411–420 of 437 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alcohol and fast food are not infectious diseases that can spread through entire populations in a matter of weeks.
Vaccines don't stop the spread. Look at Iceland. Any argument of the form you're making is invalid.
Gosh, disturbing comment section for disturbing times. When experimental medical treatments become mandatory for illnesses that have a 99%+ survival rate, and there is absolutely NO LONG TERM safety data, some red flags should be raised. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jktvh6k0qys
Here is the director of the Alabama Vaccine Research Clinic discussing the issue [1]:
> “Vaccines are just designed to deliver a payload and then are quickly eliminated by the body,” Goepfert said. “This is particularly true of the mRNA vaccines. mRNA degrades incredibly rapidly. You wouldn’t expect any of these vaccines to have any long-term side effects. And in fact, this has never occurred with any vaccine.”
> “The side effects that we see occur early on, and that’s it,” Goepfert said. “In virtually all cases, vaccine side effects are seen within the first two months after rollout.”
[1] https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12143-three-things-to-k...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing inherently inconsistent between right-libertarian values and a vaccine mandate. Libertarians believe that force should be applied to person A to protect person B from person A in certain circumstances. If person A wants to punch person B in the face, restricting person A by force is perfectly consistent with libertarian values. If person A threatens to infect person B with a deadly disease due to refu…
Wait…what? You think forcing a person to accept a substance into their body under force isn’t inconsistent with libertarian values? As a classical liberal, I can’t think of something more offensive to my values and I am a fully vaccinated person and wished everyone else was too. This is absolutely f’ing horrifying and will ultimately be used against everyone at some point in the future. The body is the absolute indiv…
But even if we consider literal forced vaccinations, I still don't see that as necessarily inconsistent with libertarianism, due to the reasons I outlined, specifically the non aggression principle.
Suppose that a new disease emerged that had a mortality rate of Ebola and a transmissibility of COVID. Suppose we had a vaccine that was capable of stopping transmission. In such a rare and extreme set of circumstances, forced vaccination (not even mere mandates in workplaces) would be a must under the NAP. The right to choose not to vaccinate is effectively the same as the right to kill people with a disease that you may carry.
Luckily COVID isn't as deadly as that, and the vaccines aren't as effective at preventing transmission, so we don't need to consider such measures. But in the right context, I very much see forced vaccinations as following from libertarian axioms. Just like you would see jailing a serial murderer and depriving them of their liberty to be justified under those same axioms.
For the record, I'm one of the most anti-collectivist people you'll meet. I just pay significant credence to the reality of negative externalities. You can swing your fist all you want, but you can't punch my nose with that fist. In the same vein, you can't cough your deadly virus into my face and not expect to justly have force applied to you.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait…what? You think forcing a person to accept a substance into their body under force isn’t inconsistent with libertarian values? As a classical liberal, I can’t think of something more offensive to my values and I am a fully vaccinated person and wished everyone else was too. This is absolutely f’ing horrifying and will ultimately be used against everyone at some point in the future. The body is the absolute indiv…
We are not talking about forced vaccination. I'm referring to the workplace mandates where people are still free to not vaccinate if they wish, just as their employer is free under at-will employment to kick them out. But even if we consider literal forced vaccinations, I still don't see that as necessarily inconsistent with libertarianism, due to the reasons I outlined, specifically the non aggression principle. Sup…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about the long term safety data on catching / surviving COVID itself? Long COVID seems to affect between 10-30% of people who catch COVID. Why do I never hear anti-vaxxers being concerned about that?
I put long COVID in the same bucket at long Lyme, which doesn't actually exist. It's a pretext for hypochondria, not a legitimate basis for public policy.
But still, it's a novel, deadly disease which has a significant impact on the respiratory system (and perhaps the vascular system as well). The human body and our immune system are incredibly complex. It's far too reductive to categorize all of these collective experiences as just "hypochondria".
And it's not like post-lyme is a fiction either: https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/newsroom/news-releases/...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We are not talking about forced vaccination. I'm referring to the workplace mandates where people are still free to not vaccinate if they wish, just as their employer is free under at-will employment to kick them out. But even if we consider literal forced vaccinations, I still don't see that as necessarily inconsistent with libertarianism, due to the reasons I outlined, specifically the non aggression principle. Sup…
I think your NAP argument doesn’t really work for a very specific reason. Every punch in the face results in a punch to the face. Every homicide results in a death. Those actions always have an aggressive consequence, so most libertarians can justify prevention and incarceration and removal of liberties as a consequence of the aggression. However, every cough, even from a Covid-19 positive person, does not result in…
Same situation if I put a single bullet into a revolver, spun it, and pulled the trigger while aiming at someone's head. There's only a one in six chance that I'd murder that person, but that action should definitely be illegal and force should be applied to anyone who would pull that trigger.
This is why we have drunk driving laws. Some non-drunk drivers do kill people, and most drunk drivers don't kill people, but the probability is highly elevated for drunk drivers, and it is therefore illegal to do it. Drunk driving laws aren't authoritarian, they aren't a result of a nanny state. This is the state fulfilling its duty of protecting person B from aggression by person A, whether that aggression happens with absolute certainty (punching me in the face) or with an elevated probability (drunk driving)
Now, I don't think vaccines should be forced on people for COVID. I just think that it's a valid thing to do in the right circumstances (e.g Ebola with an R0 of 3).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My antibody test was more painful than the pair of injections. Vaccination doesn't harm people with existing antibodies (they just rebuff it faster) and going through the process serves as a good booster.
What medieval test did you get? I got the finger prick with a drop of blood. Quick and simple. Biting my tongue is much more painful.
Fingers are sensitive. Upper arm muscle isn't.
As a part-time libertarian, one of the frustrating parts of the pandemic has been discovering how many people need the nanny state to step to stop them punching themselves in the face. Near the start of the pandemic, I thought the most intrusive state powers would barely be needed. Why would you ever need to make a vaccine mandatory? What rational person would refuse a lifesaving medicine offered to them for free? We…
Gosh, disturbing comment section for disturbing times. When experimental medical treatments become mandatory for illnesses that have a 99%+ survival rate, and there is absolutely NO LONG TERM safety data, some red flags should be raised. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jktvh6k0qys
What about the long term safety data on catching / surviving COVID itself? Long COVID seems to affect between 10-30% of people who catch COVID. Why do I never hear anti-vaxxers being concerned about that?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think your NAP argument doesn’t really work for a very specific reason. Every punch in the face results in a punch to the face. Every homicide results in a death. Those actions always have an aggressive consequence, so most libertarians can justify prevention and incarceration and removal of liberties as a consequence of the aggression. However, every cough, even from a Covid-19 positive person, does not result in…
No, because I am also rightly not allowed to throw a brick out of my apartment window without looking below, because that might plausibly hit someone in the head. Most bricks that I could throw out my window won't hit someone in the head, but that doesn't mean that it should be legal for me to do it, because it is recklessly endangering people. Same situation if I put a single bullet into a revolver, spun it, and pul…