Posted on 12/06/2021 6:06:53 AM PST by Kaslin
As a thought experiment, I posted the following statement to Twitter last week:
“Unless you are 100% sure that this vaccine is 100% safe for 100% of those who take it (you aren’t), you have NO moral right to force or coerce it on ANYONE. In fact, choosing to do so is an evil action.”
To clarify, I added the below as a follow-up:
“You can strongly recommend it. You can explain why you think the benefits are worth the drawbacks and/or risks. What you can't do - if you want to stay on the right side of morality, that is - is impose a negative consequence for making the 'wrong' choice. THAT is coercion.”
By almost any standard, especially mine, the tweet did remarkably well, reaching hundreds of thousands of people and garnering hundreds of responses. And particularly interesting was the fact that it did so without being retweeted by any major accounts, at least as far as I could tell. That especially means that the issue, and the framing above, strongly resonated with people who are passionate enough about it to interact in some way.
If you have a few minutes, you can and should read through the comments. Though most agree with me, the ones that don’t tell you everything you need to know about where we are with the fight for bodily autonomy regarding Covid-19 vaccines in America today. The gist of most centered around the seeming assumption that the unvaccinated are automatically actively spreading the virus to everyone around them just by virtue of being unvaccinated. ‘Your right to swing your fist ends where someone else’s nose begins,’ or something, the logic typically went.
Except, as we are increasingly learning, whether someone is vaccinated or not has little to nothing to do with whether or not someone spreads or contracts this particular virus. Yes, possibly, your symptoms might be reduced and you may have a decreased chance of hospitalization or death - for the few months the vaccines actually ‘work’ - but this has absolutely nothing to do with anyone around you, who have all made their own decision about whether or not to take the vaccine. In other words, this decision is and should be a personal one and a personal one alone.
But what if it wasn’t? What if the vaccine actually did prevent the contraction and spread of Covid-19? Would the mandaters then have a point? Before we dig deeper into that question, consider this thought experiment presented by a respondent on the thread cited above:
“It's found that spinal fluid of aboriginal men cures cancer of any stage. But, 1 in 1,000,000 extractions will cause immediate death. A law that forces them to donate is immoral.”
His conclusion: “You can't morally force anyone to take a risk of any degree for any cause.”
Indeed, it’s difficult to argue with any of that from a moral perspective. In that scenario, one could imagine plenty of freedom-respecting ways to incentivize “aboriginal men” to donate their spinal fluid, if said spinal fluid did cure cancer. And even minus incentivization or monetary compensation, many would doubtless choose to donate for the good of humanity. But one could also imagine a tyrannical government forcibly taking the spinal fluid, violating both the liberty and bodily autonomy of these men and subjecting them to a risk - even a minimal one - of death. Surely, a government that respects freedom and protects the rights of its citizens would never allow the latter scenario - something any of us could easily picture happening in a place like China or North Korea - to occur.
Back to this particular genre of vaccines, which currently boast the scariest side-effect profile in modern vaccine history and more associated deaths than all other vaccines combined, not to mention heart issues and other life-altering side effects. Even if one in a million dropped dead after taking this vaccine (it’s WAY more than that), do YOU want to be the one to choose which child has to be without a parent, or which parents have to lose their child?
I worded my tweet the way I did - demanding 100% certainty - knowing that this number is impossible to ever reach with even the best vaccination program. Granted, if the side effect profile were better, if the disease were scarier, and if the vaccines actually did prevent transmission and contraction, perhaps a case could be made by moral people for mandates. I would disagree based on what I’ve laid out above, but the case could be made and I might have some respect for those making it.
However, if all those factors were present, the mandates wouldn’t be needed nor likely called for. Minus those medically unable to take them along with a small number of hard-core anti-vaxxers, uptake would easily top 90%, more than enough for herd immunity, assuming herd immunity could be obtained by a vaccine against a cold virus.
Most people who choose to remain unvaccinated - like myself - do so not because we want to spread the virus to others or are against vaccinations in general, but because we have natural immunity and/or serious, data-driven questions about this particular vaccine. The moral case for choice, and against vaccine mandates, is as clear as day and as absolute as any case for good and against evil could ever be. If the Covid-19 vaccine mandaters aren’t evil people (I am beginning to believe most are), they are certainly engaging in an evil act. As such, they should be opposed using every non-violent measure at our disposal.
In agreement. In total agreement.
Norski.
Further, the Covid jabs may or may not be helpful, but there are NOT vaccines. Gene therapy, perhaps.
And there is the fundamental problem. The risk/reward math for the vaccine does not add up.
NYC Expands Vaccine Mandate to Whole Private Sector, Ups Dose Proof to 2 and Adds Kids 5-11
Nothing public from Hochul so far.
“...Most people who choose to remain unvaccinated - like myself - do so not because we want to spread the virus to others or are against vaccinations in general, but because we have natural immunity and/or serious, data-driven questions about this particular vaccine. The moral case for choice, and against vaccine mandates, is as clear as day and as absolute as any case for good and against evil could ever be. If the Covid-19 vaccine mandaters aren’t evil people (I am beginning to believe most are), they are certainly engaging in an evil act. As such, they should be opposed using every non-violent measure at our disposal....”
^THIS^
The problem is the mandaters totally refuse to acknowledge the real science because of azzholes like Fauxi and eventually are going to make it violent...wait and see.
Vaccine coercers/shamers/media... they are ALL the enemy of anyone who believes in freedom.
The coercion to vaccine is unacceptable.
When Kay Ivey, the Republican governor of Alabama, spoke at a pharmaceutical facility earlier this year contrasting:
“unvaccinated people”
with
“normal people”
That comment was outrageous. Mitch McConnell openly and others more subtly on Fox News like Tucker and Sean have made pitches for the vaccine.
The coercion to vaccinate in any way, shape or form is unaccpetable in a free society.
Later this week Biden will hold a 110 nation meeting on “Democracy”. I guess the idea is that elections matter.
How many elections have nations like Australia, New Zealand, Austria, Italy and the list goes on had then followed by the lack of freedom in relation to COVID vaccination.
Russia and China are supposed to be evil but what about our own backyard.
Bill DeBlasio on the bandwagon of coercion this morning with a private employer vax mandate.
“No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty or an involuntary servitude on another man There can be no such thing as the right to enslave.” Ayn Rand
The Demonicrats have been moral monsters back since Roe v. Wade.
The Pro-vaxers lost any moral credibility the femtosecond they started to use the focus group tested pejorative “vaccine hesitancy” ...
It's like some kind of mass hysteria, leftovers from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Has anything like this ever happened in history? Insanity.
Apparently all of those who acceded to the 2020 vaxx hype and submitted to rounds 1 and 2 of the human trial ( round 1 for JnJ) but, having now seen and read about the side effects, and refuse to be boosted with another dose of spike proteins……are now about to join the unvaxxed as modern day lepers.
The “ unboosted’ are now among the “unnvaxxed”
I had the MAB treatment so I’m good for antibodies. No Final Solution jab for me.
That's a damn good quote!
We have to consider what happened in Massachusetts a hundred plus years ago that led to the Supreme Court’s Jacobsen decision endorsing forced vaccination by state and local governments.
12 years before that decision the Supreme Court had ruled racial segregation in schools was the law of the land in the Plessy vs. Ferguson case.
A decade or so after Jacobsen Leo Frank, a Jewish man, was lynched in Georgia.
The fear of immigrants who were Catholic and Jewish including notions that they were dirty and spreaders of disease fueled the Jacobsen mentality.
Branch Covidian Vax Cultists are entirely willing to pooh-pooh the few (their words) instances of breakthroughs, deaths, impairments, permanently debilitating infirmities in favor of he vast benefits of getting boosted every 6 months to a year only up and until one of those instances involves them personally.
Wait a minute -- does that give you the same immunity as natural antibodies, and does it last forever (T-cell immunity)? If so how do you know this?
Asking because my 81-yr old relative had no symptoms but was exposed for sure -- I had him take his IVT, then 3 days later (still with no symptoms) he tested positive, then I got him in for monoclonal antibodies. Six weeks later he tested positive for antibodies. Was it his natural antibodies or the monoclonal antibodies?
There used to be a universal concept of “informed consent” for medical procedures, especially “vaccines”.
Now we have disinformed coercion.
I am ESPECIALLY disappointed in FReepers that support this coercion (on other threads) and actively propagate the disinformation campaign of profiteering fascists in government & Big Pharma.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.