Anti-Vaxxers Take Online Harassments To Real World

[The Alma Mater]

For your freedom; we have the return of an eradicated disease. For your freedom we are seeing the growth of other diseases. For your freedom we have seen the death of some who couldn’t get treatment. For your freedom, we see the effects on medical and insurance costs.

Yes.

Many of these are also true of your freedom to eat Burger King, or not hit the gym. Or freedom to fly overseas.

True, but those do not threaten my baby

[Galloism]

Yes.

Many of these are also true of your freedom to eat Burger King, or not hit the gym. Or freedom to fly overseas.

True, but those do not threaten my baby

Yes they do, in point of fact.

https://www.parents.com/pregnancy/my-bo ... lth-risks/
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/measl ... ys-n296441

[Senkaku]

This is nonsense- the point of suppressing anti-vaxxers (quarantine, jail, fines, forced injections, whatever method) is to protect immunocompromised people who can't be vaccinated and therefore need the rest of us to protect them and provide them with herd immunity. Suggesting that people who are against anti-vaxxers are also against them is completely wrong-headed nonsense that enables their ignorant, deadly criminality. We're trying to protect them from antivaxxers.

So it has nothing to do with protecting the public at large, but only a very small percentage that is immunocompromised? Sure that’s the route you want to go?

...of course it has to do with protecting the public at large- each individual is protected by their vaccination, and together the healthy individuals who get their vaccinations protect those who are medically unable to receive one.

There's nothing to obtusely cling to here, Gallo. You're suggesting that people who don't like the antivaxxers want to treat immunocompromised people the same way as the healthy criminals endangering their lives, and that those two groups of people are somehow morally or philosophically equivalent. This is patent nonsense.

Women are dumber/more superstitious than men and thus causing the plague but word it so you can say it's ridiculous anyone would suggest that's what you're saying and you're just noting it bc it's """interesting""" and then wait as they go read more explicit/radical takes by more extremist posters and go progressively further down the metaphorical YouTube autoplay feed of extremist anti-feminism, every forum needs its own innocuous taster/intro to the process

Strangely, not a reaction you see when people assert confidently that men commit the majority of the crime and stuff like that.

Always interesting to run tests on NS.

aaaand when it's pointed out you change the subject and put words in my mouth lol

change your schtick up a little honey or other ppl might start catching on

Well we do not have to force it per se. Not jail people or hold them down while we stick them. We we can and should do is make it a requirement to use certain government services, benefits and privileges.

We already mandate them to attend public schools and to get a green card. We should also mandate them to get a driver’s license, any ID legal to used for air travel or other interstate transportation, to get a passport, to work any government job, to use polling places. Require the transportation, hotel, food service and retail industries to require their employees who deal with the public be vaccinated. Things like that.

And eliminate non health related exemptions.

That way if the real loons want to avoid vaccines fine, but we have limited their ability to spread their diseases.

Polling might not be a great idea ...


“Suppression”

Why should you be allowed to vote if you're passionately committed towards the uncontrolled spread of lethal diseases throughout the body politic? Just because their bioterrorism has a mass grassroots campaign instead of a vanguard approach like Amerithrax doesn't mean it should be more acceptable.

For your freedom; we have the return of an eradicated disease. For your freedom we are seeing the growth of other diseases. For your freedom we have seen the death of some who couldn’t get treatment. For your freedom, we see the effects on medical and insurance costs.

Yes.

Many of these are also true of your freedom to eat Burger King, or not hit the gym. Or freedom to fly overseas.

Me not going to the gym just hurts me. Me not getting my flu shot or giving a future kid of mine immunized means I could kill someone else.

[Galloism]

So it has nothing to do with protecting the public at large, but only a very small percentage that is immunocompromised? Sure that’s the route you want to go?

...of course it has to do with protecting the public at large- each individual is protected by their vaccination, and together the healthy individuals who get their vaccinations protect those who are medically unable to receive one.

There's nothing to obtusely cling to here, Gallo. You're suggesting that people who don't like the antivaxxers want to treat immunocompromised people the same way as the healthy criminals endangering their lives, and that those two groups of people are somehow morally or philosophically equivalent. This is patent nonsense.

It depends if it’s about threat or not. If it’s about threat to others broadly, the cause is not important. A person who won’t pass a driving test is the same as one who can’t.

If it’s about threat to a very small specific group, then you have to weigh the freedom of travel for that group against the bodily autonomy of the much much larger group. And whether the potential life of person B is worth violating the bodily autonomy of many persons A.

Strangely, not a reaction you see when people assert confidently that men commit the majority of the crime and stuff like that.

Always interesting to run tests on NS.

aaaand when it's pointed out you change the subject and put words in my mouth lol

I run little psychology tests on NS sometimes.

Yes.

Many of these are also true of your freedom to eat Burger King, or not hit the gym. Or freedom to fly overseas.

Me not going to the gym just hurts me. Me not getting my flu shot or giving a future kid of mine immunized means I could kill someone else.

And as I posted above, those things can kill other people.

Overweight people are also more likely to get sick overall, and infect others. Which can kill the immunocompromised.

[Salus Maior]

And as I posted above, those things can kill other people.

Overweight people are also more likely to get sick overall, and infect others. Which can kill the immunocompromised.

Yeah, I think we all realize the obesity epidemic needs to be solved. I'm fine with regulating fast food places, iirc I think they already are to some extent.

And obviously, Anti-vaxxers need to be combated.

[Galloism]

And as I posted above, those things can kill other people.

Overweight people are also more likely to get sick overall, and infect others. Which can kill the immunocompromised.

Yeah, I think we all realize the obesity epidemic needs to be solved. I'm fine with regulating fast food places, iirc I think they already are to some extent.

And obviously, Anti-vaxxers need to be combated.

Informationally, sure. hell, I’m good with incentives and disincentives. Their position is stupid after all - vaccines kill very very few people, far far less than they save.

But if you start arguing we round up all the fat people and send them to fat camp against their will to protect the public, there’s a problem. Same with the unvaccinated adults.

[Salus Maior]

Yeah, I think we all realize the obesity epidemic needs to be solved. I'm fine with regulating fast food places, iirc I think they already are to some extent.

And obviously, Anti-vaxxers need to be combated.

Informationally, sure. hell, I’m good with incentives and disincentives. Their position is stupid after all - vaccines kill very very few people, far far less than they save.

But if you start arguing we round up all the fat people and send them to fat camp against their will to protect the public, there’s a problem. Same with the unvaccinated adults.

Maybe not camps, but severely penalize them sure.

One could argue taking it easier on those who have trouble with weight, because it takes a lot to get into shape in terms of time and effort. A vaccine takes barely any time and effort, one doctor's visit if anything.

[Galloism]

Informationally, sure. hell, I’m good with incentives and disincentives. Their position is stupid after all - vaccines kill very very few people, far far less than they save.

But if you start arguing we round up all the fat people and send them to fat camp against their will to protect the public, there’s a problem. Same with the unvaccinated adults.

Maybe not camps, but severely penalize them sure.

One could argue taking it easier on those who have trouble with weight, because it takes a lot to get into shape in terms of time and effort. A vaccine takes barely any time and effort, one doctor's visit if anything.

The penalty would have to be reasonable. You’re talking about a penalty for exercising their bodily autonomy. If upheld, you can bet your ass it will be placed on women who get abortions in Alabama for the same reason - exercising bodily autonomy in a way that kills a person (under law).

[Salus Maior]

Maybe not camps, but severely penalize them sure.

One could argue taking it easier on those who have trouble with weight, because it takes a lot to get into shape in terms of time and effort. A vaccine takes barely any time and effort, one doctor's visit if anything.

The penalty would have to be reasonable. You’re talking about a penalty for exercising their bodily autonomy. If upheld, you can bet your ass it will be placed on women who get abortions in Alabama for the same reason - exercising bodily autonomy in a way that kills a person (under law).

I don't believe in absolute bodily autonomy, so yeah I wouldn't be opposed to abortion restriction. That's not something that would compel me to see this any differently.

[Galloism]

The penalty would have to be reasonable. You’re talking about a penalty for exercising their bodily autonomy. If upheld, you can bet your ass it will be placed on women who get abortions in Alabama for the same reason - exercising bodily autonomy in a way that kills a person (under law).

I don't believe in absolute bodily autonomy, so yeah I wouldn't be opposed to abortion restriction. That's not something that would compel me to see this any differently.

Absolute is a hard word, but the threshold for violation should be very very very high. There’s nothing more important and valued to an individual than their own body.

[Salus Maior]

I don't believe in absolute bodily autonomy, so yeah I wouldn't be opposed to abortion restriction. That's not something that would compel me to see this any differently.

Absolute is a hard word, but the threshold for violation should be very very very high. There’s nothing more important and valued to an individual than their own body.

And a vaccine would do nothing to harm their body. It's an improvement that protects you, and people around you. It's a win-win. If it's a matter of allergy, there can be an exception.

[Galloism]

Absolute is a hard word, but the threshold for violation should be very very very high. There’s nothing more important and valued to an individual than their own body.

And a vaccine would do nothing to harm their body. It's an improvement that protects you, and people around you. It's a win-win. If it's a matter of allergy, there can be an exception.

It’s statistically unlikely to harm them (not impossible), and will certainly help protect them, and protect people around them, but that’s not really the important part.

After all, I can say the same about a nose job for a few people provided psychological distress is a real harm.

The important part is how much harm they are likely to do. And the answer is.... not likely any at all, statistically. Largely because of vaccination’s success ironically.

If Joe the fool doesn’t get vaccinated, he’s very very likely to infect no one. Even if he does, they’re exceptionally unlikely to die. So the risk you’re preventing is also very low on an individual level.

The only problem is if you get a lot of them. That’s why we don’t worry about those with allergies, etc - unvaccinated people aren’t really much of a risk unless they hit a certain threshold of the population.

[Salus Maior]

And a vaccine would do nothing to harm their body. It's an improvement that protects you, and people around you. It's a win-win. If it's a matter of allergy, there can be an exception.

It’s statistically unlikely to harm them (not impossible), and will certainly help protect them, and protect people around them, but that’s not really the important part.

After all, I can say the same about a nose job for a few people provided psychological distress is a real harm.

The important part is how much harm they are likely to do. And the answer is.... not likely any at all, statistically. Largely because of vaccination’s success ironically.

If Joe the fool doesn’t get vaccinated, he’s very very likely to infect no one. Even if he does, they’re exceptionally unlikely to die. So the risk you’re preventing is also very low on an individual level.

The only problem is if you get a lot of them. That’s why we don’t worry about those with allergies, etc - unvaccinated people aren’t really much of a risk unless they hit a certain threshold of the population.

Yeah, and we're getting to the point where there are large amounts of people causing trouble by not getting vaccines. That's why we're talking at all about this.

[Galloism]

It’s statistically unlikely to harm them (not impossible), and will certainly help protect them, and protect people around them, but that’s not really the important part.

After all, I can say the same about a nose job for a few people provided psychological distress is a real harm.

The important part is how much harm they are likely to do. And the answer is.... not likely any at all, statistically. Largely because of vaccination’s success ironically.

If Joe the fool doesn’t get vaccinated, he’s very very likely to infect no one. Even if he does, they’re exceptionally unlikely to die. So the risk you’re preventing is also very low on an individual level.

The only problem is if you get a lot of them. That’s why we don’t worry about those with allergies, etc - unvaccinated people aren’t really much of a risk unless they hit a certain threshold of the population.

Yeah, and we're getting to the point where there are large amounts of people causing trouble by not getting vaccines. That's why we're talking at all about this.

Yeah, but it’s a case of “no single raindrop is the cause of the flood”.

Joe the fool didn’t cause the problem. Strapping him down to the table won’t fix it.

The inability of society to handle science caused the problem. Forcing people will only make them double down (especially in America, where it would be taken as proof it’s bad for you).

[Plzen]

Very few people questioned the utility of vaccines back when smallpox killed 5 million people a year. How quickly our collective memory forgets.

With regards to the issue at hand, I happen to be a firm believer in the freedom of speech and expression in the fairly extensive sense, so I don’t oppose people’s right to state whatever they believe in, regardless of how asinine or false that is. Similarly, the right to gather at a public location and protest is a fairly deeply ingrained tradition of the democratic world. Such a gathering might be intimidating, but nobody who acted nonviolently should be censured with anything.

As long as these people promptly show up at their doctors’ to get their children vaccinated in accordance with law, they can complain about it as much as they like. Such is life in a liberal democracy. And if they don’t promptly show up, the hammer of legal justice will descend in full force.

[Salus Maior]

Yeah, and we're getting to the point where there are large amounts of people causing trouble by not getting vaccines. That's why we're talking at all about this.

Yeah, but it’s a case of “no single raindrop is the cause of the flood”.

Joe the fool didn’t cause the problem. Strapping him down to the table won’t fix it.

The inability of society to handle science caused the problem. Forcing people will only make them double down (especially in America, where it would be taken as proof it’s bad for you).

So what would you suggest when these groups completely reject science when they're taught it (I've been told there's even people who get through medical school and hold these views), you informing them isn't going to get them to change or save any lives.

[Galloism]

Yeah, but it’s a case of “no single raindrop is the cause of the flood”.

Joe the fool didn’t cause the problem. Strapping him down to the table won’t fix it.

The inability of society to handle science caused the problem. Forcing people will only make them double down (especially in America, where it would be taken as proof it’s bad for you).

So what would you suggest when these groups completely reject science when they're taught it (I've been told there's even people who get through medical school and hold these views), you informing them isn't going to get them to change or save any lives.

You can’t logic people out of a position they didn’t logic themselves into.

I suggest pictures.

https://thedayintech.files.wordpress.co ... io-nat.jpg
http://colgurchemistry.com/Science9/Bio ... ng%201.jpg

For starters.

[Salus Maior]

So what would you suggest when these groups completely reject science when they're taught it (I've been told there's even people who get through medical school and hold these views), you informing them isn't going to get them to change or save any lives.

You can’t logic people out of a position they didn’t logic themselves into.

I suggest pictures.

https://thedayintech.files.wordpress.co ... io-nat.jpg
http://colgurchemistry.com/Science9/Bio ... ng%201.jpg

For starters.

They'll just conspiracy theory their way right out of it.

These people are not reasonable, that's your mistake here. They think whatever bs they've bought into, whether it's essential oils, or crystals, or enemas, whatever is going to heal them and their kids better than what a doctor knows will work. Because they've bought into anti-intellectualist conspiracy theories and they're way more firm in their belief than you think they are.

[Novus America]

And as I posted above, those things can kill other people.

Overweight people are also more likely to get sick overall, and infect others. Which can kill the immunocompromised.

Yeah, I think we all realize the obesity epidemic needs to be solved. I'm fine with regulating fast food places, iirc I think they already are to some extent.

And obviously, Anti-vaxxers need to be combated.

Actually fast food is not more unhealthy than other food
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.huffpo ... 9ec82c/amp

Fast food unfairly gets targeted as it is not actually worse than more expensive restaurant food.

But anyways I agree we have to combat the anti Vax crowd. But by denying them access to government services and facilities rather than holding them down and sticking them.

Make it where they cannot get drivers licenses, passports, travel on planes, work any government job, even go to polling places.
And eliminate non medical exemptions.

That will take care of them. Without jail or force.

[Novus America]

Well we do not have to force it per se. Not jail people or hold them down while we stick them. We we can and should do is make it a requirement to use certain government services, benefits and privileges.

We already mandate them to attend public schools and to get a green card. We should also mandate them to get a driver’s license, any ID legal to used for air travel or other interstate transportation, to get a passport, to work any government job, to use polling places. Require the transportation, hotel, food service and retail industries to require their employees who deal with the public be vaccinated. Things like that.

And eliminate non health related exemptions.

That way if the real loons want to avoid vaccines fine, but we have limited their ability to spread their diseases.

Polling might not be a great idea ...


“Suppression”

Eh some people might bitch, but I do not really care.
Besides it is not suppression, setting minimum requirements anyone can meet with minimum effort is not suppression. They want to vote, they should help keep the other voters safe against deadly diseases that can be dealt with via vaccination.

[The Black Forrest]

For your freedom; we have the return of an eradicated disease. For your freedom we are seeing the growth of other diseases. For your freedom we have seen the death of some who couldn’t get treatment. For your freedom, we see the effects on medical and insurance costs.

Yes.

Many of these are also true of your freedom to eat Burger King, or not hit the gym. Or freedom to fly overseas.

Freedom always comes with a blood price. The question is how much are we willing to pay for it. Sometimes the price is low, as is here, sometimes it’s high, as in prohibiting drunken driving.

Blood price? You think you are in a war? A rebellion?

I eating a burger king is a gamble. Unlike a highly contagious disease. Even then I getting sick does not effect the others....it will obviously effect insurence rates.

Now let’s take it further. How about your freedom and say somebody who works labor and delivery and decides nobody is the boss of then and they don’t need vaccine or boosters?

About the only thing I can support your freedom would be the area of a drug being relatively new and being told I have to have it. Even then we are talking about vaccines with a known history.

[NoAvailability]

Meh, if they don't wanna get vaccinated, it's their thing. They may be spreading a disease, but ultimately doing so is their right. As far as I'm concerned, this is just another step into liberal nonsense, and doesn't warrant any more attention than other liberal nonsense.

[The Black Forrest]

Meh, if they don't wanna get vaccinated, it's their thing. They may be spreading a disease, but ultimately doing so is their right. As far as I'm concerned, this is just another step into liberal nonsense, and doesn't warrant any more attention than other liberal nonsense.

Don’t worry the state is dispatching people to vaccinate you.

[NoAvailability]

Meh, if they don't wanna get vaccinated, it's their thing. They may be spreading a disease, but ultimately doing so is their right. As far as I'm concerned, this is just another step into liberal nonsense, and doesn't warrant any more attention than other liberal nonsense.

Don’t worry the state is dispatching people to vaccinate you.

I AM vaccinated. Only because I think it's their right to be stupid enough to buy into this alternative health stuff doesn't mean I am.

[The Huskar Social Union]

Shit like this is why we need mandatory vaccinations.

This. Unless you have a legitimate medical reason to not receive a vaccination it should be mandatory, especially for children.