3 ms·

Certainly, and you have no right to walk around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies.

by lovich 5y ago

mistermann 5y ago
There are human "rights", and then there is Mother Nature's reality. Rather than thread after thread of arguing over whose fault it is and taking potshots at our respective outgroups, perhaps we should instead consider finding The Experts on reality. Perhaps they do not exist, just as we once did not have various other experts.
- lovich 5y ago
  I do not understand what point you are trying to make in response to my comment
  - mistermann 5y ago
    If you/society do not like people walking around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies, then perhaps you and society should do something about it. For example, when the covid virus broke out on the scene, some experts developed a vaccine that seems to be pretty darn good at rectifying the situation. Now there seems to be a related but different problem: a fair amount of people who are opposed to taking that vaccine (walking around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies), so perhaps a similar approach should be taken: find some people with expertise in the problem, and let them do their thing (maybe throw a few ten or hundred million at them to grease the wheels). As it is, the people who have been tasked with this job seem to be not performing up to the expectations of lots of people, so it might be a good idea to start looking for some who can.
    - lovich 5y ago
      We(society) are doing something about it. The convincing based on logic is over and now economic pressure and choosing who or who not to associate with is occurring. I am sorry that you can’t have your hand held every step of the way as you and your group continually shit on everything and put the rest of us at risk. Sucks to suck for everyone who loses their job cause they want to take a stance. They’ll be remembered as martyrs should they be proven right, but I wouldn’t put money on it.
      - mistermann 5y ago
        > The convincing based on logic is over and now economic pressure and choosing who or who not to associate with is occurring. I see. Well, I wish you luck with this approach. > I am sorry that you can’t have your hand held every step of the way as you and your group continually shit on everything and put the rest of us at risk. Do you perceive yourself to have the ability to read minds? Well I have some bad news for you: you missed, horribly. - I do not desire or need to have my hand held - I am double vaccinated - I do not have "a group" (at least nothing related to vaccination status) - I do not continually shit on things (but do I occasionally offer some advice) > Sucks to suck for everyone who loses their job cause they want to take a stance. They’ll be remembered as martyrs should they be proven right, but I wouldn’t put money on it. Based on my observations, when people lose their income (particularly as a result of policies they disagree with), they often become angry. On one hand, this can be enjoyable for observers. But then on the other hand, sometimes Mother Nature has a surprise in store that more than makes up for the pleasure. Let's hope for everyone's sake that this is not one of the times that the law of unintended consequences pays us a visit.
        lovich 5y ago
        > Based on my observations, when people lose their income (particularly as a result of policies they disagree with), they often become angry. On one hand, this can be enjoyable for observers. But then on the other hand, sometimes Mother Nature has a surprise in store that more than makes up for the pleasure. Let's hope for everyone's sake that this is not one of the times that the law of unintended consequences pays us a visit. Would you mind not being cryptic and stating what you actually mean? I don’t expect people to find my beliefs tasteful or agree with them, but I am laying them out on the table to discuss at least.
        mistermann 5y ago
        Domestic terrorism is one potential outcome that doesn't seem all that far-fetched.
        5y ago
dude4you 5y ago
Concentration camps for HIV positive people?
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  I can't get HIV from sharing the same space as someone who is infected, and it's a crime to knowingly spread HIV. Where are the camps for people with COVID?
  - dude4you 5y ago
    The original post was less specific about that.
  - nopzor 5y ago
    that’s disengenous. you can’t get HIV by eg. dining in the same restaurant as someone who is positive. you can with covid.
- lovich 5y ago
  There’s no concentration camps for Covid, you can stay home. You don’t catch hiv by walking by someone positive with it, and if you did like you do with Covid and it caused the same level of casualties then yes I would be all for the measures as we are using against covid
  - angelzen 5y ago
    Until your landlord or your bank kick you out for being behind on payments. Which is bound to happen if you can't go outside and, I dunno, work.
    - lovich 5y ago
      I happen to agree with that logic. Corporations have too much power. What I don't agree with is limiting regulation to a few companies based on the current situation. When Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission got decided on narrow technical grounds this is the kind of thing my political ideology warned about. We gave far too much power to corporations to decide who they do business with. The laws around that sort of power were decided long before everyone could find out some of the most intimate aspects of your life in a few google searches. The only reason I am against the anti vaxxers/anti covid measure people trying to take down the faang companies ability to stop their speech right now is because they only want to limit corporate power and private property as it extends to themselves. Look at the florida law for instance that tried to damage social media companies that blocked people based on their political speech unless they owned a theme park, which was an explicit carve out for Disney. I can get behind a movement that wants to prevent corporations from having enough power to limit individual rights. I cannot get behind a movement that only wants to prevent corporations from limiting rights on a group of people that I believe are hurting me, but will not limit corporations from limiting rights on everyone else. Either the logic applies to all, or people are lying about caring about rights and just want to be the people on top.

Certainly, and you have no right to walk around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies.

by lovich 5y ago

Certainly, and you have no right to walk around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies.

There are human "rights", and then there is Mother Nature's reality. Rather than thread after thread of arguing over whose fault it is and taking potshots at our respective outgroups, perhaps we should instead consider finding The Experts on reality. Perhaps they do not exist, just as we once did not have various other experts.

lovich 5y ago
I do not understand what point you are trying to make in response to my comment
- mistermann 5y ago
  If you/society do not like people walking around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies, then perhaps you and society should do something about it. For example, when the covid virus broke out on the scene, some experts developed a vaccine that seems to be pretty darn good at rectifying the situation. Now there seems to be a related but different problem: a fair amount of people who are opposed to taking that vaccine (walking around spreading viruses that affect other’s bodies), so perhaps a similar approach should be taken: find some people with expertise in the problem, and let them do their thing (maybe throw a few ten or hundred million at them to grease the wheels). As it is, the people who have been tasked with this job seem to be not performing up to the expectations of lots of people, so it might be a good idea to start looking for some who can.
  - lovich 5y ago
    We(society) are doing something about it. The convincing based on logic is over and now economic pressure and choosing who or who not to associate with is occurring. I am sorry that you can’t have your hand held every step of the way as you and your group continually shit on everything and put the rest of us at risk. Sucks to suck for everyone who loses their job cause they want to take a stance. They’ll be remembered as martyrs should they be proven right, but I wouldn’t put money on it.
    - mistermann 5y ago
      > The convincing based on logic is over and now economic pressure and choosing who or who not to associate with is occurring. I see. Well, I wish you luck with this approach. > I am sorry that you can’t have your hand held every step of the way as you and your group continually shit on everything and put the rest of us at risk. Do you perceive yourself to have the ability to read minds? Well I have some bad news for you: you missed, horribly. - I do not desire or need to have my hand held - I am double vaccinated - I do not have "a group" (at least nothing related to vaccination status) - I do not continually shit on things (but do I occasionally offer some advice) > Sucks to suck for everyone who loses their job cause they want to take a stance. They’ll be remembered as martyrs should they be proven right, but I wouldn’t put money on it. Based on my observations, when people lose their income (particularly as a result of policies they disagree with), they often become angry. On one hand, this can be enjoyable for observers. But then on the other hand, sometimes Mother Nature has a surprise in store that more than makes up for the pleasure. Let's hope for everyone's sake that this is not one of the times that the law of unintended consequences pays us a visit.
      - lovich 5y ago
        > Based on my observations, when people lose their income (particularly as a result of policies they disagree with), they often become angry. On one hand, this can be enjoyable for observers. But then on the other hand, sometimes Mother Nature has a surprise in store that more than makes up for the pleasure. Let's hope for everyone's sake that this is not one of the times that the law of unintended consequences pays us a visit. Would you mind not being cryptic and stating what you actually mean? I don’t expect people to find my beliefs tasteful or agree with them, but I am laying them out on the table to discuss at least.
        mistermann 5y ago
        Domestic terrorism is one potential outcome that doesn't seem all that far-fetched.
        5y ago

dude4you 5y ago

Concentration camps for HIV positive people?

heavyset_go 5y ago
I can't get HIV from sharing the same space as someone who is infected, and it's a crime to knowingly spread HIV. Where are the camps for people with COVID?
- dude4you 5y ago
  The original post was less specific about that.
- nopzor 5y ago
  that’s disengenous. you can’t get HIV by eg. dining in the same restaurant as someone who is positive. you can with covid.
lovich 5y ago
There’s no concentration camps for Covid, you can stay home. You don’t catch hiv by walking by someone positive with it, and if you did like you do with Covid and it caused the same level of casualties then yes I would be all for the measures as we are using against covid
- angelzen 5y ago
  Until your landlord or your bank kick you out for being behind on payments. Which is bound to happen if you can't go outside and, I dunno, work.
  - lovich 5y ago
    I happen to agree with that logic. Corporations have too much power. What I don't agree with is limiting regulation to a few companies based on the current situation. When Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission got decided on narrow technical grounds this is the kind of thing my political ideology warned about. We gave far too much power to corporations to decide who they do business with. The laws around that sort of power were decided long before everyone could find out some of the most intimate aspects of your life in a few google searches. The only reason I am against the anti vaxxers/anti covid measure people trying to take down the faang companies ability to stop their speech right now is because they only want to limit corporate power and private property as it extends to themselves. Look at the florida law for instance that tried to damage social media companies that blocked people based on their political speech unless they owned a theme park, which was an explicit carve out for Disney. I can get behind a movement that wants to prevent corporations from having enough power to limit individual rights. I cannot get behind a movement that only wants to prevent corporations from limiting rights on a group of people that I believe are hurting me, but will not limit corporations from limiting rights on everyone else. Either the logic applies to all, or people are lying about caring about rights and just want to be the people on top.