This isn't just a simple difference of opinion, though, is it? This is people (with some exceptions, e.g. vulnerable individuals targeted by anti-vaxxers) acting highly irresponsibly in the midst of a public health crisis which has killed over five million people.
While I don't agree with them, you don't accept the possibility that some people may have what they consider to be legitimate concerns about injecting a relatively new vaccine into their body or about the whole principle of western medicine and the effect it can have on the human bodies auto immune defence systems?
A liberal society demands respect for other peoples right to think differently to you. Be very careful what you wish for and tolerate or even encourage.
How many of these people do we think genuinely reject the very concept of Western medicine? And how many ask absolutely no question when it comes to the ingredients of the things they consume on a daily basis (medicine or otherwise)? This sums it up as well as anything I've seen:
I dont know who "these" people are. I do know when you group disparate people into a group, give them a disparaging name and then seek to demonise them, that becomes a very slippery and unpleasant slope. Some people who have chosen not to be vaccinated may have done so casually without a moments thought. Others may have done so out of deep convictions. You don't have to agree them. You should respect their right to hold a view different to yourself.
Also, if someone really had 'forgotten' to get vaccinated, don't you think they'd have 'remembered' by now? There is a lot of misinformation around, but there are also perfectly intelligent people who are unvaccinated out of little more than an aversion to being told what to do, as far as I can see.
@ReturnToSenda not quite sure what happened with your quote. It did appear. I responded, then it seems to have disappeared again and you reposted. The effect was that I have answered a point that now doesnt appear. Weird as you say.
your quote spectacularly misses the point anyway.
Personally I don't respect people's 'right' to walk around with an increased risk of spreading a deadly disease, but each to their own.
You are still missing the point. You are refusing to respect people's right to genuinely believe that the vaccine (indeed all vaccines) are very harmful to human beings auto immune systems and hence bad for humans in the long term. You dont have to agree with them but it is worrying frankly that you seem to think the majority have the right to disregard the minority's genuinely held views. I would suggest you might want to read and reflect on some history books.
@mooneyman said:
Do you respect the anti-vaxxers that pressurise others to follow their convictions particularly harassing kids outside the school gates Dev?
No of course not. Where have I suggested that is the case? Like Senda you are making the mistake of lumping a whole load of disparate people into one grouping and then using the negative actions of a handful within that grouping to discredit all that you have grouped together. Farage and his ilk use exactly that technique to build resentment against muslim people. Is that really the example you wish to follow.
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
Would you agree that they should be bound by extra restrictions if they refuse to get it? I don't think anyone is arguing that people should be held down and forcibly injected.
People are free to make their own decisions, but have to accept the consequences of that decision. I am free to say what I like to someone, but if it's offensive the consequence is that I'll get thumped, or if it's hateful I'll face the law, that's the deal.
It's the same thing here. People are free to remain unvaxxed, but the consequence is they cannot be around large groups of people and will lose their ability to do things they enjoy that require that... like going to watch a football match.
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
Would you agree that they should be bound by extra restrictions if they refuse to get it? I don't think anyone is arguing that people should be held down and forcibly injected.
I’ve heard people asking for mandatory vaccination.
Extra restrictions - tricky one but on balance, no. I can see that if we’re out of other options then trying to limit unvaccinated people from circulating in the population is probably an inevitable step. But while it works on paper, in practice it can’t be enforced and people will find ways to get around whatever rules are introduced. So I think it would achieve very little and create more divisions between vaccinated an unvaccinated people.
...and think of the planning implications @DevC !
There are people around the world walking miles to get their children vaccinated with the devilish Western medicines. I reserve the right to believe a lot of those barking about not wanting a free vaccine developed by their own scientists over here (while I bet actually getting jabbed on the QT) are twats. And if they are working in any of the services at the sharp end are doubly twattish.
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
Would you agree that they should be bound by extra restrictions if they refuse to get it? I don't think anyone is arguing that people should be held down and forcibly injected.
I’ve heard people asking for mandatory vaccination.
Extra restrictions - tricky one but on balance, no. I can see that if we’re out of other options then trying to limit unvaccinated people from circulating in the population is probably an inevitable step. But while it works on paper, in practice it can’t be enforced and people will find ways to get around whatever rules are introduced. So I think it would achieve very little and create more divisions between vaccinated an unvaccinated people.
You suggest in practice restricting unvaccinated people from circulating in the population cannot be enforced. As an example, are you really saying that unvaccinated individuals should be allowed into any care home to see their loved ones?
@prufrock_91 said:
People are free to make their own decisions, but have to accept the consequences of that decision. I am free to say what I like to someone, but if it's offensive the consequence is that I'll get thumped, or if it's hateful I'll face the law, that's the deal.
It's the same thing here. People are free to remain unvaxxed, but the consequence is they cannot be around large groups of people and will lose their ability to do things they enjoy that require that... like going to watch a football match.
I find that a strange definition of 'freedom' but to be fair, it's one that seems to be in the ascendency.
@eric_plant said:
You do realise that "freedom" as a concept doesn't mean that you can literally do whatever you want to don't you?
It might do as a concept but society involves people getting along and numerous rules. Not all extreme.If you'll allow a fairly ludicrous example In olden days people used to just dump their rubbish and excrement out in the street. You'd certainly get annoyed neighbors if you did that now and most people would agree that laws in place to stop that and protect health are reasonable.
Imagine if your neighbour dumped crap all over the road and then claimed that you asking him to stop was infringing on his freedom.
Vaccines and clean water are widely accepted to be the two things that have made the most massive contribution to advancement in civilisation. It's not a freedom issue it is public health. I know Thames Water often still make some us drink sewage to pay shareholders...and this government is willing to let them and make it more widely acceptable... but the principle remains. Strangely I notice a lot of the posters I blocked during the knee/racism debate for my blood pressure are all over this one.
@LDF said: @StrongestTeam - I think you've mis-read @eric_plant 's post. He said freedom DOESN'T mean you can do whatever you want.
Yeah, more expanding on it and a bit of semantics, not disagreeing with Eric's point
Oh, I see what you mean. I'll delete my last post. And this one. Then you'll have to delete your reply to me so it all makes sense. Or shall I leave everything alone to prevent confusion?
@Wendoverman said:
Vaccines and clean water are widely accepted to be the two things that have made the most massive contribution to advancement in civilisation. It's not a freedom issue it is public health. I know Thames Water often still make some us drink sewage to pay shareholders...and this government is willing to let them and make it more widely acceptable... but the principle remains. Strangely I notice a lot of the posters I blocked during the knee/racism debate for my blood pressure are all over this one.
I assume you mean me. It's not strange; as I've said before, I rarely get to see The Mighty Blues so can't contribute much to the footy talk. I can, however, express opinions on other subjects. I've yet to form strong views on the Covid saga, which is why I'm following this thread with interest.
@LDF said: @StrongestTeam - I think you've mis-read @eric_plant 's post. He said freedom DOESN'T mean you can do whatever you want.
Yeah, more expanding on it and a bit of semantics, not disagreeing with Eric's point
Oh, I see what you mean. I'll delete my last post. And this one. Then you'll have to delete your reply to me so it all makes sense. Or shall I leave everything alone to prevent confusion?
@LDF said: @StrongestTeam - I think you've mis-read @eric_plant 's post. He said freedom DOESN'T mean you can do whatever you want.
Yeah, more expanding on it and a bit of semantics, not disagreeing with Eric's point
Oh, I see what you mean. I'll delete my last post. And this one. Then you'll have to delete your reply to me so it all makes sense. Or shall I leave everything alone to prevent confusion?
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
Would you agree that they should be bound by extra restrictions if they refuse to get it? I don't think anyone is arguing that people should be held down and forcibly injected.
I’ve heard people asking for mandatory vaccination.
Extra restrictions - tricky one but on balance, no. I can see that if we’re out of other options then trying to limit unvaccinated people from circulating in the population is probably an inevitable step. But while it works on paper, in practice it can’t be enforced and people will find ways to get around whatever rules are introduced. So I think it would achieve very little and create more divisions between vaccinated an unvaccinated people.
You suggest in practice restricting unvaccinated people from circulating in the population cannot be enforced. As an example, are you really saying that unvaccinated individuals should be allowed into any care home to see their loved ones?
No. Care home is someone’s place of residence, so I think imposing conditions of entry is entirely reasonable. In just the same way I don’t have to let someone into my house if I don’t wish to. And at a practical level it is enforceable - care homes already check visitors in/out and there are relatively few people coming and going. When visiting my partner’s elderly grandmother we have to show proof of vaccination & LFT. Perfectly reasonable I think.
But pubs, clubs, cinemas, stadia, transport? I just can’t see it working. Too many people to check, many will create fake documents to get into these venues, the venues themselves won’t properly enforce it etc. Can you really see a waitress or steward even attempting to prevent someone entering a restaurant or stadium based on their vaccine status? They simply aren’t paid enough to care, frankly.
Comments
How many of these people do we think genuinely reject the very concept of Western medicine? And how many ask absolutely no question when it comes to the ingredients of the things they consume on a daily basis (medicine or otherwise)? This sums it up as well as anything I've seen:
I dont know who "these" people are. I do know when you group disparate people into a group, give them a disparaging name and then seek to demonise them, that becomes a very slippery and unpleasant slope. Some people who have chosen not to be vaccinated may have done so casually without a moments thought. Others may have done so out of deep convictions. You don't have to agree them. You should respect their right to hold a view different to yourself.
No idea why my post wouldn't post, but I cba to type it out again. But basically ... this:
Personally I don't respect people's 'right' to walk around with an increased risk of spreading a deadly disease, but each to their own.
Do you respect the anti-vaxxers that pressurise others to follow their convictions particularly harassing kids outside the school gates Dev?
Also, if someone really had 'forgotten' to get vaccinated, don't you think they'd have 'remembered' by now? There is a lot of misinformation around, but there are also perfectly intelligent people who are unvaccinated out of little more than an aversion to being told what to do, as far as I can see.
@ReturnToSenda not quite sure what happened with your quote. It did appear. I responded, then it seems to have disappeared again and you reposted. The effect was that I have answered a point that now doesnt appear. Weird as you say.
your quote spectacularly misses the point anyway.
You are still missing the point. You are refusing to respect people's right to genuinely believe that the vaccine (indeed all vaccines) are very harmful to human beings auto immune systems and hence bad for humans in the long term. You dont have to agree with them but it is worrying frankly that you seem to think the majority have the right to disregard the minority's genuinely held views. I would suggest you might want to read and reflect on some history books.
No of course not. Where have I suggested that is the case? Like Senda you are making the mistake of lumping a whole load of disparate people into one grouping and then using the negative actions of a handful within that grouping to discredit all that you have grouped together. Farage and his ilk use exactly that technique to build resentment against muslim people. Is that really the example you wish to follow.
I’m with @DevC on this.
People have the right to freedom of opinion and shouldn’t be forced to take a medication they don’t want.
These are basic principles of a democratic society. I want my kids inherit a world where that is valued, even if that means some people will use that freedom to choose not to be vaccinated.
Whatever their reasons, I'm never going to respect people's decisions which put me and everyone else who's done the sensible thing at extra risk.
Would you agree that they should be bound by extra restrictions if they refuse to get it? I don't think anyone is arguing that people should be held down and forcibly injected.
People are free to make their own decisions, but have to accept the consequences of that decision. I am free to say what I like to someone, but if it's offensive the consequence is that I'll get thumped, or if it's hateful I'll face the law, that's the deal.
It's the same thing here. People are free to remain unvaxxed, but the consequence is they cannot be around large groups of people and will lose their ability to do things they enjoy that require that... like going to watch a football match.
I’ve heard people asking for mandatory vaccination.
Extra restrictions - tricky one but on balance, no. I can see that if we’re out of other options then trying to limit unvaccinated people from circulating in the population is probably an inevitable step. But while it works on paper, in practice it can’t be enforced and people will find ways to get around whatever rules are introduced. So I think it would achieve very little and create more divisions between vaccinated an unvaccinated people.
...and think of the planning implications @DevC !
There are people around the world walking miles to get their children vaccinated with the devilish Western medicines. I reserve the right to believe a lot of those barking about not wanting a free vaccine developed by their own scientists over here (while I bet actually getting jabbed on the QT) are twats. And if they are working in any of the services at the sharp end are doubly twattish.
You suggest in practice restricting unvaccinated people from circulating in the population cannot be enforced. As an example, are you really saying that unvaccinated individuals should be allowed into any care home to see their loved ones?
I find that a strange definition of 'freedom' but to be fair, it's one that seems to be in the ascendency.
You do realise that "freedom" as a concept doesn't mean that you can literally do whatever you want to don't you?
Of course; but to say that you're free to speak your mind but if I don't like it I'll make you suffer must be stretching the boundaries.
It might do as a concept but society involves people getting along and numerous rules. Not all extreme.If you'll allow a fairly ludicrous example In olden days people used to just dump their rubbish and excrement out in the street. You'd certainly get annoyed neighbors if you did that now and most people would agree that laws in place to stop that and protect health are reasonable.
Imagine if your neighbour dumped crap all over the road and then claimed that you asking him to stop was infringing on his freedom.
@StrongestTeam - I think you've mis-read @eric_plant 's post. He said freedom DOESN'T mean you can do whatever you want.
Exactly
To be fair, disagreeing with someone whilst agreeing with them is very much on trend for the gasroom
We must be approaching the golden thread where every post disagrees with every other post within the same thread
Yeah, more expanding on it and a bit of semantics, not disagreeing with Eric's point
I don't think it is really, if you accept that the way we act should be governed by laws.
I disagree
Vaccines and clean water are widely accepted to be the two things that have made the most massive contribution to advancement in civilisation. It's not a freedom issue it is public health. I know Thames Water often still make some us drink sewage to pay shareholders...and this government is willing to let them and make it more widely acceptable... but the principle remains. Strangely I notice a lot of the posters I blocked during the knee/racism debate for my blood pressure are all over this one.
Some say the law is an ass!
Oh, I see what you mean. I'll delete my last post. And this one. Then you'll have to delete your reply to me so it all makes sense. Or shall I leave everything alone to prevent confusion?
I assume you mean me. It's not strange; as I've said before, I rarely get to see The Mighty Blues so can't contribute much to the footy talk. I can, however, express opinions on other subjects. I've yet to form strong views on the Covid saga, which is why I'm following this thread with interest.
Is it too early for a beer?
Hee hee - a bit.
No. Care home is someone’s place of residence, so I think imposing conditions of entry is entirely reasonable. In just the same way I don’t have to let someone into my house if I don’t wish to. And at a practical level it is enforceable - care homes already check visitors in/out and there are relatively few people coming and going. When visiting my partner’s elderly grandmother we have to show proof of vaccination & LFT. Perfectly reasonable I think.
But pubs, clubs, cinemas, stadia, transport? I just can’t see it working. Too many people to check, many will create fake documents to get into these venues, the venues themselves won’t properly enforce it etc. Can you really see a waitress or steward even attempting to prevent someone entering a restaurant or stadium based on their vaccine status? They simply aren’t paid enough to care, frankly.