4 ms·

Vaccinated are actually at a lot lower risk to catch the disease and even less likely to actually develop symptoms and severe cases. Keeping unvaccinated out pr

Vaccinated are actually at a lot lower risk to catch the disease and even less likely to actually develop symptoms and severe cases. Keeping unvaccinated out protects them from those who can spread it unknowingly.

tinus_hn 5y ago
Or you can not accept the nanny state and let people decide for themselves over things that affect themselves. Who knows, if you afford people that kind of respect they might even believe that states ideas on whether getting vaccinated is good for them.
- _Microft 5y ago
  You mean I could think for myself? OK, here is my reasoning: I am in no position to make an informed decision on these vaccines and measures by myself, so I trust those who actually know what they are talking about.
  - tinus_hn 5y ago
    Wow, you thought for yourself and your conclusion was you’re not going to think for yourself. Well that’s fine. Now try affording others that same privilege and allow them to draw their own conclusions.
  - kuraudo 5y ago
    I'm in your camp: the problem is the people we rely on as experts are said to be lying/wrong/stupid/evil/devils/.etc by the people against the positions they hold. How do you fight that kind of thing?
- vladvasiliu 5y ago
  Well, the issue with this approach is that one's actions don't only affect oneself. It's not like wearing a seatbelt, where in case of a crash, you're only killing yourself. Of course, it's more complicated than that, because if you only get badly wounded, then society's gonna have to foot your bill. Here, however, we're talking about a highly contagious virus that's transmitted through air, which can be spread even if you don't have symptoms and even if you don't actively interact with someone (as opposed to, say, HIV). Vaccines seemed to lower the spread risk, although with the new variant that effect looks weaker. So deciding for yourself to not vaccinate has a high likelihood of effecting others. To go back to the road analogy, this doesn't look so much like a nanny state as setting some ground rules. Like driving on the same side of the road, mandating lights, blinkers, etc.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  How does this follow from your earlier point, or in any way answer the parent? It seems more like a change of topic.

tinus_hn 5y ago

Or you can not accept the nanny state and let people decide for themselves over things that affect themselves. Who knows, if you afford people that kind of respect they might even believe that states ideas on whether getting vaccinated is good for them.

_Microft 5y ago
You mean I could think for myself? OK, here is my reasoning: I am in no position to make an informed decision on these vaccines and measures by myself, so I trust those who actually know what they are talking about.
- tinus_hn 5y ago
  Wow, you thought for yourself and your conclusion was you’re not going to think for yourself. Well that’s fine. Now try affording others that same privilege and allow them to draw their own conclusions.
- kuraudo 5y ago
  I'm in your camp: the problem is the people we rely on as experts are said to be lying/wrong/stupid/evil/devils/.etc by the people against the positions they hold. How do you fight that kind of thing?
vladvasiliu 5y ago
Well, the issue with this approach is that one's actions don't only affect oneself. It's not like wearing a seatbelt, where in case of a crash, you're only killing yourself. Of course, it's more complicated than that, because if you only get badly wounded, then society's gonna have to foot your bill. Here, however, we're talking about a highly contagious virus that's transmitted through air, which can be spread even if you don't have symptoms and even if you don't actively interact with someone (as opposed to, say, HIV). Vaccines seemed to lower the spread risk, although with the new variant that effect looks weaker. So deciding for yourself to not vaccinate has a high likelihood of effecting others. To go back to the road analogy, this doesn't look so much like a nanny state as setting some ground rules. Like driving on the same side of the road, mandating lights, blinkers, etc.
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
How does this follow from your earlier point, or in any way answer the parent? It seems more like a change of topic.