5 ms·
If you leave quarantine you expose yourself to risk. It's your choice to leave quarantine or not. It's your choice to get a vaccine or not. This is a personal
by nickthemagicman 5y ago
If you leave quarantine you expose yourself to risk.
It's your choice to leave quarantine or not. It's your choice to get a vaccine or not.
This is a personal responsibility issue.
Not a society wide issue.
It's never been anyone's responsibility to wear a bubble suit to protect immuno-compromised people, or stop eating meat because of people with high cholesterol..
and it's not anyone's responsibility to get a vaccine to protect other people from covid.
Personally Im a hurricane evacuee and we are grateful for the help we don't demand you help us at risk to your livelihood.
- spywaregorilla 5y agoThe societal risk of infecting immuno compromised people with random generic disease is small. Scale matters. Similarly you're not allowed to walk around new york if you're confirmed to be carrying a novel strain of ebola. Permitting individuals to choose to be vaccinated and building owners to choose to forbid vaccinated people seems reasonable to me. Sacrificing individual freedoms for the mutual benefit of the larger group is the very core concept of society.
- nickthemagicman 5y agoWhat's the correct scale though? To a large number of people.... a survivability of 99.99% is an acceptable risk for people to go out in society freely, like you have with most age groups in Covid. To some people ONE death is too many because the value of a human life is priceless. What's the correct, scientifically determined, objective scale of people dying, to allow the government to turn things into a medical fascist state? My argument is that there is no objectively correct 'scale' because it's not a scientific measure therefore doesn't matter. It's just the news and government yelling scary death numbers until enough kind-hearted but ignorant people are scared enough to sacrifice their freedoms.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago1) Things don't fall into the set of {objective, irrelevant}. There is also "subjective". Which is why we vote to agree on things as a group. 2) There are middle grounds between fascist states and passing some regulations 3) The news being a fearmongering whore doesn't invalidate the fact that some of what it reports may be a genuine threat 4) The right of america has historically fond of "if you don't like it, you can go to another country". Surely it's strictly less impactful to say "if you don't like it, you can work from home".
- nomdep 5y agoFor someone with AIDS is not their responsibility to warn people before sex or to use a condom… wait IT IS! How about driving drunk? Fuck everyone else am I right? So stop whining and putting everyone at risk only because something is mildly inconvenient to you. Grow up already
- nickthemagicman 5y agoDoes it happen.... all the time? yes yes it does. You need to grow up and accept that other people aren't out there to protect you like Mommy and Daddy. The world does not exist to hold your hand. Never had been. Your life, your responsibility, your choices. That is the essence of freedom and it's beautiful. It's too bad you would sacrifice freedom for safety.
- nomdep 5y agoYou should go back to your bunker now.
- nickthemagicman 5y agoThanks for the kind words! A bunker would be great for a person to quarantine themselves off from covid too! Don't leave quarantine ever! Stay home, stay safe, and keep granny safe!
- nomdep 5y agoYou clearly had lived a pampered (and single) life if you think just granny is at risk.
- nickthemagicman 5y agois your definition of pampered: 'looks at statistics'?
- otherme123 5y ago
- Chris2048 5y ago> or stop eating meat because of people with high cholesterol that doesn't make sense - why would you eating meat harm people with high cholesterol? > It's never been anyone's responsibility to wear a bubble suit to protect immuno-compromised people if you're a doctor treating them (or a friend visiting) it is