Anti COVID Vaccine and Passport Mandate March

[Calandale]

Nicely avoiding the first two issues raised in the quote.

Why would you even quote it all if you can't deal with the points?

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Because the points are so laughably bad, they shouldn't really be entertaining them to begin with.

"Is the sky green?" - considering you're not colour blind, just look up.

I've dealt with anti-vax types - no amount of evidence will make them snap out of their stupidity. I've provided some basic evidence, but obviously it will be ignored.

[FourAceDeal]

Nicely avoiding the first two issues raised in the quote.

Why would you even quote it all if you can't deal with the points?

In the time it takes me to respond the other party could find a source of good informaiton and correct themselves.  The fact that they have not done this so far means that any further effort I expend on correcting their willful  ignorance will be a complete fucking waste of time.  I'm done wasting my time on people who get their medical knowledge from the Facebook University of Fuckwittery.

The anti-vax agenda is being pushed by troll farms and nazis.  If you believe then you are either a) a Nazi,  b)  a fuckwit,  or c) a Nazi Fuckwit.

I'm done with these people.   I have been polite for over a fucking year and I'm done.  At this point in time if you haven't found a stream of truthful information for yourself then I'm too tired to continue.  Just try not to take anyone of worth with you when your ignorance eventually kills you or someone you pass your pathogens on to.

[FourAceDeal]

No.  Fuck it.  Let's do one more deep dive into the realms of ignorance.


Can someone paste up a link to the "evidence" that one in six people catch covid from the vaccination centres they attend (or whatever today's meme is).   Let's take a look at it.

[Calandale]

No.  Fuck it.  Let's do one more deep dive into the realms of ignorance.


Can someone paste up a link to the "evidence" that one in six people catch covid from the vaccination centres they attend (or whatever today's meme is).   Let's take a look at it.

That would be nice. But it may be a difficult burden - a less than fair demand by Eclaire to prove something that probably isn't all that important (and Omicron will probably provide that evidence). The more interesting one is where no one even has to do research. Just look at this thread.

I ain't seeing it. And, in order to maintain any semblance of intellectual honesty, you should be admitting your mistake - or pointing out what we've missed. When people brush off such factors completely, and don't own up to their own hyperbole, it helps create entrenchment in positions; the precise situation that is preventing rational discussions.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

An entrenchment already has happened - typically in these debates, it's more showing how silly the person's position is to others, rather than trying to convince.

I think the former has already been convincingly demonstrated.

[Calandale]

Yes, it has. Reinforcing it is precisely what we do not need though.

Because, both sides have their knee-jerk reactions that are not supportable.

The only means of realizing your own best path is to see things without them.

[Fun With Matches]

Why do people label one whole group as “anti vaxxers”…the issue is bigger than that. You can still be vaccinated (or not) and disagree with the gagging of free speech and discussion.

Exactly. I found out through JPSears that the Merriam Webster dictionary recently updated their definition of "anti-vaxxer" to include this:

a person who opposes the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer

Now, whether anyone is for mandatory vaccines or not, I for one am NOT against vaccines, but am against mandating them as I believe it is a breach of human rights. This dictionary definition is clearly misleading. Look at one of the examples it gives also:

He said, while he will not get the COVID-19 vaccine, he is not an "anti-vaxxer" against all vaccinations.

Quoting "anti-vaxxer" as if what the man said wasn't believable or credible.

Before any of you jump on me, at least you can acknowledge that this dictionary definition is misleading and not precise. Right?

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Yes, it has. Reinforcing it is precisely what we do not need though.

Because, both sides have their knee-jerk reactions that are not supportable.

The only means of realizing your own best path is to see things without them.

lol it's not a "both sides" issue.

One side is demonstrably correct, the other is based on misinformation and conspiracy nonsense.

The problem is once that someone gets in that tin foil rut, it's more or less impossible for people to convince them otherwise. Arguing with them with the intent to change that person's mind becomes pointless.

Arguing that you lot are idiots however, that's very convincing to most people on here.

[Dirty Big Yoke]

Why do people label one whole group as “anti vaxxers”…the issue is bigger than that. You can still be vaccinated (or not) and disagree with the gagging of free speech and discussion.

Exactly. I found out through JPSears that the Merriam Webster dictionary recently updated their definition of "anti-vaxxer" to include this:

a person who opposes the use of vaccines or regulations mandating vaccination

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anti-vaxxer

Now, whether anyone is for mandatory vaccines or not, I for one am NOT against vaccines, but am against mandating them as I believe it is a breach of human rights. This dictionary definition is clearly misleading. Look at one of the examples it gives also:

He said, while he will not get the COVID-19 vaccine, he is not an "anti-vaxxer" against all vaccinations.

Quoting "anti-vaxxer" as if what the man said wasn't believable or credible.

Before any of you jump on me, at least you can acknowledge that this dictionary definition is misleading and not precise. Right?

Sorry, anti-mandate is indeed an anti-vax position, especially if most people protesting already were vaccinated - that more or less shows they're healthy enough to get another! Seriously, that very fact makes it all the more ridiculous. If there were actual issues with the vaccinations outside the usual rare allergic reactions, they wouldn't be well enough to protest.

There are alternate vaccinations for people who have allergic reactions to specific vaccinations. Even then, you can still get exemptions from vaccination if you have a valid reason, as detailed here:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/covid-19-medical-exemptions-proving-you-are-unable-to-get-vaccinated

[FourAceDeal]

No.  Fuck it.  Let's do one more deep dive into the realms of ignorance.


Can someone paste up a link to the "evidence" that one in six people catch covid from the vaccination centres they attend (or whatever today's meme is).   Let's take a look at it.

That would be nice. But it may be a difficult burden - a less than fair demand by Eclaire to prove something that probably isn't all that important (and Omicron will probably provide that evidence). The more interesting one is where no one even has to do research. Just look at this thread.

I ain't seeing it. And, in order to maintain any semblance of intellectual honesty, you should be admitting your mistake - or pointing out what we've missed. When people brush off such factors completely, and don't own up to their own hyperbole, it helps create entrenchment in positions; the precise situation that is preventing rational discussions.

Saying that vaccines do not work is not a rational discussion.  A rational discussion would end when the antivaxer is handed the evidence to disprove their idiotic point of view.  But it doesn't.  They just change their belief system to exclude the point just proven.   That is not rational.  It is simply a waste of fuking time and effort for everyone else.


If anyone wants to post up whatever stupid reasons there are for not getting vaccinated this week I'll gladly point out why they're dumb and paste up some links to easily found peer reviewed science that any moron could have found for themselves in two minutes on Google.

[odeon]

Why do people label one whole group as “anti vaxxers”…the issue is bigger than that. You can still be vaccinated (or not) and disagree with the gagging of free speech and discussion.

The anti-vaxxer issue is exactly that big. The people who refuse to get vaccinated vs the people who do. Nobody's shutting anyone up. The fact that they're not getting away with it does not equal the gagging of free speech, just that free speech is working.

Free speech is not about a safe zone.

[odeon]

Do you like being labelled as one thing or another because of AS, for example? Do you like being told you have no feelings, or are always selfish, or awkward?

Labelling people as one thing is a dangerous practice. Not all people who have rallied are anti vaccines, and even if they are, isn’t that ok?

I’m not condoning violence by any stretch, but one label fits all is dangerous thinking and tells me you are buying into the black and white narrative.

People are gagged on many platforms. Yes. Does that sit well with you? Are you not on I2 because if it’s freedom to debate topics? Or has that all changed too?

My mum put all of this very succintly: Nobody asked me if I wanted a polio shot. That would have been stupid.

The fact of the matter is that needlessly many people are dying because some people refuse to get vaccinated. Understandably, some survivors, vulnerable people and sentient beings in general think this refusal is moronic and selfish.

Debate all you want but don't say you aren't allowed to, and don't equate people disagreeing with you in not-so-polite terms with not allowed to have your say,

[odeon]

I would have thought it safe to say that the available vaccines do work. There's a lot of evidence to support this. The problem is that not enough people get vaccinated, which allows the virus to survive and mutate.

Understand that viruses mutate all the time. It's what they do. It's evolution. It's natural selection and, while not necessarily good news for us as a species, not very controversial. Allow the bug to continue and it will change.

There's nothing controversial or new about any of this. The vaccines are kind of new and exciting, but how they are supposed to work is not. I repeat: there is nothing controversial about any of this.

Or at least there shouldn't be. Science gave you mobile phones and the internet and Aspirin, and it now wants to give you this.

[Calandale]

Yes, it has. Reinforcing it is precisely what we do not need though.

Because, both sides have their knee-jerk reactions that are not supportable.

The only means of realizing your own best path is to see things without them.

lol it's not a "both sides" issue.

Actually, it is. Because the economic costs of lockdowns and the societal costs of mandates are probably greater than the lives being lost.

One side is demonstrably correct, the other is based on misinformation and conspiracy nonsense.

Conspiracy nonsense has to be baked into the equation. Actions which, though backed by medical science should also
take into account the predictable reactions from a social sciences point of view. Manipulation is an art, and the heavy hand of
government mandates may cause more intransigence as well as tearing the fabric of the society apart.

The problem is once that someone gets in that tin foil rut, it's more or less impossible for people to convince them otherwise. Arguing with them with the intent to change that person's mind becomes pointless.

See? you get half of it. And the more you push people INTO that tinfoil rut, the worse it will be.

Arguing that you lot are idiots however, that's very convincing to most people on here.

Yet, you, in your own entrenched dogmatic position, cannot see any better than the conspiracy theorists can.

As I said - both sides are filled with knee-jerk conformists to a party line, further causing the issues.