3507

I like this post because it brings up a lot of interesting questions.

There's not much to disagree with yet, because it's nearly all phrased as questions.

I'm going to give my own answers to your questions.

1. "... everyone be mandated ...": Maybe.

2. "... choice ...": If the "personal choice" were to affect _only_ that person, then I'd prefer not to mandate. But it does not affect only that person. It affects a great many people, because the v***s spreads and mutates among the population (mostly among unv******ted people) (affecting the entire population because of the whole situation).

3. "...religious and medical reasons...": There could be a great variety of religious reasons, from a great variety of religions (because we don't mandate any particular religion). A religious reason would be a problem if it were to affect people who don't subscribe to it. A religious person's right to harbor a dangerous, and mutating, v***s, does affect others.

4. "...thrown...": I happen to know of at least one medical reason which should not be just "thrown out the window"; that's the one about mercury in a preservative in some doses of some v*****es (e.g., some flu v*****es, at least in the past). Mercury is potentially dangerous or toxic. This is an example of a reason which should be respected; but in this case the end result doesn't have to be that the person doesn't get v******ted; the person could be given a dose which does not contain mercury. With enough respect going around, pharmaceutical companies would find ways to produce v*****e doses without harmful preservatives, and the public would be informed about such things (and not just deluged with advertisements and vacuous absolute statements).

5. "...apart...": I think that's the logical result, yes. For example: If there's a person with poor health habits, who tends to spread diseases such as the common cold, who touches lots of food he doesn't buy in grocery stores, who coughs a lot, and refuses to wear a mask, and refuses to get v******ted in a p******c, then yes we ought to have some way of reducing the harm that that person does to the rest of us.

6. "...government...paying...": I'd like that. To get that, we'd need something like universal health care coverage, which is a sensible idea. But if we were to reject such solutions as universal health care coverage, then of course we can't require the government to pay for reactions to the inoculation. And that does not change that the government might still need to mandate universal or near-universal v******tion, if the overall effect weighs heavily on the side of saving the health of the nation (or world) as a whole. (It might be only a very small percentage who have significant adverse reactions to the v*****e, and it might be unpredictable who that will be.)

7. "...pharmaceutical companies ... liable...": That should depend on negligence. If a pharmaceutical company had an honest option and a dishonest option, and chose the dishonest option, then I think suing it should be an option. To do that you might need a government regulating the pharmaceutical industry. If it's just one individual person trying to prove in court what a pharmaceutical company did and why it should result in a successful lawsuit, then the person is likely to just die before winning such a lawsuit. The individual people could band together to do something, but that's either a union or a government (and even a union is like a little government entity). I'm in favor of a government, which represents the interests of the people at large, regulating the pharmaceutical companies. And if it does that job poorly, then make it do it better.

8. "... other aspects ...": There is a "social contract" or "general agreement" that people have to cooperate in some ways. Government is related to that. The social contract and/or the government regulates some things but not all things. (I think that's generally been true throughout world history.). Where might we draw the line, theoretically, between what a people's government should regulate and what it shouldn't? I'd probably draw that line somewhat like this: the government should protect the public spaces so that all can use them safely (or with some kind of safety and some degree of safety); but the government should stay out of the personal things which only affect the individuals who do them.

Wolfman888

58% unv******ted in a majority white Republican party is quite a few v**es.

If only half (24%) get the v***s, and half of them (12%) actually croak,

your Party of I**********n has no chance in 2022.

Get back in your bunker, less; end times 'er comin'.

Wolfman888

Very simple;

1. If you get the shot, you may have c***d symptoms or be hospitalized; but you won't die.

2. If you don't get the shot and get c***d, you, or someone you infect, will probably die.

How hard is that to understand ?

Squiddiddler Loc: Phoenix

"This hard"

C****-** v******tion-related deaths skyrocketed to 6,985 across the United States this year.

son of witless

Haven't heard from you in a long time. I hope you haven't been ill ?

American Vet

Yep - all them minority Conservatives.......

African Americans Still Have Highest V*****e Hesitancy Rate
https://blackdoctor.org/african-americans-still-have-highest-v*****e-hesitancy-rate-heres-why/

B***k A******ns lagging behind in C****-** v******tions
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/black-americans-lagging-c****-**-v******tions-data-shows/story?id=75614117


https://hotair.com/jazz-shaw/2021/07/19/cdc-b****s-and-hispanics-still-least-likely-to-be-v******ted-n402993

son of witless

Since the fatality rate prior to the v*****es was less than 1 %, where do you get number 2 from ?

martsiva

What a load of l*****t BS garbage!! Rawstory and the Washington Post are both the most l*****t liberal rags on this planet!! No - it is not worth reading!! You obviously allowed them to give you the jab with an experimental drug that is not a v*****e and isn`t even approved by the FDA!

One Patriot

If you are so concerned about people in this country not being v******ted, then maybe you should tell the Biden regime to start (at the very least) start testing ALL of the i******s coming into this country. I just can’t help but to laugh at some of the stupid stuff you put on this site! WOW... ignorance truly is a bliss!

martsiva

I`m still wondering how much your handlers are paying you to keep on with your insistence that people get this experimental drug! You just keep on and keep on and keep on and it`s becoming evident that there is some incentive for you!!

Wonttakeitanymore

H**e to break it to you but the Washington compost is not conservative! Does th add t screw up ur narrative? Zombie

Wonttakeitanymore

Not in this lifetime!

Wonttakeitanymore

Right!!

youngwilliam Loc: Deep in the heart

The jab has affected his brain. Before it was an obsession, now it is a sickness.
Don't understand his concern about who is jabbed or not. Even when you take the experimental drug you can contract and t***smit the c***d to your loved ones, right woody?

Wonttakeitanymore

First step in mail handbook!!actually thst was the takeover! Then lockdowns then guns vindicated, schools for regular kids shut down, n**is burned books! It’s here!