Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

CDC: Study Confirms Natural Immunity Stronger Than Vaccines


taniwha
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, stereologist said:

I am for mandated vaccinations to protect the public. Where is this stupidity of the anti-vaxx sums coming from from? Apparently from politicians.

The former president of the US and Brazil are two prime examples of anti-science politicians.

I wonder if their idiotic anti-science stances will change voting in the future as they get more of their followers to get sick or die, and opt for fake useless remedies.

 

You're dodging the question. You said you are not for people's right to choose. Would you be for the government using force to get your way? If not, then you simply have to come to terms that not everybody is going to take up to 4 shots per year. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, stereologist said:

Mandates have worked without brute force. So wake up and get back to reality.

You will never get the entire population to submit to your Will without the use violence. You know, human beings have this tendency to resist.

Open up a history book and look up on the reign of totalitarian regimes.

Sure, you can make the life of unvaccinated people miserable by restricting many of their rights, and turning a large part of the population on them. That may be your definition of a 'mandate'.

Edited by Only_
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/28/2022 at 5:26 AM, taniwha said:

100% agree, just as everyone else will have to put up with the protests until change happens for the better, end of  :tu:

Change is coming. Things are looking brighter. Let's hope for the best. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Only_ said:

You will never get the entire population to submit to your Will without the use violence. You know, human beings have this tendency to resist.

Open up a history book and look up on the reign of totalitarian regimes.

Sure, you can make the life of unvaccinated people miserable by restricting many of their rights, and turning a large part of the population on them. That may be your definition of a 'mandate'.

The choice of a miserable life for the unvaccinated is their choice. I don't care if they choose to be losers.

The claim of violence is just a threat of no value. Of course there might be some so stupid and entrenched in being stupid that they resort to violence.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stereologist said:

The choice of a miserable life for the unvaccinated is their choice. I don't care if they choose to be losers.

It's a false choice. If people don't submit to your Medical Dictatorship then they become outcasts, second-class citizens that need to be segregated from the rest of society.                                                

Quote

The claim of violence is just a threat of no value. Of course there might be some so stupid and entrenched in being stupid that they resort to violence.

So you expect everyone to just to comply to your Will? That seems highly improbable. That is why totalitarian governments have always resorted to violence and persecution to crush or submit minorities.

Edited by Only_
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, F3SS said:

You're dodging the question. You said you are not for people's right to choose. Would you be for the government using force to get your way? If not, then you simply have to come to terms that not everybody is going to take up to 4 shots per year. 

Question officially dodged. One can only assume you'd support brute force but you're afraid to say it. People either get a choice or they don't. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Only_ said:

It's a false choice. If people don't submit to your Medical Dictatorship then they become outcasts, second-class citizens that need to be segregated from the rest of society.                                                

So you expect everyone to just to comply to your Will? That seems highly improbable. That is why totalitarian governments have always resorted to violence and persecution to crush or submit minorities.

Such drama!

Do you lose it when told to wear a seat belt?

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Golden Duck said:

Such drama!

Do you lose it when told to wear a seat belt?

Bodily intergrity is a centerpiece of human rights and medical ethics. Override those principles and you are opening up a whole can of worms.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Only_ said:

It's a false choice. If people don't submit to your Medical Dictatorship then they become outcasts, second-class citizens that need to be segregated from the rest of society.                                                

So you expect everyone to just to comply to your Will? That seems highly improbable. That is why totalitarian governments have always resorted to violence and persecution to crush or submit minorities.

The fools call it medical dictatorship but the Supreme Court has ruled that the government can promote the public good through vaccines. So buck up and stop playing the pansy ass routine.

So you are too foolish  to get with the program to be a good citizen. There is no violence. That's just a lie from a whiny peon. The claim of persecution is just another whine from a peon. And claiming to be a minority is another fake whine from a peon.

Have you ever considered being an adult?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Only_ said:

Bodily intergrity is a centerpiece of human rights and medical ethics. Override those principles and you are opening up a whole can of worms.

What a pile of childish rubbish

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's dealing with children when we get these fake rights claims and these lies about violence and other shenanigans.

For over a century it has been recognized int he US and other countries that the state has the right to protect its citizens through forced vaccinations and other efforts.

Then we get the cry baby claims of "body intergrity[sic]". There  is no such concept except in the minds of those that live off of failed ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Only_ said:

Bodily intergrity is a centerpiece of human rights and medical ethics. Override those principles and you are opening up a whole can of worms.

You have a choice to not get vaccinated.  That chouce hasn't disappeared.

Do you lose it over helmet mandates?  Everybody has a right to preserve their hairstyles, except maybe in specific workplaces. Then you might have to make a choice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I hope so because I was vaccinated this past summer and I just spent 8 days flat on my ass with Covid but! I didn’t have to go in the hospital. I lost my taste and smell for 6 days it just came back. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Freez1 said:

Well I hope so because I was vaccinated this past summer and I just spent 8 days flat on my ass with Covid but! I didn’t have to go in the hospital. I lost my taste and smell for 6 days it just came back. 

I'm glad you did well. I know someone that has been affected worse than losing their sense of smell and taste permanently. It came back distorted so everything tastes horrible. Thankfully the vaccine protected you

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2022 at 11:03 PM, stereologist said:

For over a century it has been recognized int he US and other countries that the state has the right to protect its citizens through forced vaccinations and other efforts.

But there has never been any kind of forced vaccination in the U.S. The only historical precedent is the Jacobson vs Massachusetts in 1905. The statutory penalty for refusing smallpox vaccination was a 5$ fine. There was no provision for actually forcing vaccination on any person. So you still had a choice to refuse the vaccine. Can you at least have the intellectual honesty to admit that you'd have to use physical force to force vaccinate reluctant citizens?

Quote

The fools call it medical dictatorship but the Supreme Court has ruled that the government can promote the public good through vaccines. So buck up and stop playing the pansy ass routine.

The Supreme Court has recently rejected Biden's vaccine mandate for large businesses. There is a limit to what the government can do.

Edited by Only_
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/29/2022 at 11:34 PM, Golden Duck said:

You have a choice to not get vaccinated.  That chouce hasn't disappeared.

I have already made my choice.

But if you read this thread carefully, some people don't want you to have a choice.

Quote

Do you lose it over helmet mandates?  Everybody has a right to preserve their hairstyles, except maybe in specific workplaces. Then you might have to make a choice.

Ethically speaking, I think having to wear a helmet is quite different than having a formula injected into your body.

That is why the notion of consent is fundamental in medicine.

Edited by Only_
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Only_ said:

 

Ethically speaking, I think having to wear a helmet is quite different than having a formula injected into your body.

That is why the notion of consent is fundamental in medicine.

Not to mention you don't have to carry your helmet on your head 24 hours a day 365.  Or upgrade it every 3 months.  When you hop off the bike you take off Hemet, when the pandemic is over you keep the spikes for life.

Edited by taniwha
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Only_ said:

I have already made my choice.

But if you read this thread carefully, some people don't want you to have a choice.

Ethically speaking, I think having to wear a helmet is quite different than having a formula injected into your body.

That is why the notion of consent is fundamental in medicine.

Perhaps take your own advice.  The conflict, in choice, arises in the competing rights of parties. An employer can implement policies to manage WHS or  absenteeism.

Ethically speaking you're just begging the question.  Helmets mandates are implemented to reduce injury and fatalities.  How does not wearing a helmet affect the rest of society?

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, taniwha said:

Not to mention you don't have to carry your helmet on your head 24 hours a day 365.  Or upgrade it every 3 months.  When you hop off the bike you take off Hemet, when the pandemic is over you keep the spikes for life.

But it's still a law decreed by the ebil gubmint.

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Golden Duck said:

But it's still a law decreed by the ebil gubmint.

Helmets aren't mandated by decree vaccines are :huh:

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Only_ said:

But there has never been any kind of forced vaccination in the U.S. The only historical precedent is the Jacobson vs Massachusetts in 1905. The statutory penalty for refusing smallpox vaccination was a 5$ fine. There was no provision for actually forcing vaccination on any person. So you still had a choice to refuse the vaccine. Can you at least have the intellectual honesty to admit that you'd have to use physical force to force vaccinate reluctant citizens?

The Supreme Court has recently rejected Biden's vaccine mandate for large businesses. There is a limit to what the government can do.

The historical precedents for forced vaccinations goes back to Washington's army.

The question is whether physical fore is needed with reluctant citizens. So far the military was vaccinated. Kids going to public schools need to be vaccinated. To get on a transplant list you need to be vaccinated. Federal employees had to get vaccinated. Contractors working for the feds had to  be vaccinated. Where was the physical force in any of that?

But there could always be some idiot who wants to use physical force. Let me think? You  know the jackasses that spit in people's faces rather than wear a face mask. Tey were arrested and charged with assault. And the people that attacked others when they were restricted access due to being covidiots. There are always those few that resort to violence. But that is not the norm and society is not going to back down because some violent jackass wackos want to use force to get their way in society.

The Supreme Court did allow the mandate for health care workers. And lots of those jackasses were sent packing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a good one for those foolish. Many jobs are known as at will jobs. The employer has the right to terminate employment for any reasons including an employee not being vaccinated. It's being used and people are out of work. Good riddance.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, taniwha said:

Helmets aren't mandated by decree vaccines are :huh:

That's wrong.

Vaccines are legally required by law in the US and probably in many places in Europe as well.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, taniwha said:

Helmets aren't mandated by decree vaccines are :huh:

Are you OK?

Motorcylce and Bicycle helmets are compulsory when using a bike, unless you have a medical certificate.  It says so in the Road Rules.

Vaccines are still a choice.

Edited by Golden Duck
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.