3 ms·
Not every anti-mandate person is a anti-vax. Government mandates are a political issue. Depending on the country and its laws, some believe mandates are illegal
by ctrlp 5y ago
Not every anti-mandate person is a anti-vax. Government mandates are a political issue. Depending on the country and its laws, some believe mandates are illegal and constitute government tyranny. They may value rule by law or autonomy over their bodies. They may choose to receive vaccine but don't want to be 'forced to choose'.
Not every anti-covid-vax person is anti-other-vax. The mRNA vaccine is novel. Many believe its long-term safety profile is TBD. They think comparing vaccines with decades of safety data to ones with months is apples to oranges. They may also believe that Covid is not very dangerous to their demographic and don't like the risk/benefit calculation. They may also not trust the pharmaceutical industry and its influence on global health policy. The indemnifications of liability may give them pause to accept all the risk of side-effects. The censorship of contrary opinions on media may also affect their willingness to believe everything they are being told about the safety, efficacy, and necessity of the vaccines.
"Anti-vax" has become a convenient political weapon. It's important to unpack what it means and who is using it and why.
- lolsal 5y agoYou articulated my sentiments way better than I could, thank you.
- josho 5y agoThank you for sharing. > some believe mandates are illegal and constitute government tyranny This isn't a vaccine mandate. You are free to choose to be tested or vaccinated. Do you feel being forced to make this choice is tyranny, if so how bad do things have to get before the good of society becomes more important than your personal choice?
- betwixthewires 5y agoNot who you're replying to, but the good of society never becomes more important than your personal choice.
- generj 5y agoClearly the good of society is more important than some personal choices. We don’t allow people to make personal choices to commit murder, or to drive drunk, or even to drive at all without licenses.
- betwixthewires 5y agoLaws against murder and drunk driving are to protect other individuals against having their rights violated by you. Society never comes into the calculation, only the self interest of other individuals. You can drive without a license.
- ctrlp 5y agoThe agreed-upon surface area of 'the good of society' is smaller than you think. A disease that is %99.99 survivable and likely won't be resolved by non-sterilizing vaccine. is not comparable to the prohibition on murder.
- josho 5y agoI think it's larger than you think. In some regions ICUs are filled with covid patients and surgeries are being cancelled as a result.
- halfjoking 5y agoI'm still wondering if the saliva test meets the requirements? Anyone know? I feel that forcing an uncomfortable nasal swab test is being used as a means of punishment, and not based on science. If it was just saliva I wouldn't feel that way.
- ctrlp 5y agoI ask you to put your thinking hat on and imagine other scenarios where compulsion is softened by indirection. The 'tested or vaccinated' choice is a temporary choice and unlikely to last. The pressure is firmly in the vaccinate or lose your job direction. What is the 'good of society' and who decides it? In a pluralistic society there is valid disagreement about which are the goods (plural) of society. It seems you don't agree.
- ryandrake 5y ago> Not every anti-mandate person is a anti-vax. Government mandates are a political issue. Depending on the country and its laws, some believe mandates are illegal and constitute government tyranny. They may value rule by law or autonomy over their bodies. They may choose to receive vaccine but don't want to be 'forced to choose'. This makes as much sense as a family member I have who wont wear his seat belt. He admits that seat belts save lives and greatly improve safety, but won't wear his out of spite because "the government shouldn't force me to do it". Imagine deliberately choosing to amplify the danger of driving, every time you drive, purely on principle to "Oppose Tyranny."
- ctrlp 5y agoTo a natural paternalist, the desire for autonomy doesn't make any sense. Regardless of the existential value of 'spite' to your family member, the issue of whether something is legal or not is bigger than 'spite' to those who value rule by law. They are not so ready to trade their legal standing for supposed safety. If you give up your rights so readily it shows how little value they have for you. Don't expect the government to care about them more than you do.