4 ms·
Rejecting a compulsory measure not “anti-science,” and using that term in that manner displays a dogmatism that is decidedly unscientific. It is quite coherent
by chronofar 5y ago
Rejecting a compulsory measure not “anti-science,” and using that term in that manner displays a dogmatism that is decidedly unscientific. It is quite coherent to accept the consensus epidemiological realities of COVID, the efficacy and safety of the vaccines, and simultaneously disagree with compulsory measures to enforce treatment.
- curiousgal 5y agoAgreed but in this specific context the issue concerns healthcare workers. Vaccines are mandatory in the army for obvious reasons, ones that are even more relevant for healthcare workers.
- chronofar 5y agoI agree that certain forums require perhaps different compulsory actions, and for healthcare certainly the case for more stringent requirements can be made. Nonetheless my previous reply remains accurate, it is quite possible to coherently argue against them in this context, at minimum by way of their political mechanism of enforcement, while also accepting the consensus scientific views.