as a male, you have to sign up for selected service. In many other countries you have mandatory military service. This is not rape.
You have to register your car and a license to operate it. Not rape.
You have to have a license for all kinds of occupations to practice them. Not rape.
It's an appalling analogy that isn't remotely the same thing as getting vaccinated as you know. So let's aim higher please.
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
The_Hater wrote:Neutral 123 wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:It's absolutely appalling someone would try and equate a vaccine with rape. Of course when you realize you have no real arguments you attempt this kind of blatantly false correlation to try and claim some sort of moral high ground you don't actually possess.
But let's do better please.
And the irony of repeating the same talking points over and over that every other anti-vaxxer does while labeling others sheep is so rich. Just so incredibly rich.
Really? What's the difference between forcing an injection and forcing sex? You do realize that there's a history of forced breeding programs for the greater good of society? How is that different from forced injections for the greater good of society? And like I said, this stuff has ACTUALLY happened. No one is speaking theoretically here. The exact same worldview has led to just that.
Wow. Just wow.
Listen. Don’t get the shot. It’s your choice. But don’t complain when you can’t fly on a plane, most companies/businesses won’t hire you and you can’t sit down in any restaurant either. Because all of these industries have had rules in place since they started, and this is no different.
But again, this is your choice. Just like Kyrie and millions of others are making choices. Good luck.
Texas Chuck wrote:ah yes the slippery slope. We've had vaccines for a long time now and yet everyone still has all the same freedoms they've always had...
And we shouldn't have to force anyone. People should want to do the right thing for themselves and their community.
Be a good teammate. Get vaccinated.
Texas Chuck wrote:ah yes the slippery slope. We've had vaccines for a long time now and yet everyone still has all the same freedoms they've always had...
And we shouldn't have to force anyone. People should want to do the right thing for themselves and their community.
Be a good teammate. Get vaccinated.
AthensBucks wrote:Lowry is done.
Nurse is below average at best.
Masai is overrated.
I dont get how so many people believe in the raptors,they have zero to chance to win it all.
Neutral 123 wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:You have to go to school as a child. This is not remotely rape.
In the US as a male, you have to sign up for selected service. In many other countries you have mandatory military service. This is not rape.
You have to register your car and a license to operate it. Not rape.
You have to have a license for all kinds of occupations to practice them. Not rape.
It's an appalling analogy that isn't remotely the same thing as getting vaccinated as you know. So let's aim higher please.
The merits or necessity of these examples would need to be discussed individually, but you are misrepresenting his argument.
Vaccines are great and a blessing. Sex is great and a blessing. Forced vaccines are a nightmare. Forced sex is a nightmare. The use of force is the problem.
Now of course force is necessary in a free society to preserve the freedom of everyone. A murderer must be separated from society by force because he violates the freedom of others by taking their lives.
In a collectivist society, force is used as a tool in hopes of reaching some stated goal. Forced vaccinations in hopes of ending covid is in line with collectivism as is a forced breeding program. What he was doing is illuminating the amorality of a collectivist worldview. One that's easy to support because it sounds nice superficially, but most don't think of the consequences of where this has and will lead again.
Neutral 123 wrote:Texas Chuck wrote:ah yes the slippery slope. We've had vaccines for a long time now and yet everyone still has all the same freedoms they've always had...
And we shouldn't have to force anyone. People should want to do the right thing for themselves and their community.
Be a good teammate. Get vaccinated.
It's not a slippery slope. It's actual history. And how does everyone have the same freedoms they've always had when people are being threatened with being unable to travel, to earn a living, to live a normal life? This is what I don't understand. Why not just own what you guys are willing to do to get the outcome you think is right?
ThunderBolt wrote:I’m going to let some of you in on a little secret I learned on realgm. If you don’t like a thread, not only do you not have to comment but you don’t even have to open it and read it. You’re welcome.
I didn't respond for a bit because I've had some personal stuff in my life that would have affected how I approached talking about the virus/vaccine. And you obviously do not have anything to do with thatCartuse wrote:HollowEarth wrote:I'm just addressing the part about science up there. That's true of all sciences. The scientific method is tentative. This is the benefit of science itself, we can discard what doesn't work to build on what does. No psychologist today is using the methods of Freud, Lovaas, or Freeman.
Thank you for pointing that out, I did express myself poorly. I also understand science to be tentative, and that's exactly the reason why I take issue with very radical and concrete measures being taken in the name of something that's neither definite nor unquestionable, but a constant work in progress.
What I should've said is that those very definite orders and acts of coercion which are imposed outside of any democratic framework have contradicted themselves since day 1, therefore indicating that the "science" behind those decisions is not to be taken as absolute and irrefutable.
My problem is with the blind conviction that what the politicians force on us is some kind of logical deduction of what the science says. That's simply not true, no matter how much it's repeated by the media and parroted by the people.
Science presents data and correlations of variables. I'm willing to accept someone saying that interpreting the data could be an act of science, but I can't accept people saying that the ACTIONS inspired by such interpretation are scientific. That's dishonest. We can believe we have an idea, but the truth is we can't know what's gonna happen when we take decissions on such a massive scale, all we can do is hope for the best. And there's no way of contrasting the consequences of different actions at this scale, since you can't go back in time, and parallel studies lack the possibility of any honest ceteris paribus assumption.
We see that since vaccination deaths have decreased? That's great! Now, why turn that into a witch hunt pitting people against people because we're no longer individuals but a collective in which everyone must act as instructed by the unelected? Because of the eerily long forecasted assumption of deadlier strains that won't evolve unless every single person in this planet has been vaccinated in a very short time? I believe inciting civil conflict or stripping people of their autonomy is far more dangerous than having a 99% vaccination rate as opposed to a 85%.
But of course, no one's doing any science on my claim so I can't say this without being flooded with studies that show beyond the shadow of any doubt that that 14% will result in X millions of lives saved. That's settled and it can't be argued. Until it changes into something else and then that other thing will also be settled and unarguable.
Who cares about the children that have been ruined by isolation, the widespread effects of anxiety, suicides, domestic violence, lack of certainty in the future and absolute fear of the present? Who cares about the potential effects that is having and will continue to have in society, and how devastating they might be? We don't need no science on that! Common sense tells us those are all tragic consequences of the pandemic, and not the political decisions which were but a logical extension of science! And who cares about the nature of the pandemic iteslf, where the virus came from? Who cares if it was a one in a trillion mutation or made in a lab? That changes nothing! We don't have to look into that kind of stuff, we have bigger fish to fry! It's all about saving the lives of the elderly! And we have the numbers to show you! Just like we did at first, when "respected science" was forecasting millions upon millions of deaths in excess of what actually happened.
Neutral 123 wrote:nikster wrote:Neutral 123 wrote:
That is an anti science statement for several reasons. One, the science can change and it can change dramatically. Believing it to be unlikely is one thing, suggesting it's impossible is anti science. Second, there is no 'general public' person getting the vaccine. Individuals get the vaccine, and the benefit to getting the vaccine varies widely based on ones age and overall health.
As I've stated numerous times, I believe if someone is old, in poor health, getting the vaccine is likely a good idea for them. I still wouldn't FORCE them to take it, but I'd highly recommend it. I would not recommend it for someone who is young and healthy. That's a view that Fauci himself agrees with. He admits that a young healthy person would be getting the vaccine for 'society' or someone else. And he sees nothing of using force to reach that aim. That's wrong imo.
Any short term side effects we havent detected yet would have to be so rare they wouldnt change the risk/benefit equation. Any effects that suddenly appear several months are so extremely unlikely, and if they were the chances that they are worse than any long term effects of covid is also negligible. So yeah I would say the idea that anything fundamentally changes the risk/benefit is virtually impossible. And by general population I meant the individuals it consists of.
And once again, your showing those opposing the mandates have a fundamentally wrong view of the current science.What Fauci said was that the young are less likely to get severe disease, that does not mean the risk/benefit does not support being vaccinated for individual benefit because the science is still clear there. And since when do you give a **** what Fauci thinks? You just cherry pick an out of context quote when it suits your agenda and otherwise don't take any thing else he says seriously.
You conveniently omit the long term risks that may exist with these vaccines. You also incorrectly assume that because more incidents have not been linked to the vaccine that they don't exist.
Proving a causal link between the vaccine and negative health outcomes is a very difficult task, that's especially true when the vaccine may only increase your risk of a certain outcome. If for instance these vaccines raised heart attack risk, it would likely express itself in people who were already at high risk of heart attack. Linking increased risk to the vaccine would likely take years.
And your second point shows you still don't get it. Opposing mandates is not about the science, it's about whether people have a right to make their own personal decisions. I believe someone has a right to be wrong.
I've also pointed out that the risk/benefit is not even across the population either, so it's anti science to even suggest that what's best for an 85 year old in a nursing home is what's best for a healthy 19 year old man.
JayMKE wrote:nikster wrote:JayMKE wrote:Considering the NBA operated just fine for two postseasons during covid with masks/social distancing/testing, what’s the logic of mandating a vaccine on players now that doesn’t even prevent spread?
Also what’s the point of local ordinances that only apply to home players?
Well when you outright deny some of the basic benefits of getting vaccinated i can see why you would be confused
I am not a kool aid drinker like yourself, actually read “the science” you guys claim to worship.
ZB9 wrote:Times like these make me very glad that I live in the free state of Texas. We have been living normal for a while now.
There are no mandates allowed, crowds are everywhere you go with very few masks seen. Most people that i know didnt take the jab yet are fine covid wise.
Of course, people that are scared of covid can choose to stay home or wear masks. People can wear a hazmat suit if they want. Everyone is free to take the jab if they want or they can refuse to take it and wont be treated as a 2nd class citizen. Everyone is free to make their own risk assessments and their own choices.
No vaccine mandates, very few masks, crowds everywhere....yet no covid crisis. In fact the covid numbers are pretty low. I wonder why that is?
