Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="zubenelgenubi" data-source="post: 4945690" data-attributes="member: 63706">I don&#039;t know how to make it more clear. When I share all the information I rely on to help me make decisions, you get terrified by how much I write. I&#039;ll try to brass tacks it. There is not enough data to make it clear that getting the shot will do any of the things you believe it will, or that it is safe. You can disagree, that&#039;s fine. You get the shot, I don&#039;t, everyone&#039;s happy.It is exceedingly clear that the virus didn&#039;t cause any major disruptions, the completely insane response by the government did that. These measures have never been used before, for good reason.I don&#039;t believe they are going door to door to force the vax. I do know they said they were going to send vaxxvangelists door to door to try to convince people. That idea is laughable, though, and I&#039;ve already said what I would do if they came to my door. Let them make their spiel, offer them refreshments, and send them on their way.Where the &quot;forcing&quot; comes in is in making businesses believe they legally have power to require them, which may or may not be true, and can vary state to state, but the EEOC and DOJ have made their position clear. Then there is a misinformation campaign making businesses believe they could face liability for not requiring the vaccine. But no court has ever upheld this notion. The only way you could be held liable for spreading a virus is if you do it on purpose, and it actually causes real harm to someone. And proving that you did it can be next to impossible. The only sensible things employers should be expected is to offer sick pay that will allow people to properly quarantine, when they actually have symptoms. Beyond that, it is insane to believe businesses have any more right to invade our privacy or infringe our rights. The government can&#039;t do these things, but if private business can, then the government uses them to do it by proxy. It&#039;s a bad idea, all around.I&#039;ve said plainly, I may consider getting the vaccine if we get the long term data that shows it actually, safely, does what they claim. That&#039;s looking less and less likely as time goes on. All of the risks that I read about over the last year, and were denied by the institutional folks, is proving to be true. I did my best to inform others, and many laughed it off, so I don&#039;t feel responsible for the bad decisions made by others in the least. BTW, how many people did you kill before the vaccine was available? How many people have you killed by passing the flu? Me neither. Your saving lives and infrastructure thing seems like a bit of a stretch.I realize I&#039;m well past the &quot;horrifying&quot; stage of &quot;meandering thought process&quot; so I&#039;ll cut it there. But I could flesh out each of the above paragraphs with enough data to fill a book.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="zubenelgenubi, post: 4945690, member: 63706"] I don't know how to make it more clear. When I share all the information I rely on to help me make decisions, you get terrified by how much I write. I'll try to brass tacks it. There is not enough data to make it clear that getting the shot will do any of the things you believe it will, or that it is safe. You can disagree, that's fine. You get the shot, I don't, everyone's happy. It is exceedingly clear that the virus didn't cause any major disruptions, the completely insane response by the government did that. These measures have never been used before, for good reason. I don't believe they are going door to door to force the vax. I do know they said they were going to send vaxxvangelists door to door to try to convince people. That idea is laughable, though, and I've already said what I would do if they came to my door. Let them make their spiel, offer them refreshments, and send them on their way. Where the "forcing" comes in is in making businesses believe they legally have power to require them, which may or may not be true, and can vary state to state, but the EEOC and DOJ have made their position clear. Then there is a misinformation campaign making businesses believe they could face liability for not requiring the vaccine. But no court has ever upheld this notion. The only way you could be held liable for spreading a virus is if you do it on purpose, and it actually causes real harm to someone. And proving that you did it can be next to impossible. The only sensible things employers should be expected is to offer sick pay that will allow people to properly quarantine, when they actually have symptoms. Beyond that, it is insane to believe businesses have any more right to invade our privacy or infringe our rights. The government can't do these things, but if private business can, then the government uses them to do it by proxy. It's a bad idea, all around. I've said plainly, I may consider getting the vaccine if we get the long term data that shows it actually, safely, does what they claim. That's looking less and less likely as time goes on. All of the risks that I read about over the last year, and were denied by the institutional folks, is proving to be true. I did my best to inform others, and many laughed it off, so I don't feel responsible for the bad decisions made by others in the least. BTW, how many people did you kill before the vaccine was available? How many people have you killed by passing the flu? Me neither. Your saving lives and infrastructure thing seems like a bit of a stretch. I realize I'm well past the "horrifying" stage of "meandering thought process" so I'll cut it there. But I could flesh out each of the above paragraphs with enough data to fill a book. [/QUOTE]

Verification