Young Hillsong Church congregant who mocked vaccine dies of COVID

[TagliatelliMonster]

But I don't see evidence that unvaccinated it people put the vaccinated at risk.....because of their decisions.

Perhaps that is because you simply aren't aware of the evidence. Or don't want to.
By now, I find it amazing that you still don't understand this.

The virus has free reign in the unvaccinated.
This promotes mutation of the virus which makes them incubators for new variants - which might very well end up causing problems for the vaccinated.
The unvaccinated also are more contagious then the vaccinated. Their infection lasts longer and is more severe.

Exempt people put others at risk too with that line of thinking.

They do.

How is a exempt person putting people in less danger than a nonexempt (what's the difference)?

Not. But in those cases, it's the lesser of two evils.
Exempt people are exempt for a reason. Giving them a shot might prove fatal for them.
So they need to be extra careful.

Is it really about opinion they may spread the virus or just people's decisions you guys disagree with?

No, it's about facts. About how viruses work.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

What's your solution?

Mandatory vaccination.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I think there are more that choose not to vaccinate than those who can't. Unless every exempt have allergies to the ingredients, CDC lists different possible ailments and conditions so people know that it is safe to take the vaccine if they choose to.

I don't see how they can be without evidence to prove people are actually in danger. It's all based on fear. I bet the majority of the world will take the vaccine so what's the sense of calling just a few foolish when there isn't enough for them to make the pandemic worse?

It's like you guys fear that unvaccinated hold ticking time bombs. They were fine one day and wake up in the morning in threat to the world. It's ridiculous.

Whatever you need to tell yourself to get to sleep at night.

The only solution I can think of since education and coercion is not working (rather) is to force people to get vaccinated.

Canada seems to be going to a system where the unvaccinated in most jobs will have to get regular (twice a week?) testing to keep a lid on outbreaks. Pretty soon we'll have data on how successful that is, and whether it works as a solution.

One problem I have right off the bat with our current plan, though: the tests will be provided for free by the government. Added up over time, those tests are going to cost a lot of money. I object to that.

If someone decides to refuse the vaccine, they should take responsibility for that choice and pay their own way. As a taxpayer, I have a real problem with subsizing this sort of anti-social behaviour.

Though that leaves the exempt to spread the virus. How do we handle them?

We "handle" them by limiting their risk of getting sick in two ways:

- everyone who's able and responsible will get vaccinated.
- everyone who's irresponsible enough to refuse the vaccine has to follow strict rules for physical distancing, PPE, testing, etc., to limit exposure for people who are unvaccinated through no fault of their own.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Mandatory vaccination.

If people protest, how would you handle that?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Perhaps that is because you simply aren't aware of the evidence. Or don't want to.
By now, I find it amazing that you still don't understand this.

Here's an example of what I mean by evidence.

If you sued an unvaccinated person and went to the judge to say "he endangered me" the judge would ask how.

You can give him CDC reports, tell him thousands died, even say he coughed twice in my presence, but the judge would need something concrete.

Was this person intentionally
In your face?
Did he block the door so you won't get out?
Did he physically or verbally threatened you?
Do you have people with COVID that didn't have it before to validate your complaint?

If someone did get sick, do you have evidence it's that person and not say not wiping down counters or the rare chance you can spread the virus?

How would you prove to a judge that unvaccinated people are at risk while keeping in mind that stereotyping a group under statistics doesn't mean it applies to all people.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Good. You guys can blame them for killing the world but it's all a generalization based on a handful of silly antivaxxers who don't represent all the unvaccinated.

It's a fact of reality that the unvaccinated are the ones currently clogging up hospitals and taking up resources that, had they been vaccinated, most likely would not be needed. They're also the ones dying unnecessarily and spreading it around so that new variants will inevitably keep arising.

But I don't see evidence that unvaccinated it people put the vaccinated at risk.....because of their decisions.

Then you're not looking.

Exempt people put others at risk too with that line of thinking.
How is a exempt person putting people in less danger than a nonexempt (what's the difference)?

I really don't understand why you keep harping on the people who cannot get vaccinated for medical reasons. When the rest of us get vaccinated en masse, that helps protect such people. People like cancer patients, for instance. Or my 8 year old niece who has cystic fibrosis, where catching something like a simple cold could kill her, never mind COVID.

Also, children under the age of 12 are currently not able to get the COVID vaccine just due to the simple fact that it hasn't been tested enough on children yet.

But just like with every other vaccine on the planet since we started vaccinating, herd immunity provides safety to the people who are medically exempt from being vaccinated.

Is it really about opinion they may spread the virus or just people's decisions you guys disagree with?

It's really about stopping the spread of the virus.

 

[ecco]

What's your solution?

Did you not read the post you responded to?

Here it is again...

People who intentionally do not get vaccinated are prolonging the pandemic and causing it to spread and mutate. They are responsible for killing people. They do not deserve to take hospital beds from rational people.​

Additionally, I would mandate proof of vaccinations (or medical exemption) as a requirement for entering any facility that is even partially Government funded.
I would sue all Governors who have ordered prohibitions on mask mandates.

 

[ecco]

One problem I have right off the bat with our current plan, though: the tests will be provided for free by the government. Added up over time, those tests are going to cost a lot of money. I object to that.

If someone decides to refuse the vaccine, they should take responsibility for that choice and pay their own way. As a taxpayer, I have a real problem with subsizing this sort of anti-social behaviour.

100% agreement.

If they don't want to get vaccinated, they should pay for the tests.

 

[ecco]

Here's an example of what I mean by evidence.

If you sued an unvaccinated person and went to the judge to say "he endangered me" the judge would ask how.

Apparently, you are not aware that the facts of science are not decided by a trial.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Did you not read the post you responded to?

Here it is again...

People who intentionally do not get vaccinated are prolonging the pandemic and causing it to spread and mutate. They are responsible for killing people. They do not deserve to take hospital beds from rational people.​

Additionally, I would mandate proof of vaccinations (or medical exemption) as a requirement for entering any facility that is even partially Government funded.
I would sue all Governors who have ordered prohibitions on mask mandates.

Solution as in where would the sick unvaccinated people go?

What would you do to them if they are potentially responsible for killing people?

(Also--it helps to say "in my opinion or I believe" just a heads up).

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Apparently, you are not aware that the facts of science are not decided by a trial.

This doesn't tell me what you agree, disagree with, flaws in my logic, or anything.

If you brought up a case and said "he did it because Expert X says so" the judge will want evidence.

 

[ecco]

Solution as in where would the sick unvaccinated people go?

Quarantined in their residences along with all resident family members. Big signs on premises:

What would you do to them if they are potentially responsible for killing people?

If they are quarantined they won't be killing anyone.

(Also--it helps to say "in my opinion or I believe" just a heads up).

Seriously? You spout unsupported nonsense all the time.

 

[ecco]

This doesn't tell me what you agree, disagree with, flaws in my logic, or anything.

The flaw in your logic is believing that scientific facts are determined in courtrooms.

There. I've now said it twice. If you still don't understand, I'll let you revel in your willful ignorance.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For how long?

Quarantined in their residences along with all resident family members. Big signs on premises:

If they are quarantined they won't be killing anyone.


Seriously? You spout unsupported nonsense all the time.

It's better to just ask what I mean: New Policy About Ill-Wishes and Gloating over Others' Illness or Death

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The flaw in your logic is believing that scientific facts are determined in courtrooms.

It's an analogy meaning that if you're presenting a claim "unvaccinated people are dangerous" and facts "Expert X says this" you'd have to explain how this claim and this fact applies to a person's specific situation.

There. I've now said it twice. If you still don't understand, I'll let you revel in your willful ignorance.

I'm not sure which quote this is referring to. It's very vague.

 

[ecco]

It's better to just ask what I mean: New Policy About Ill-Wishes and Gloating over Others' Illness or Death

You asked what I would do. I answered honestly: Mandated vaccines and/or mandated home quarantine.

That's neither gloating nor ill-wishing.

However, you should be very concerned about the other part of the RF oversight...

Please note that the staff will continue to treat misinformation about COVID-19 as well as vaccines as a violation of Rule 9. To determine whether or not a given statement is misinformation for the purpose of this policy, the staff primarily refer to the WHO and the CDC. Any statements contradicting these two organizations' stated positions on the various aspects of the pandemic will be moderated as Rule 9 violations.​

 

[ecco]

It's an analogy meaning that if you're presenting a claim "unvaccinated people are dangerous" and facts "Expert X says this" you'd have to explain how this claim and this fact applies to a person's specific situation.

If people do not believe the WHO and CDC and FDA then that is their problem. It is a fact that "unvaccinated people are dangerous". From whom do you think the 600,000 dead Americans got covid? Are you under the impression that it came down from a comet? The 600,000 dead Americans got covid from unvaccinated people.

Granted most of this happened in the early stages of the pandemic.

Today we know a lot more. Today we have enough vaccines to innoculate every American.

Virtually everyone who contracts and dies from covid now got covid from unvaccinated people. About 12,000 Americans died in August 2021 - needlessly! So, yes "unvaccinated people are dangerous". If you have another reason those 12,000 died, I love to hear it.

Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=usa...30j0i390l3.11184j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

[Unveiled Artist]

You asked what I would do. I answered honestly: Mandated vaccines and/or mandated home quarantine.

That's neither gloating nor ill-wishing.

However, you should be very concerned about the other part of the RF oversight...

Please note that the staff will continue to treat misinformation about COVID-19 as well as vaccines as a violation of Rule 9. To determine whether or not a given statement is misinformation for the purpose of this policy, the staff primarily refer to the WHO and the CDC. Any statements contradicting these two organizations' stated positions on the various aspects of the pandemic will be moderated as Rule 9 violations.​

If you have issues with it, I'm not the one to speak to.

 

[ecco]

I'm not sure which quote this is referring to. It's very vague.

You can trace back the links just as easily as anyone else can. I'm not going to repeat my answer three times. If twice is not enough,- oh well.




On the other hand, I will repeat it a third time.
The flaw in your logic is believing that scientific facts are determined in courtrooms.


There. I've now said it three times. If you still don't understand, I'll continue to let you revel in your willful ignorance and embarrass yourself.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If people do not believe the WHO and CDC and FDA then that is their problem. It is a fact that "unvaccinated people are dangerous". From whom do you think the 600,000 dead Americans got covid? Are you under the impression that it came down from a comet? The 600,000 dead Americans got covid from unvaccinated people.

Granted most of this happened in the early stages of the pandemic.

Today we know a lot more. Today we have enough vaccines to innoculate every American.

Virtually everyone who contracts and dies from covid now got covid from unvaccinated people. About 12,000 Americans died in August 2021 - needlessly! So, yes "unvaccinated people are dangerous". If you have another reason those 12,000 died, I love to hear it.

Source: https://www.google.com/search?q=usa...30j0i390l3.11184j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I'm saying that if you presented a claim "unvaccinated people are dangerous" and the facts "12,000 died" by expert X, you'll have to explain how this claim applies to a person's individual situation.