3 ms·

If we're at the point of society of banning things and forcing injections I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. The argument isn't unvaccinated people are s

If we're at the point of society of banning things and forcing injections I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. The argument isn't unvaccinated people are spreading covid directly to vaccinated people, it's now that unvaccinated people are taking up ICU space and resources. Under that logic we should start cracking down on other things that stress the healthcare system. We should start looking at the other leading causes of hospitalizations. That's heart disease, cardiovascular disease, and diabetes. Got any idea what those have in common? Maybe if you're a PoS person, and your social score is low enough, you don't get care. Likewise, maybe if you caused that car collision, you don't get care? All because the ICU might hit capacity. Talk about fear mongering.

dzhiurgis 5y ago
> I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. call 1-800-950-NAMI they will explain
dragonwriter 5y ago
> If we're at the point of society of banning things We’ve been at that point for, literally, all of recorded history. You are a little late to the realization. > I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. We can. The question is whether we should; banning popular, habituating substances has a pretty bad track record of doing more to exacerbate than solve the problems associated with consumption, as well as being a source for all kinds of additional problems. “Banning” isn't the same thing as “magically eliminating”.
- hunterb123 5y ago
  > We can. The question is whether we should; Yeah that's my point. The backlash of banning things is warranted for many reasons. But why care when we've already moved on to forced injections through career intimidation.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    Backlash against is not warranted. Why would you say that it is?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > The backlash of banning things is warranted for many reasons. There's plenty of things uncontroversially, unproblematically banned. There arr particular classes of things that have historically been notably problematic to ban. > But why care when we've already moved on to forced injections through career intimidation. Jobs with vaccination requirements are also not new, though not quite as old as banning things. I’m not sure why the existence of such requirements makes the real problems with banning certain classes of things any less important. This seems to be a complete non-sequitur.

dzhiurgis 5y ago

> I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. call 1-800-950-NAMI they will explain

dragonwriter 5y ago

> If we're at the point of society of banning things We’ve been at that point for, literally, all of recorded history. You are a little late to the realization. > I don't see why we can't just ban sugar. We can. The question is whether we should; banning popular, habituating substances has a pretty bad track record of doing more to exacerbate than solve the problems associated with consumption, as well as being a source for all kinds of additional problems. “Banning” isn't the same thing as “magically eliminating”.

hunterb123 5y ago
> We can. The question is whether we should; Yeah that's my point. The backlash of banning things is warranted for many reasons. But why care when we've already moved on to forced injections through career intimidation.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  Backlash against is not warranted. Why would you say that it is?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > The backlash of banning things is warranted for many reasons. There's plenty of things uncontroversially, unproblematically banned. There arr particular classes of things that have historically been notably problematic to ban. > But why care when we've already moved on to forced injections through career intimidation. Jobs with vaccination requirements are also not new, though not quite as old as banning things. I’m not sure why the existence of such requirements makes the real problems with banning certain classes of things any less important. This seems to be a complete non-sequitur.