3 ms·

>Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. But you ca

>Compulsory getting a government-sanctioned liquid into my body is a completely different topic. "My body my choice" exactly. My part of space-time. But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. If the consequences for not getting vaccinated had more impact on an individual's participation in society, I think we'd see fewer people "choosing" to not get vaccinated, because they would actually face consequences for that choice. Instead, people are able to refuse the vaccine, still participate fully in society, and the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated.

effie 5y ago
> But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. > The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. You only wish there was such a contract, but there is no such thing. Even in cities, being part of a free society does not mean or require submitting to any medical procedure. > the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated. Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions.
- minikites 5y ago
  >Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. Separating yourself physically from other people doesn't make you any less of a member of society, you're just lengthening the umbilical cord. >Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions. It does imply that through negligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_negligence_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_neglige... We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome.
  - effie 5y ago
    > We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome. No that's pure fantasy, most people in most situations do not have such a duty. If you're an adult, you yourself are responsible for your health, not people out there who you encounter in your life. They have to obey the laws, but they don't have to respect your medical wishes to protect some group. And even those that do have duty of care, like doctors and nurses to their patients, have other options to fulfill it: by having antibodies; by having cell immunity; by maintaining profylactic medications such as zinc, vitamin D, ivermectine; by getting tested often; by limiting their exposure to the patient. Vaccination isn't the only way to fulfill that duty of care.

effie 5y ago

> But you can't "choose" to be separate from society, that's my point. Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. > The people in question want to refuse vaccination but still participate fully in society, which is not how a societal contract works. You only wish there was such a contract, but there is no such thing. Even in cities, being part of a free society does not mean or require submitting to any medical procedure. > the consequences are fully externalized onto those who are unable to be vaccinated. Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions.

minikites 5y ago
>Of course you can, to varying degrees. The farther from cities and the more resourceful you are, the more separate you can get. Separating yourself physically from other people doesn't make you any less of a member of society, you're just lengthening the umbilical cord. >Not getting vaccinated does not imply, legally or physically, that you intentionally spread disease. You are jumping to false conclusions. It does imply that through negligence: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_negligence_claims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negligence#Elements_of_neglige... We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome.
- effie 5y ago
  > We have a duty to other people and other people getting sick through the inaction of an individual's refusal to get vaccinated is an easily foreseeable outcome. No that's pure fantasy, most people in most situations do not have such a duty. If you're an adult, you yourself are responsible for your health, not people out there who you encounter in your life. They have to obey the laws, but they don't have to respect your medical wishes to protect some group. And even those that do have duty of care, like doctors and nurses to their patients, have other options to fulfill it: by having antibodies; by having cell immunity; by maintaining profylactic medications such as zinc, vitamin D, ivermectine; by getting tested often; by limiting their exposure to the patient. Vaccination isn't the only way to fulfill that duty of care.