4 ms·

>> I find it ironic that there are plenty comments that paint the picture of how mandatory vaccinations divide the country.... >> How much more divided can a

>> I find it ironic that there are plenty comments that paint the picture of how mandatory vaccinations divide the country.... >> How much more divided can a country already be when the absolute democratic majority has made their decision months ago to take the shot but 30% are holding everyone back. > Its worth remembering that division is due to the other side always. That's an unhelpful muddying of the waters. If some clear minority is undermining a popular policy, especially if it's doing so for irrational reasons or out of spite, you can definitely point to that minority as the cause of the division.

abduhl 5y ago
If only we could apply such a black and white view to things like racism and LGBTQ rights.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > If only we could apply such a black and white view to things like racism and LGBTQ rights. You shouldn't read a pithy comment as a complete statement on any manner, and mine certainly indicated there's more complexity that wasn't being covered. That said, in this case, the COVID anti-vaxers are the source of this division.
- akiselev 5y ago
  That’s literally the opposite of a black and white view - why the minority is blocking the majority is what creates the gray area. It’s the difference between small c conservatives who have reasonable concerns about how affirmative action might worsen the problem and flaming racists who think they’re fundamentally superior.
- KarlKemp 5y ago
  Are you under the impression that only a minority cares about minority rights and, for example, heterosexual people would uniformly oppose LGBTQ rights? In that case I’ve got news for you. But first, I need you to stay strong: President Kennedy was….
Sophistifunk 5y ago
I think you missed the point.
beaner 5y ago
I think assuming that it's out of "spite" is an example of not realizing how "your side" might be causing the division. There are a lot of people who have already had covid and now have antibodies, who were also never in, and continue not to be in, a risky demographic. The risk for these people is very, very low already. On top of that, the vaccine is not entirely without risk. There have been many reports of side effects, specifically heart issues in young males. There have been some deaths. The counterargument might be, "okay, that may be technically true, but the risk is very, very low." And the people who do not want the vaccine, who are not in a risky demographic, might say in reply to you: exactly, that's the same thing we're saying about the virus.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  >> especially if it's doing so for irrational reasons or out of spite > I think assuming that it's out of "spite" is an example of not realizing how "your side" might be causing the division. With "out of spite," I was specifically referring to things like "owning the libs." > There are a lot of people who have already had covid and now have antibodies, who were also never in, and continue not to be in, a risky demographic. The risk for these people is very, very low already. So? Getting a vaccine isn't only about managing personal risk. Also, from what I understand natural immunity is often weaker than vaccine-induced immunity, and "hybrid immunity" (natural + vaccine) is superior to either alone. > On top of that, the vaccine is not entirely without risk. There have been many reports of side effects, specifically heart issues in young males. There have been some deaths. Is that risk higher than that from COVID infection? No: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25133462-800-myocarditis-is-more-common-after-covid-19-infection-than-vaccination/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25133462-800-myocardi.... This is a good example of an irrational reason: I'm scared of a choice that has a very small chance of producing myocarditis, so instead I'll make a choice that has a greater chance of producing myocarditis.
  - beaner 5y ago
    > This is a good example of an irrational reason: I'm scared of a choice that has a very small chance of producing myocarditis, so instead I'll make a choice that has a greater chance of producing myocarditis. This isn't true. "Healthy boys may be more likely to be admitted to hospital with a rare side-effect of the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid vaccine that causes inflammation of the heart than with Covid itself, US researchers claim." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-risk-from-pfizer-jab-side-effect-than-covid-suggests-study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r...

abduhl 5y ago

If only we could apply such a black and white view to things like racism and LGBTQ rights.

tablespoon 5y ago
> If only we could apply such a black and white view to things like racism and LGBTQ rights. You shouldn't read a pithy comment as a complete statement on any manner, and mine certainly indicated there's more complexity that wasn't being covered. That said, in this case, the COVID anti-vaxers are the source of this division.
akiselev 5y ago
That’s literally the opposite of a black and white view - why the minority is blocking the majority is what creates the gray area. It’s the difference between small c conservatives who have reasonable concerns about how affirmative action might worsen the problem and flaming racists who think they’re fundamentally superior.
KarlKemp 5y ago
Are you under the impression that only a minority cares about minority rights and, for example, heterosexual people would uniformly oppose LGBTQ rights? In that case I’ve got news for you. But first, I need you to stay strong: President Kennedy was….

Sophistifunk 5y ago

I think you missed the point.

beaner 5y ago

I think assuming that it's out of "spite" is an example of not realizing how "your side" might be causing the division. There are a lot of people who have already had covid and now have antibodies, who were also never in, and continue not to be in, a risky demographic. The risk for these people is very, very low already. On top of that, the vaccine is not entirely without risk. There have been many reports of side effects, specifically heart issues in young males. There have been some deaths. The counterargument might be, "okay, that may be technically true, but the risk is very, very low." And the people who do not want the vaccine, who are not in a risky demographic, might say in reply to you: exactly, that's the same thing we're saying about the virus.

tablespoon 5y ago
>> especially if it's doing so for irrational reasons or out of spite > I think assuming that it's out of "spite" is an example of not realizing how "your side" might be causing the division. With "out of spite," I was specifically referring to things like "owning the libs." > There are a lot of people who have already had covid and now have antibodies, who were also never in, and continue not to be in, a risky demographic. The risk for these people is very, very low already. So? Getting a vaccine isn't only about managing personal risk. Also, from what I understand natural immunity is often weaker than vaccine-induced immunity, and "hybrid immunity" (natural + vaccine) is superior to either alone. > On top of that, the vaccine is not entirely without risk. There have been many reports of side effects, specifically heart issues in young males. There have been some deaths. Is that risk higher than that from COVID infection? No: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25133462-800-myocarditis-is-more-common-after-covid-19-infection-than-vaccination/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg25133462-800-myocardi.... This is a good example of an irrational reason: I'm scared of a choice that has a very small chance of producing myocarditis, so instead I'll make a choice that has a greater chance of producing myocarditis.
- beaner 5y ago
  > This is a good example of an irrational reason: I'm scared of a choice that has a very small chance of producing myocarditis, so instead I'll make a choice that has a greater chance of producing myocarditis. This isn't true. "Healthy boys may be more likely to be admitted to hospital with a rare side-effect of the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid vaccine that causes inflammation of the heart than with Covid itself, US researchers claim." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-risk-from-pfizer-jab-side-effect-than-covid-suggests-study https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r...