I am saying this as someone who has both shots and generally supports the vaccination. From what I understand Google is known as a company with a "liberal" culture. Is demanding employees accept one side of an argument and adhere to it (or face the consequences) contrary to the definition of "liberal"? That's the problem with Western politics. Liberal vs. conservative is no longer about how permissive we are with ide…
This policy has nothing to do with opinions and political leanings; it's a physical safety policy for an office. Most offices would also deny you access if you try to get in and stab fellow employees with dirty needles you found by the bus stop. You could argue the merits of Google not allowing employees the option to permanently work from home, but as far as their offices are concerned this is a very sane requiremen…
Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
391–400 of 442 posts
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#392Earlier quoted context omitted.
I asked honestly, and seriously. I want to be taught, explained to. Not given lip. I take (strong) exception to be characterized as "blase". My kids aren't eligible for vaccination either. I can assure you Im not "blase" about their health. You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behavi…
>> "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" > You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behaviors and their risks. It doesn't matter what the statistics are, it's a risk they're exposed to because of the unvaccinated, anti-maskers, and people looking for every fucking excuse they can…
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#393The fact that these mandates ignore the fact that past infection also provides immunity is frustrating and makes me question what is behind the mandates themselves. A valid test showing the antibodies should be allowed in place of an immunization. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting...
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#394Good. Its time to stop messing around with this. The vaccines are tested and are safe.
I'm vaccinated and I personally don't care if others choose not to do it.
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#395I am saying this as someone who has both shots and generally supports the vaccination. From what I understand Google is known as a company with a "liberal" culture. Is demanding employees accept one side of an argument and adhere to it (or face the consequences) contrary to the definition of "liberal"? That's the problem with Western politics. Liberal vs. conservative is no longer about how permissive we are with ide…
The workforce is safer if vaccines are mandated in the office. Indisputable.
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#396It saddens me to see that all the top comments on these posts are just some empty populist yelling, variations on "good, after all, there's a war going on". And counterpoints end up being strawmen about vaccines not working anyway. Whatever your end conclusion about whether this is a good move, it's a complex issue that balances a lot of things and is worthy of serious discussion. Instead we get basically an online n…
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#397Earlier quoted context omitted.
Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. It's not the unvaccinated that are hurting you here, but the government response to them. If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Imagine if the government told you you can't wear a short skirt because a religious extremist might stab you. In wh…
> Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. Well, mandatory vaccinations then should not be a problem too, right? they would also be only issues with your government . > If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Because none of them is fine with dying. I guarantee you that 99.9% of the un…
I care as much about the opinions of the ECHR (or any other court[1]) about as much as I care of the opinion of martians. They are not god-oracles of morality. I'm a thinking being I'll come to the conclusions myself. You're free to reproduce to me their arguments though.
"Well, mandatory vaccinations then should not be a problem too, right? they would also be only issues with your government."
What's your point? Obviously mandatory vaccinations are a problem between me and my sovereign. The problems you originally stated (unreasonable restrictions on your liberty given the realized effectiveness of the vaccines) were problems you have with your government, but you were putting them at the feet of the unvaccinated. Again, my original question was who are the unvaccinated hurting but themselves?
"Because none of them is fine with dying. I guarantee you that 99.9% of the unvaccinated people when confronted with death will NOT say "oh, I've covid just let me die" "
That's 1 in 1000 people. In my experience there is a huge variation of personalities among 1000 people [2] I'm curious what you assess your guarantee on. From my experience, given the group of people I like to befriend, you'd be lucky to get 80%.
But anyway this comment reeks of paternalism. Smoking, motorcycling, sugar, they all have a huge potential to kill me. I'm guess I'll be sad if any one of them does. So what?
" if you get sick and will be offered place and care in hospital that could save your life, will you choose to accept it? "
First I haven't said why I'm not vaccinated. I've only eluded to an auto-immune disease that I waiting to speak to my specialist about.
In fact the primary reasons why I'm not vaccinated are primarily moral. For example, I don't see why a healthy young adult should get a vaccine before an elderly South American just because he's from the North. I thought we'd agreed all lives are valuable, not just European ones.
Second, given that my objections are primarily moral, I signed up for a vaccine trial to get a vaccine while addressing my moral concerns.
Third, I've asked ppl not to be personal. I only mentioned that I also have kids because someone threw theirs in my face. But if you must know,
a. I don't think (given the reasons why I'm not vaccinated and that I in fact volunteered to their trials) I have an obligation not to go to a hospital
b. I don't see why an anti-vaxxer (I'm not one) should be denied hospital care. Do you believe, for example, that society shouldn't take care of those who, being able to, failed to save for retirement and blew their money on fun? How about smokers? Should they be denied cancer care?
c. Based on principles, yes, I would (or hope to have the courage to) make my kids father-less. But this is hardly the situation (see point a and b).
Why did you italicize "principles"? Are you nihilistically implying that principles are generally worthless in the face of material realities? Or are you implying that those who's principles are different than yours aren't worthy?
d. "Unless you don't care about your kids" - I'd regret your comment if it weren't so silly, I invite you to think about it more deeply. My best friend is a firefighter who literally walks into burning houses to save people's lives. He risks making his three boys orphans every day he goes to work. He choose his dangerous career, he could have studied law. Are you implying that he doesn't deserve his kids?
Malcom X, MLK, both had kids who did something greater than themselves and died for it. Are you saying they didn't love their kids? [3]
[1] I don't mean that I'm not bound to my country's highest court's decisions - that's what living in society entails. However, the ECHR is not the fount of moral certainty. Also there is a latent submissiveness in the comment. An unelected bureaucracy says something and its like gospel? Only your actions are bound to the ECHR, not your conscience.
[2] There might be observational bias - I pride myself in having relationships with as many walks of life as possible.
[3] I not drawing comparison between those who don't take the vaccines and these titans of the 20th century. I just mean to illustrate how thoughtless the comment that leaving my kids fatherless for principles implies that I don't love them.
In the end, though, your life journey is no one's but your own.
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#398I don't mean this polemically, or rhetorically. I'm honestly asking because I've given this some thought, and it's not entirely obvious to me. "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. "Those who cant get the vaccines" Now, some people will point out that some can't get the vaccines. Except that ppl with HIV, GBS, autoimmune etc are all e…
From a purely business perspective a COVID-19 infection is highly disruptive to business operations. If you're following CDC guidelines (and some businesses legally must) then a COVID-19 infection causes you to not only lose the infected employee for the duration of their illness, but you lose every other non-vaccinated employee who has had contact with that employee for two weeks. I know of at least five businesses…
"Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" if not themselves?
All the reasons you gave me are examples of harm from government rules trying to, it appears to me, save people from themselves.
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#399Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The burden of proof is not on the people who have every reason to believe they have natural immunity. > It's entirely on people who want to mandate a medical procedure. Nope, not really. While there is quite a high burden of proof on the people who want to mandate a medical procedure, the people who make their own medical claims (such as natural immunity provides equivalent or adequate protection) bear a significan…
Making a claim that matches centuries of experience carries virtually no burden of proof. It's not remotely a "spurious" claim.
Huh? There are centuries of experience that natural COVID-19 immunity is as consistently effective as one of the current crop of US-approved vaccines?
Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines
#400I don't mean this polemically, or rhetorically. I'm honestly asking because I've given this some thought, and it's not entirely obvious to me. "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. "Those who cant get the vaccines" Now, some people will point out that some can't get the vaccines. Except that ppl with HIV, GBS, autoimmune etc are all e…
Unfortunately, I'm still unconvinced that the unvaccinated are harming anyone other than themselves. This opens a good topic on the role of paternalism to force people to better themselves. But that'll be for another day.