Coronavirus and You - Page 627

On August 24 2022 06:36 WombaT wrote:
For a thread of seemingly intelligent people (and me), why are we locked in a seemingly interminable cycle of ‘what BJ’s position is?’

The cosmic ballet… goes on.

On August 24 2022 10:03 Sermokala wrote:

Because you repeatedly refuse to answer the basic question I keep asking you.

You keep refusing to address the most simple points about your position in a constant state of trying to achieve gotchas that get dismissed by everyone. You constantly lie and bring up things you show you know is a lie.

You keep spreading anti vax misinformation and except people to never question or respond to you. When confronted you ignore what people are saying and insist that you're somehow being attacked because you're somehow the only one that knows the truth.

You keep refusing to answer even the most basic questions that people ask you with the blind resistance of someone who is afraid to question anything that they're saying.

So I will constantly ask you the same basic question you keep refusing to answer. Why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine, when we have a list of other mandates about basic operations in the country that are no different from it.

On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:

hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading.

On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:

He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have.

He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing.

After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point.

But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him.

If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is?

On August 24 2022 05:17 BlackJack wrote:


We wouldn’t say either of those things because we have an entire language at our disposal to be precise. We actually don’t have to say things that are factually incorrect.

On August 24 2022 15:26 Mikau313 wrote:


The problem arises when you selectively apply that precise language.

When you say:
* People have been hospitalised with myocarditis after taking the vaccine

But then neglect to say
* The amount of people who were hospitalised with myocarditis was almost statistically insignificant;
* The vast majority of people who got myocarditis after the vaccine were fine;
* Chances of somebody getting myocarditis are astronomically higher from contracting Covid than they are from taking the vaccine even if a causal link between the vaccine and myocarditis were to be established;
* Taking the vaccine reduces your chance of contracting myocarditis as a result of Covid to almost 0.
* If your goal is to minimize your chance of getting myocarditis taking the vaccine is the objectively correct choice.

You are still (intentionally) spreading misinformation, even when you make a precise and true statement initially.

On August 24 2022 17:27 BlackJack wrote:


Ok so if someone says something that’s untrue I’m not allowed to just say “that’s not true according to this” without saying all that other stuff as well? Well it’s a lot to write but okay. Maybe I can make it my signature so it’s in every post.

On August 24 2022 17:27 BlackJack wrote:


Ok so if someone says something that’s untrue I’m not allowed to just say “that’s not true according to this” without saying all that other stuff as well? Well it’s a lot to write but okay. Maybe I can make it my signature so it’s in every post.

On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:


I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu?

Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer

Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!”

On August 24 2022 21:01 NewSunshine wrote:

I mean, you could try just giving people good faith and taking them for what they mean to say, instead of leaping on every factual inaccuracy you find. That would be a start.

Folks are human. We slip up, even when we know what we're doing or talking about. Anyone who wants to find something "wrong" will find it. Nobody likes the guy who has to point out every little thing that isn't technically correct. And it's not because of some "inconvenient truth" dynamic. It's because you could just take people for what they obviously mean to say, and just be cool about shit.

On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:

Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts.

But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu.

So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines?

On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:


You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates?

I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates?

On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:

I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you.

Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept.

People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals.

If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated?

On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote:
.... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices.

On August 25 2022 06:19 BlackJack wrote:


If these were just "slip ups" it would not be very difficult to just correct the slip ups on the next post and not have to go back and forth over and over by suggesting the slip ups were true because you can get 5 other guys in the thread to go along with it