5 ms·

> And I, personally, refuse to grant them that courtesy. Inalienable human rights are not a courtesy for you to grant.

munk-a 5y ago
Refusing vaccination is not an inalienable right in America - the Supreme Court has ruled many times that compelled vaccination is perfectly legal for the government. In fact the anti-vax crowd isn't particularly new in the US - it was present when both polio and MMR were being removed as common causes of death. The only real difference this time around is that anti-vax is considered a political tool by one of the US parties and thus has garnered a false legitimacy.
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  I'm talking about inalienable human rights. You're talking about legal rights. There's a distinction here. And for what it's worth, I'm not concerned with legality: lawyers can and will legally justify anything they want to. I'm 100% sure that your claim about the law is correct. I'm sure that various inhuman authoritarian laws are going to be tried in America over Covid-19 and legally upheld. Politicians, businesses trying to make big bucks, and moral busybodies will never let a good crisis go to waste. I'm concerned about morality. It is utterly reprehensible to force a human to inject something into his body against his will. No judge, law, legislature, vote, or disease changes that fact.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    Infants receive medical care while being unable to personally consent to it and that is generally accepted - ditto for adults when they have reduced cognition for a variety of factors. I can't disagree that compelled vaccination may be personally immoral for you - but I don't think it's in any way viewed as unethical. It is accepted at a societal level even if some individuals will reject it - and, due to the widespread effects of this pandemic, I think the society we're contemplating to derive ethics here is the global one.

Refusing vaccination is not an inalienable right in America - the Supreme Court has ruled many times that compelled vaccination is perfectly legal for the government. In fact the anti-vax crowd isn't particularly new in the US - it was present when both polio and MMR were being removed as common causes of death. The only real difference this time around is that anti-vax is considered a political tool by one of the US parties and thus has garnered a false legitimacy.

logicalmonster 5y ago
I'm talking about inalienable human rights. You're talking about legal rights. There's a distinction here. And for what it's worth, I'm not concerned with legality: lawyers can and will legally justify anything they want to. I'm 100% sure that your claim about the law is correct. I'm sure that various inhuman authoritarian laws are going to be tried in America over Covid-19 and legally upheld. Politicians, businesses trying to make big bucks, and moral busybodies will never let a good crisis go to waste. I'm concerned about morality. It is utterly reprehensible to force a human to inject something into his body against his will. No judge, law, legislature, vote, or disease changes that fact.
- munk-a 5y ago
  Infants receive medical care while being unable to personally consent to it and that is generally accepted - ditto for adults when they have reduced cognition for a variety of factors. I can't disagree that compelled vaccination may be personally immoral for you - but I don't think it's in any way viewed as unethical. It is accepted at a societal level even if some individuals will reject it - and, due to the widespread effects of this pandemic, I think the society we're contemplating to derive ethics here is the global one.