NBA protocols/Covid/Vaccine - Discussion thread

[Neutral 123]

I just want my right to bodily autonomy back.

You have that. It's completely wrong to argue otherwise. There is no vaccine mandate to exist. You are free not to take the vaccine. Period. You are not free to work wherever you choose, or travel wherever you like using whatever methods of transportation you like. Unofficially, you can leave this society and make a go of it in the woods, where you will have no serious connection to the government. To me, this is a perfectly acceptable way of life if you can't trust and can't cope.

"All I can say is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims– and as far as possible one must refuse to be on the side of the pestilence.” You can't expect me to have much sympathy for your temporary loss of rights when you routinely show up rooting for Team Pestilence.

Ok, there are no mandates. But the government in various states and parts of the world have banned you from getting on planes, trains, going to shopping centres, restaurants and have put pressure on businesses to fire anyone who doesn't get the injection. But no, no pressure, no mandates. I can go live in the woods if I don't want so called experts running every aspect of my life. I can guarantee I won't be left alone by these people there either.

[Neutral 123]

It’s already hilarious when right wingers talk about Australia, only to have Australian posters on here tell them they’re laughably wrong. And I’m using the term right wingers specifically because the hysteria about Australia is exclusively a right wing fabrication. It just shows how really clueless a lot of people are about covid and vaccinations. From what I’ve read Australia is doing a lot better with vaccination rates after initially fumbling the vaccine roll out

Watch on YouTube

I guess Andrew Bogut is also a loon like Kyrie, Wiggins, Johnathon Isaac?

Pretty much, yes. Very smart basketball player though.

So Bogut is an expert on basketball and politicians are experts on how to run your life? I think I get it now.

[Neutral 123]

I just want my right to bodily autonomy back.

You have that. It's completely wrong to argue otherwise. There is no vaccine mandate to exist. You are free not to take the vaccine. Period. You are not free to work wherever you choose, or travel wherever you like using whatever methods of transportation you like. Unofficially, you can leave this society and make a go of it in the woods, where you will have no serious connection to the government. To me, this is a perfectly acceptable way of life if you can't trust and can't cope.

"All I can say is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims– and as far as possible one must refuse to be on the side of the pestilence.” You can't expect me to have much sympathy for your temporary loss of rights when you routinely show up rooting for Team Pestilence.

It's discrimination against those that refuse the jabs. Imagine if these same limitations were placed on people due to their sexual preferences.

People want it both ways. They want to claim the vaccines protect the vaccinated yet act like the unvaccinated as some huge threat to the world. It can't be both. Either the vaccine protects the vaccinated. In which case my status shouldn't matter to any person that's taken the jab. Or the jab doesn't work in which case why are we discriminating against those that refuse it.

Exactly. What happened to my body, my choice? What happened to equity and equality? It's actually fascinating studying the history of leftism. This IS consistent with the ideology. The means always justifies the end, and those in power reserve the right to be the law instead of making laws that everyone has to abide by.

[michaelm]

Watch on YouTube

I guess Andrew Bogut is also a loon like Kyrie, Wiggins, Johnathon Isaac?

Pretty much, yes. Very smart basketball player though.

So Bogut is an expert on basketball and politicians are experts on how to run your life? I think I get it now.

No, but they have been voted in by the populace to run the country, and are advised by people who have been trained in public health not all of whom I necessarily rate highly individually btw. Bogut is a basketball player who has never stood for public office in Australia as far as I am aware.

On second thoughts I was wrong to discourage you from dogma, you display little capacity for logical argument.

[Neutral 123]

Pretty much, yes. Very smart basketball player though.

So Bogut is an expert on basketball and politicians are experts on how to run your life? I think I get it now.

No, but they have been voted in by the populace to run the country, and are advised by people who have been trained in public health not all of whom I necessarily rate highly individually btw. Bogut is a basketball player who has never stood for public office in Australia as far as I am aware.

On second thoughts I was wrong to discourage you from dogma, you display little capacity for logical argument.

You say no, but then appear to agree with my statement. Do you believe running the country is synonymous with telling everyone how to live their life? You do realize that IS the history of governance right? What is unique is the system of individual freedom spawned from England that a few countries used to enjoy on some level before Covid.

[nikster]

I am retreating to my original and the only point ultimately worth debating. Do 'experts' have a right to force others to do what they think is best or do individuals have a right to decide for themselves even if they may be wrong.

As for those studies, I've already stated they exist. The CDC is now willing to offer reduced transmission as a benefit, so I stand corrected on that. A benefit interestingly, not explicitly stated by the Australian govt, at least not on their main page anyways.
https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/about-rollout#benefits-of-vaccination

Your only point is something you never actually dsupoort. You constantly bring up misinformation or misapply the science, when confronted you say the personal freedom is the only thing that matters. But that's not even something you've actually discussed yet.

Where's the line on personal freedom? Should we allow drinking and driving, who are the experts to tell us that's too dangerous? I could have that right, and if I hurt someone then I can deal with the consequences. Do national emergencies (war, natural disaster, pandemics etc...) not change where that line is?

Just like anything else, the spirit of the person or the people is what matters. You either fundamentally believe in individual choice or you don't. No law, no constitution, nothing can protect against those who don't believe in the right of the individual. The entire creation of America was built on the idea of individual rights. Those rights have been eroded and challenged using the very system that they created to avoid this. The founders understood that too. The American constitution was created for a moral and religious people as John Adams stated.

To address your questions directly. That line is generally where you inhibit the freedom of others. Now even that has been twisted to mean that the obligation is on me to protect everyone else from Covid. A clear corruption of the idea of personal freedom. Others have the right to protect themselves as they see fit, blame others for their inability to protect themselves.

It is also falsely assumed in this narrative that unvaxxed = covid positive. Guilty until proven innocent.

And let's be clear. The ONLY reason that this is such a controversial issue is not because of the science, it is because of the use of force to get everyone to mask, vaccinate, close their businesses etc. Those who constantly argue against the current science are really arguing for their right to decide. That's it.

So where does drinking and drinking fall into this? Your not necessarily impacting anyone's freedom when you get behind the wheel intoxicated, you are only increasing your risk of doing so.

[michaelm]

It’s already hilarious when right wingers talk about Australia, only to have Australian posters on here tell them they’re laughably wrong. And I’m using the term right wingers specifically because the hysteria about Australia is exclusively a right wing fabrication. It just shows how really clueless a lot of people are about covid and vaccinations. From what I’ve read Australia is doing a lot better with vaccination rates after initially fumbling the vaccine roll out

Australia historically has strongly embraced vaccination.

The low vaccination rate was basically a combination of lack of urgency/a manana mentality given we had Covid zero, and bad luck. While I am not necessarily an admirer of the current Australian federal government, they bet on local production of the Astra Zeneca vaccine which VITTS, and some panic imo, partly derailed at least temporarily, and a protein vaccine based on well proven technology being developed locallly which was on all indications a fantastic vaccine but came unstuck essentially through bad luck.

Once the arrival of the delta variant gave impetus for vaccination, the population has pretty much rushed to get vaccinated, with most complaints being in regard to insufficient supply.

[Neutral 123]

Your only point is something you never actually dsupoort. You constantly bring up misinformation or misapply the science, when confronted you say the personal freedom is the only thing that matters. But that's not even something you've actually discussed yet.

Where's the line on personal freedom? Should we allow drinking and driving, who are the experts to tell us that's too dangerous? I could have that right, and if I hurt someone then I can deal with the consequences. Do national emergencies (war, natural disaster, pandemics etc...) not change where that line is?

Just like anything else, the spirit of the person or the people is what matters. You either fundamentally believe in individual choice or you don't. No law, no constitution, nothing can protect against those who don't believe in the right of the individual. The entire creation of America was built on the idea of individual rights. Those rights have been eroded and challenged using the very system that they created to avoid this. The founders understood that too. The American constitution was created for a moral and religious people as John Adams stated.

To address your questions directly. That line is generally where you inhibit the freedom of others. Now even that has been twisted to mean that the obligation is on me to protect everyone else from Covid. A clear corruption of the idea of personal freedom. Others have the right to protect themselves as they see fit, blame others for their inability to protect themselves.

It is also falsely assumed in this narrative that unvaxxed = covid positive. Guilty until proven innocent.

And let's be clear. The ONLY reason that this is such a controversial issue is not because of the science, it is because of the use of force to get everyone to mask, vaccinate, close their businesses etc. Those who constantly argue against the current science are really arguing for their right to decide. That's it.

So where does drinking and drinking fall into this? Your not necessarily impacting anyone's freedom when you get behind the wheel intoxicated, you are only increasing your risk of doing so.

This is off topic and I don't want to get accused of derailing. But the bottom line when it comes to Covid is there are people who believe we must do everything to preserve individual choice and those who believe this is an opportunity to finally have experts run everything. Your pov on this will determine much of your perspective. It's about intent/spirit of the person rather than difficult situations where a reasonable argument could be made either way.

[michaelm]

Just like anything else, the spirit of the person or the people is what matters. You either fundamentally believe in individual choice or you don't. No law, no constitution, nothing can protect against those who don't believe in the right of the individual. The entire creation of America was built on the idea of individual rights. Those rights have been eroded and challenged using the very system that they created to avoid this. The founders understood that too. The American constitution was created for a moral and religious people as John Adams stated.

To address your questions directly. That line is generally where you inhibit the freedom of others. Now even that has been twisted to mean that the obligation is on me to protect everyone else from Covid. A clear corruption of the idea of personal freedom. Others have the right to protect themselves as they see fit, blame others for their inability to protect themselves.

It is also falsely assumed in this narrative that unvaxxed = covid positive. Guilty until proven innocent.

And let's be clear. The ONLY reason that this is such a controversial issue is not because of the science, it is because of the use of force to get everyone to mask, vaccinate, close their businesses etc. Those who constantly argue against the current science are really arguing for their right to decide. That's it.

So where does drinking and drinking fall into this? Your not necessarily impacting anyone's freedom when you get behind the wheel intoxicated, you are only increasing your risk of doing so.

This is off topic and I don't want to get accused of derailing. But the bottom line when it comes to Covid is there are people who believe we must do everything to preserve individual choice and those who believe this is an opportunity to finally have experts run everything. Your pov on this will determine much of your perspective. It's about intent/spirit of the person rather than difficult situations where a reasonable argument could be made either way.

More dogma.

Your opponents on this thread want Covid dealt with effectively.

[Neutral 123]

So where does drinking and drinking fall into this? Your not necessarily impacting anyone's freedom when you get behind the wheel intoxicated, you are only increasing your risk of doing so.

This is off topic and I don't want to get accused of derailing. But the bottom line when it comes to Covid is there are people who believe we must do everything to preserve individual choice and those who believe this is an opportunity to finally have experts run everything. Your pov on this will determine much of your perspective. It's about intent/spirit of the person rather than difficult situations where a reasonable argument could be made either way.

More dogma.

Your opponents on this thread want Covid dealt with effectively..

You do realize it is dogma to prioritize COVID over everything else right? It is also dogma to assume that force and control are the best way to deal with Covid.

[michaelm]

This is off topic and I don't want to get accused of derailing. But the bottom line when it comes to Covid is there are people who believe we must do everything to preserve individual choice and those who believe this is an opportunity to finally have experts run everything. Your pov on this will determine much of your perspective. It's about intent/spirit of the person rather than difficult situations where a reasonable argument could be made either way.

More dogma.

Your opponents on this thread want Covid dealt with effectively..

You do realize it is dogma to prioritize COVID over everything else right? It is also dogma to assume that force and control are the best way to deal with Covid.

Further dogmatic statements by you rather than me.

[Neutral 123]

More dogma.

Your opponents on this thread want Covid dealt with effectively..

You do realize it is dogma to prioritize COVID over everything else right? It is also dogma to assume that force and control are the best way to deal with Covid.

Further dogmatic statements by you rather than me.

Amazing

[nikster]

Just like anything else, the spirit of the person or the people is what matters. You either fundamentally believe in individual choice or you don't. No law, no constitution, nothing can protect against those who don't believe in the right of the individual. The entire creation of America was built on the idea of individual rights. Those rights have been eroded and challenged using the very system that they created to avoid this. The founders understood that too. The American constitution was created for a moral and religious people as John Adams stated.

To address your questions directly. That line is generally where you inhibit the freedom of others. Now even that has been twisted to mean that the obligation is on me to protect everyone else from Covid. A clear corruption of the idea of personal freedom. Others have the right to protect themselves as they see fit, blame others for their inability to protect themselves.

It is also falsely assumed in this narrative that unvaxxed = covid positive. Guilty until proven innocent.

And let's be clear. The ONLY reason that this is such a controversial issue is not because of the science, it is because of the use of force to get everyone to mask, vaccinate, close their businesses etc. Those who constantly argue against the current science are really arguing for their right to decide. That's it.

So where does drinking and drinking fall into this? Your not necessarily impacting anyone's freedom when you get behind the wheel intoxicated, you are only increasing your risk of doing so.

This is off topic and I don't want to get accused of derailing. But the bottom line when it comes to Covid is there are people who believe we must do everything to preserve individual choice and those who believe this is an opportunity to finally have experts run everything. Your pov on this will determine much of your perspective. It's about intent/spirit of the person rather than difficult situations where a reasonable argument could be made either way.

Why is it off topic? The only important argument in your mind is about freedom. So do you find Drinking and driving laws to be against the spirit of freedom in the American constitution? That is a law promoted by experts (who found statistical risk in accidents when intoxicated) that limit your freedom for the protection of yourself and the general public

[slick_watts]

the nba's protocols are fine. i wish they would go even further. since they platform their players and personalities as global goodwill ambassadors having vaccine hesitancy simmering in the background is unfortunate.

[michaelm]

You do realize it is dogma to prioritize COVID over everything else right? It is also dogma to assume that force and control are the best way to deal with Covid.

Further dogmatic statements by you rather than me.

Amazing

You are amazed by repetitive rejection of the straw man logical fallacy ?.

No one including me has expressed a wish for all aspects of life to be controlled by experts. I am fine with a better solution than vaccination for the pandemic, and even more fine if the virus fades away to the extent that a minimal solution or no solution at all is necessary. I have also never said that Covid should be prioritised above all else, in fact I specifically said the opposite in regard to lockdowns as a measure against Covid, and neither I nor anyone else has endorsed forced vaccination of anyone.

It is you who argues on the basis of a fixed ideology ignoring all contradiction from what I can discern, hence my assessment of you as dogmatic.

[ATLTimekeeper]

I just want my right to bodily autonomy back.

You have that. It's completely wrong to argue otherwise. There is no vaccine mandate to exist. You are free not to take the vaccine. Period. You are not free to work wherever you choose, or travel wherever you like using whatever methods of transportation you like. Unofficially, you can leave this society and make a go of it in the woods, where you will have no serious connection to the government. To me, this is a perfectly acceptable way of life if you can't trust and can't cope.

"All I can say is that on this earth there are pestilences and there are victims– and as far as possible one must refuse to be on the side of the pestilence.” You can't expect me to have much sympathy for your temporary loss of rights when you routinely show up rooting for Team Pestilence.

Ok, there are no mandates. But the government in various states and parts of the world have banned you from getting on planes, trains, going to shopping centres, restaurants and have put pressure on businesses to fire anyone who doesn't get the injection. But no, no pressure, no mandates. I can go live in the woods if I don't want so called experts running every aspect of my life. I can guarantee I won't be left alone by these people there either.

There's pressure, but no mandate to exist. What's your solution again?

[michaelm]

So Bogut is an expert on basketball and politicians are experts on how to run your life? I think I get it now.

No, but they have been voted in by the populace to run the country, and are advised by people who have been trained in public health not all of whom I necessarily rate highly individually btw. Bogut is a basketball player who has never stood for public office in Australia as far as I am aware.

On second thoughts I was wrong to discourage you from dogma, you display little capacity for logical argument.

You say no, but then appear to agree with my statement. Do you believe running the country is synonymous with telling everyone how to live their life? You do realize that IS the history of governance right? What is unique is the system of individual freedom spawned from England that a few countries used to enjoy on some level before Covid.

It is the business of elected governments to govern in western democracies, particularly in crises, and to seek and assess advice, which with a public health crisis in Australia is probably imo best sought from advisors trained in public health rather than retired NBA basketball players who have spent most of the last 2 decades overseas. In the end it is down to those elected democratically, and they are not obliged to take unreasonable advice, in fact pretty much the opposite imo.

When the delta variant got going here they formed a plan to deal with it, basically on advice from the Peter Doherty Institute for infection and Immunity, including the Nobel Laureate Peter Doherty himself who is still around and active. Time will tell I guess whether it was wise to take this course with Andrew Bogut living in the same city where the institute is situated.

The people with some of whom I was less impressed were the health bureaucrats btw. I am also not telling you or anyone else on this forum what they should do in regard to the pandemic btw, just posting my own personal views and disagreeing with views which I personally consider not to stand scrutiny.

[ZB9]

What i said was there is not a covid crisis in Texas despite no mandates and that is true. There isnt a covid crisis here.

30 days ago you had your 2nd highest new cases and approached your highest death count too. Peaked at 467 in a day in December 2020, peaked at 443 September 23rd, about 20 days ago.

Yet vaccinations in Texas were way up on Sept 23rd compared to Dec 2020 when there weren't any vaccines.

How is that possible that numbers can go up or stay the same when the number of people getting vaccinated goes way up?

Texas went from having 1300 cases to start July up to 28000 cases in early September. You are correct in saying that they aren't the highest %-wise, because other anti-vaxxer led states are beating you there: Tennessee, North Dakota, Florida, South Carolina, South Dakota, Arkansas, Mississippi make up the top 7. However that's not to understate the massive spike that Texas had, and how it went much worse than the rest of the country.

See, as I said above, Texas went from 1300 to 28000 cases a day, a 2150% increase. The US as a whole in the exact same timeframe went from 18000 cases a day to 173000 cases per day, a 961% increase. Texas basically did 2.5x worse than the conglomerated average in the country.

Texas is around #17-#20 per capita and trending down. No mandates are needed.

Btw, im curious why the federal govt wants so many un vetted illegal immigrants from Mexico and Central/South America coming to Texas right now considering there is a "pandemic" going on.

They want to suggest mandates and vax for citizens yet they dont vet the people coming here from the south where there is not much covid infastructure. The press secretary herself said that they dont care if illegal immigrants from the south get vaxxed because quote "they arent staying long". wtf lol

Im not against immigration at all. I think it is one of the main things that our country is about and one of the things that make us great. However, every country has the right to vet and know who is coming in, especially during a pandemic.

It just shows that the fed government is full of **** when they act like they care about protecting people from covid. With their actions, the federal govt are actually encouraging more people to come to Texas illegally. Should illegal immigration numbers into Texas actually increase during a pandemic?

It's the COVID thread. What do you want to talk about - the weather? Always good to hear pitches for lightweight eugenics though - overweight people and immunodeficient people, tough luck, but I'd really rather make up claims over and over than help out in any way.

Im talking about vax and mandate and lockdown proponents in general only care about covid, not just in this thread but everywhere. There are many causes of death but only covid matters.

Covid is not a top 5 cause of death most places but it takes precedent over every other health issue. Other health issues are actually being neglected because of covid in many places. For example, cancer screenings have gone way down because of the covid obsession dominating everything. There are stories of people dying because their medical procedure was pushed back because of covid restrictions.

The reaction to the virus has been more dangerous overall than the virus itself.

Today in RGM antivaxx history: vaccine mandates to get into certain places is basically rape, and basically the same as outlawing cars, because its a slippery slope.

Ive heard many mandate proponents saying it's about saving lives. Well if it's about saving lives, then there are a lot of causes of death that are more probable for a healthy person than covid is.

If it was about saving lives, then outlawing fast food in the US and outlawing cars would save many lives. Of course that is not feasible in reality nor should it be.

There were the same amount of overall deaths in 2019 as there were in 2020. I will bet that it will be around the same in 2021. How is that possible in a pandemic?

It's about preventable deaths and making sure our healthcare system isnt overburdened taking care of the sick so that we can save the most lives possible.

Well like ive said earlier, there is a 1 to 5 percent chance that someone who catches covid will be hospitalized.

What should that number be to stop the mandates and lockdowns in California, New York and other leftist places?

If the hospitals were truly being overwhelmed, then there wouldnt be thousands of nurses and doctors being fired for refusing to take the jab.

California's numbers started spiking slightly (for context, we went from 1500 to 18000 in the same time frame as referenced above, a spike of 1200%) and did so higher than the country's average, even though before this we had one of the lowest %s. And so our local government took action, and despite having the highest population and more pop density than states like TX and FL, we curbed our cases and deaths significantly better than those 2 states. We have 11m more people in CA, and we have 50% of the deaths of TX per day at peak Delta.

Opportunistic indeed. That's 220 families a day that don't have to go through the death of a loved one.

So when will the mandates and lockdowns stop? What do the numbers have to be? Who determines it? Even if the number did get to zero, the mandates wont stop. The only way it will stop is if people stop going along with it.

The pharm industry contributed to Newsom's recall campaign so now he is going to mandate that all school kids get vaxxed, even though the covid risk for kids is something like .002 percent. It starts with masks mandates, then lockdowns, people went along with that so they push it further, now adding kids to the vax experiment. The numbers going down doesnt actually matter, more mandates were added, not less.

[ZB9]

Im a liberal, not a leftist.

Well since you asked about sides, the only reason im a Republican

Words mean things man... you dont just get to say whatever and change the definition of things

You don't think there are social liberals that are Republicans? There are.

Classic liberal free thinkers aren't welcome in today's Democrat party. Only one type of monolithic group think and newspeak allowed in that party today.

[Cartuse]

Why is it off topic? The only important argument in your mind is about freedom. So do you find Drinking and driving laws to be against the spirit of freedom in the American constitution? That is a law promoted by experts (who found statistical risk in accidents when intoxicated) that limit your freedom for the protection of yourself and the general public

Not really trying to get into this argument, but I just wanted to point out that the drinking and driving analogy is not appropiate.

When you drink and drive, you are doing a combination of actions that might endanger other people. You're acting in a way that's putting other people at risk. Drinking and driving is not a status quo or inertial state. you have to go ahead and do it.

When you don't get a vaccine, you're not doing anything. It's your inaction that other people are condemning. It's the opposite case, in which your existence is deemed unacceptable by other people unless you take a certain action. Not comparable at all, since in this case the only way you can say the unvaccinated person is putting others at risk is by placing the responsibility of the virus or disease on that person. But that person didn't create the virus. And that point of view is moral, ethical or philosophical and subject to debate. It's by no stretch of imagination a proven scientific fact.