6 ms·

Yup. But given that all the government's want to push this out like it's code on a Friday night, sacrifices were made.

by bobthebuilders 6y ago

ulfw 6y ago
Oh you prefer living like this for another five years?
- CyberRabbi 6y ago
  Our choices: rushed vaccine without legal recourse or forced lockdown... how did we get here? What happened to the law and our human rights?
  - ulfw 6y ago
    You forgot the whole "people are dying of it" thing Rabbi. If that wasn't the case and people just got blue hands for a day from exposure, we wouldn't be where we are.
    - CyberRabbi 6y ago
      People who are scared of dying can stay indoors and take rushed vaccines if they want, that doesn’t justify corrupting the law and trampling on everyone’s human rights.
      - WalterBright 6y ago
        You don't have to take the vaccine if you don't want to. Your rights aren't being trampled on.
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Yes, my rights have been trampled on... I’ve had to close my coffee shop because the government says I cannot provide a service to people who willingly want it. And I lost my lease in October after taking multiple loans just hoping this would end, so now I roast coffee out of my house. This isn’t about individuals being “forced” to take the vaccine. policy is being made on a systemic level, either promote a traditionally undertested vaccine to the public, without their ability to seek damages, or restrict their rights to voluntarily gather and do business
        ulfw 6y ago
        Oh look at you. If people would take the vaccine you condemn, they'd be able to come back to your coffee shop. But that's not what you want either it seems.
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        I didn’t condemn any vaccine... I’m condemning the corruption of the legal process by removing people’s ability to seek damages from a vaccine and I’m condemning mandatory “lockdowns” that violate the rights of innocent people. The existence of a vaccine should absolutely have no effect on anyone’s ability to do business with anyone else. That should be their decision to make. My life has been ruined from this. I’m blown away that I have to state this in a liberal democracy.
        WalterBright 6y ago
        I don't see the connection between lockdowns and vaccine liability.
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        This thread is about the premise that the prevalence of the vaccine will allow the politicians to revoke the lockdowns.
      - khuey 6y ago
        If you don't take the "rushed vaccine" you don't need any legal recourse so what's the problem again?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        The problem is the false binary public policy and the open violation of our human rights and the legal process.
        olliej 6y ago
        What rights are being violated? Or is it a violation of rights to disallow drunk driving? Is it a violation of rights to not allow murder?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        When you murder someone you violate the rights of an innocent person thus forfeiting your own rights.
      - olliej 6y ago
        What about the people the selfish people kill? When the ICUs are filled with entitled asses and the nurses and doctors keep getting taken out by those entitled asses, what happens to the responsible people who actually followed basic rules of intro biology?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Your premise is flawed: keeping our human rights intact naturally won’t result in the hospitals overflowing. If the virus is life-threatening (and I believe it is) then there is a natural disincentive to not taking necessary precautions and individuals will act accordingly, creating a positive systemic outcome. This is the basis of liberal democracy, we trust our citizens with freedom and this in turn results in better outcomes (esp innovation). Freedom isn’t something we do just because we’re “selfish” or it’s a luxury, it’s literally a better system. I would imply that you should have payed more attention in civics, thus insulting your intelligence but I prefer civil and respectful discourse. Ideas matter.
        yongjik 6y ago
        In another comment you said the government prohibited you from selling coffee to willing patrons. I'm sorry to hear that, but think about that. People are/were literally going to a random coffee shop and stay among strangers in the middle of a pandemic. This pandemic clearly showed that telling people to "just use your common sense" in an once-in-a-lifetime crisis leads to disaster. Hardly surprising, when you think about it - we never tell employers/employees to "just use your common sense whether a particular construction job is dangerous," in fact we have elaborate rules to decide exactly what is dangerous, and a whole government department to enforce it, so why would a novel infectious disease that nobody has any hands-on experience any different?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Recommend people wear masks, take vaccines and etc. I have no issue with that and I do it myself without hesitation. I have issue with making it mandatory. Especially forcing places of business to close down. People work construction jobs voluntarily. Voluntary is good. Let’s live in a voluntary collaboration-oriented society. We did, once.
  - goldenchrome 6y ago
    Not sure why downvoted. This seems like a reasonable point. The choices need not be so binary.
  - qiqitori 6y ago
    It isn't really planned to force people to take the vaccine (perhaps apart from certain people, but probably not even them). Edit: Though it seems it's legal sometimes to force people to vaccinate: https://khn.org/morning-breakout/a-court-case-from-the-early-1900s-gives-new-york-legal-precedent-for-requiring-measles-vaccinations/ https://khn.org/morning-breakout/a-court-case-from-the-early... The population never really had the freedom to run around and spread diseases harming people.
    - AndrewBissell 6y ago
      "You don't have to take the vaccine, but if you don't we won't let you travel anywhere, or attend any public events, or send your kids to public school. Up to you!" > The population never really had the freedom to run around and spread diseases harming people. I don't know what you mean exactly. People have generally enjoyed the freedom to roam without being subject to liability or investigation as to whether they might be spreading an illness. Flying or going to the grocery store with a bad cough and a fever was considered poor etiquette but not a matter for legal sanction. The worst that would happen was not being allowed to send your kids to public school.
      - qiqitori 6y ago
        Hmm, maybe they felt that way, but there are many laws in different countries and instances of people being fined for violating laws related to this. From e.g.: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200508.769108/full/ https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200508.76910... on the 1918 pandemic (article is from May 2020) "Most famously, San Francisco, California, along with other Western cities such as Seattle, Washington, Juneau, Alaska, and Phoenix, Arizona, passed laws requiring masks in public. Violators could be ticketed, fined, and imprisoned." You'll find a few instances of people being fined for measles-related stuff: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/york-city-issues-fines-1000-people-refused-vaccinated/story?id=62501784 https://abcnews.go.com/Health/york-city-issues-fines-1000-pe... https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/news/brookfield/2019/04/22/brookfield-man-sentenced-after-breaking-measles-quarantine/3537704002/ https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/news/brookfi... If you search for quarantine break-related laws, you'll e.g. find this 2005 CA law: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/q-1.1/page-7.html https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/q-1.1/page-7.html This Australian law on grievous bodily harm contains, "does any act that is likely to result in a person having a serious disease": https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/swans.nsf/650321a87e813bb4c82573f60019d274/0e38561c410508ab48257019001699ce?OpenDocument https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/swans.nsf/650321a87e813bb... Thus I think it's okay to tell people that they didn't have this freedom they apparently believed they had.
mjevans 6y ago
If we didn't it'd get pushed out like herd immunity does in colleges with rampant frat parties. Can you imagine the carnage and 'natural herd immunity' of 5 years of all of the holidays everyone ignoring the quarantines would give us?

Yup. But given that all the government's want to push this out like it's code on a Friday night, sacrifices were made.

ulfw 6y ago

Oh you prefer living like this for another five years?

CyberRabbi 6y ago
Our choices: rushed vaccine without legal recourse or forced lockdown... how did we get here? What happened to the law and our human rights?
- ulfw 6y ago
  You forgot the whole "people are dying of it" thing Rabbi. If that wasn't the case and people just got blue hands for a day from exposure, we wouldn't be where we are.
  - CyberRabbi 6y ago
    People who are scared of dying can stay indoors and take rushed vaccines if they want, that doesn’t justify corrupting the law and trampling on everyone’s human rights.
    - WalterBright 6y ago
      You don't have to take the vaccine if you don't want to. Your rights aren't being trampled on.
      - CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Yes, my rights have been trampled on... I’ve had to close my coffee shop because the government says I cannot provide a service to people who willingly want it. And I lost my lease in October after taking multiple loans just hoping this would end, so now I roast coffee out of my house. This isn’t about individuals being “forced” to take the vaccine. policy is being made on a systemic level, either promote a traditionally undertested vaccine to the public, without their ability to seek damages, or restrict their rights to voluntarily gather and do business
        ulfw 6y ago
        Oh look at you. If people would take the vaccine you condemn, they'd be able to come back to your coffee shop. But that's not what you want either it seems.
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        I didn’t condemn any vaccine... I’m condemning the corruption of the legal process by removing people’s ability to seek damages from a vaccine and I’m condemning mandatory “lockdowns” that violate the rights of innocent people. The existence of a vaccine should absolutely have no effect on anyone’s ability to do business with anyone else. That should be their decision to make. My life has been ruined from this. I’m blown away that I have to state this in a liberal democracy.
        WalterBright 6y ago
        I don't see the connection between lockdowns and vaccine liability.
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        This thread is about the premise that the prevalence of the vaccine will allow the politicians to revoke the lockdowns.
    - khuey 6y ago
      If you don't take the "rushed vaccine" you don't need any legal recourse so what's the problem again?
      - CyberRabbi 6y ago
        The problem is the false binary public policy and the open violation of our human rights and the legal process.
        olliej 6y ago
        What rights are being violated? Or is it a violation of rights to disallow drunk driving? Is it a violation of rights to not allow murder?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        When you murder someone you violate the rights of an innocent person thus forfeiting your own rights.
    - olliej 6y ago
      What about the people the selfish people kill? When the ICUs are filled with entitled asses and the nurses and doctors keep getting taken out by those entitled asses, what happens to the responsible people who actually followed basic rules of intro biology?
      - CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Your premise is flawed: keeping our human rights intact naturally won’t result in the hospitals overflowing. If the virus is life-threatening (and I believe it is) then there is a natural disincentive to not taking necessary precautions and individuals will act accordingly, creating a positive systemic outcome. This is the basis of liberal democracy, we trust our citizens with freedom and this in turn results in better outcomes (esp innovation). Freedom isn’t something we do just because we’re “selfish” or it’s a luxury, it’s literally a better system. I would imply that you should have payed more attention in civics, thus insulting your intelligence but I prefer civil and respectful discourse. Ideas matter.
        yongjik 6y ago
        In another comment you said the government prohibited you from selling coffee to willing patrons. I'm sorry to hear that, but think about that. People are/were literally going to a random coffee shop and stay among strangers in the middle of a pandemic. This pandemic clearly showed that telling people to "just use your common sense" in an once-in-a-lifetime crisis leads to disaster. Hardly surprising, when you think about it - we never tell employers/employees to "just use your common sense whether a particular construction job is dangerous," in fact we have elaborate rules to decide exactly what is dangerous, and a whole government department to enforce it, so why would a novel infectious disease that nobody has any hands-on experience any different?
        CyberRabbi 6y ago
        Recommend people wear masks, take vaccines and etc. I have no issue with that and I do it myself without hesitation. I have issue with making it mandatory. Especially forcing places of business to close down. People work construction jobs voluntarily. Voluntary is good. Let’s live in a voluntary collaboration-oriented society. We did, once.
- goldenchrome 6y ago
  Not sure why downvoted. This seems like a reasonable point. The choices need not be so binary.
- qiqitori 6y ago
  It isn't really planned to force people to take the vaccine (perhaps apart from certain people, but probably not even them). Edit: Though it seems it's legal sometimes to force people to vaccinate: https://khn.org/morning-breakout/a-court-case-from-the-early-1900s-gives-new-york-legal-precedent-for-requiring-measles-vaccinations/ https://khn.org/morning-breakout/a-court-case-from-the-early... The population never really had the freedom to run around and spread diseases harming people.
  - AndrewBissell 6y ago
    "You don't have to take the vaccine, but if you don't we won't let you travel anywhere, or attend any public events, or send your kids to public school. Up to you!" > The population never really had the freedom to run around and spread diseases harming people. I don't know what you mean exactly. People have generally enjoyed the freedom to roam without being subject to liability or investigation as to whether they might be spreading an illness. Flying or going to the grocery store with a bad cough and a fever was considered poor etiquette but not a matter for legal sanction. The worst that would happen was not being allowed to send your kids to public school.
    - qiqitori 6y ago
      Hmm, maybe they felt that way, but there are many laws in different countries and instances of people being fined for violating laws related to this. From e.g.: https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200508.769108/full/ https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200508.76910... on the 1918 pandemic (article is from May 2020) "Most famously, San Francisco, California, along with other Western cities such as Seattle, Washington, Juneau, Alaska, and Phoenix, Arizona, passed laws requiring masks in public. Violators could be ticketed, fined, and imprisoned." You'll find a few instances of people being fined for measles-related stuff: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/york-city-issues-fines-1000-people-refused-vaccinated/story?id=62501784 https://abcnews.go.com/Health/york-city-issues-fines-1000-pe... https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/news/brookfield/2019/04/22/brookfield-man-sentenced-after-breaking-measles-quarantine/3537704002/ https://www.jsonline.com/story/communities/west/news/brookfi... If you search for quarantine break-related laws, you'll e.g. find this 2005 CA law: https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/q-1.1/page-7.html https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/q-1.1/page-7.html This Australian law on grievous bodily harm contains, "does any act that is likely to result in a person having a serious disease": https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/swans.nsf/650321a87e813bb4c82573f60019d274/0e38561c410508ab48257019001699ce?OpenDocument https://www.slp.wa.gov.au/statutes/swans.nsf/650321a87e813bb... Thus I think it's okay to tell people that they didn't have this freedom they apparently believed they had.

mjevans 6y ago

If we didn't it'd get pushed out like herd immunity does in colleges with rampant frat parties. Can you imagine the carnage and 'natural herd immunity' of 5 years of all of the holidays everyone ignoring the quarantines would give us?