3 ms·

there are a lot of personal things that would be great to know in order to make "informed decision". Why stop at vaccinations? Like in Black Mirror you get all

by trhway 5y ago

there are a lot of personal things that would be great to know in order to make "informed decision". Why stop at vaccinations? Like in Black Mirror you get all the info available about a person you are about to associate with. >they can make an informed decision. fortunately they can make it without knowing like all other people do in similar situation of unaccessible personal data - they can politely ask and/or just treat "unknown" as "unvaccinated".

rootusrootus 5y ago
> there are a lot of personal things that would be great to know in order to make "informed decision" I'm most interested in the infectious disease risk. I have unvaccinated children (too young). I'd prefer not to expose them to likely sources of the virus if it can be avoided. If your choice isn't likely to affect me, I don't have any interest in it.
- Overton-Window 5y ago
  You're free to remain locked down and homeschool your children.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    I should sacrifice my freedom for yours? Why not the other way around? After all, your choice does not affect just one other person, it may affect millions.
    - Overton-Window 5y ago
      > I'd prefer not to expose them to likely sources of the virus if it can be avoided. It can be avoided. You remain locked down. Why should others moderate their existence based on your unfounded fears? Should cars be banned as they pose a nonzero risk to your children as they cross the road? > After all, your choice does not affect just one other person, it may affect millions. This is a delusional hypothetical with no basis in reality. See Israel.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - rootusrootus 5y ago
        > Why should others moderate their existence based on your unfounded fears? We seem to be at an impasse, because that question can be asked literally word-for-word of you. Except I'm not insisting on you changing your behavior, you are the one trying to suppress my freedom of association. > Should cars be banned as they pose a nonzero risk to your children as they cross the road? Cars at least arguably have a benefit to society that supports their continued existence.
        Overton-Window 5y ago
        > We seem to be at an impasse, because that question can be asked literally word-for-word of you. I'm not asking anything of you. You're asking me to waive my right to legal recourse and inject an experimental vaccine based on unfounded claims COVID can be eradicated through vaccination. > Except I'm not insisting on you changing your behavior, you are the one trying to suppress my freedom of association. It's the vaccinated excluding the unvaccinated from public and freedom of association, not the other way.
- trhway 5y ago
  absolutely. Just don't expose your children to any people whose positive vaccination status isn't known to you. It isn't prohibited to ask about it.
  - rootusrootus 5y ago
    That is pretty much exactly what I do. I assume you are infectious until you prove otherwise, and I avoid you. > It isn't prohibited to ask about it. Unless you live in Florida, where the government is quite authoritarian.

by trhway 5y ago

rootusrootus 5y ago

> there are a lot of personal things that would be great to know in order to make "informed decision" I'm most interested in the infectious disease risk. I have unvaccinated children (too young). I'd prefer not to expose them to likely sources of the virus if it can be avoided. If your choice isn't likely to affect me, I don't have any interest in it.

Overton-Window 5y ago
You're free to remain locked down and homeschool your children.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  I should sacrifice my freedom for yours? Why not the other way around? After all, your choice does not affect just one other person, it may affect millions.
  - Overton-Window 5y ago
    > I'd prefer not to expose them to likely sources of the virus if it can be avoided. It can be avoided. You remain locked down. Why should others moderate their existence based on your unfounded fears? Should cars be banned as they pose a nonzero risk to your children as they cross the road? > After all, your choice does not affect just one other person, it may affect millions. This is a delusional hypothetical with no basis in reality. See Israel.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - rootusrootus 5y ago
      > Why should others moderate their existence based on your unfounded fears? We seem to be at an impasse, because that question can be asked literally word-for-word of you. Except I'm not insisting on you changing your behavior, you are the one trying to suppress my freedom of association. > Should cars be banned as they pose a nonzero risk to your children as they cross the road? Cars at least arguably have a benefit to society that supports their continued existence.
      - Overton-Window 5y ago
        > We seem to be at an impasse, because that question can be asked literally word-for-word of you. I'm not asking anything of you. You're asking me to waive my right to legal recourse and inject an experimental vaccine based on unfounded claims COVID can be eradicated through vaccination. > Except I'm not insisting on you changing your behavior, you are the one trying to suppress my freedom of association. It's the vaccinated excluding the unvaccinated from public and freedom of association, not the other way.
trhway 5y ago
absolutely. Just don't expose your children to any people whose positive vaccination status isn't known to you. It isn't prohibited to ask about it.
- rootusrootus 5y ago
  That is pretty much exactly what I do. I assume you are infectious until you prove otherwise, and I avoid you. > It isn't prohibited to ask about it. Unless you live in Florida, where the government is quite authoritarian.