myata Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 Let's just reflect for a minute what we're having here. When we suspected recklessness life threatening choices in our earlier life not so long back, we would have: a) a court; tribunal, panel, arbitration, etc b) evidence c) an objective and impartial judge, arbiter etc d) thorough examination of the evidence, on all sides e) a legal specialist assisting the defendant f) a process supposedly objective and impartial g) a detailed explanation of the decision by the judge, panel etc h) a review of the decision f) a possibility of an appeal and so on. And now, scroll only a few months forward and we declare a selected group in the society "reckless", "life threatening" and many other bad things just see and listen, please attention here: based on what? Remember, those points A,B,C and so on? Was it that long ago, really? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 1 hour ago, Accountability Now said: Just my opinion, but that typically doesn’t bode well for the vaxxers when they don’t publish data. Like they're hiding something. Again….just an opinion No, I think it was just a passing news report about the number of people in hospital, in ICU and the number that died. Don't think they were deliberately leaving out information about the number of people who were vaccinated and the number who were not. We get some of that on some news reports but new reports are not necessarily official reports meant to cover every detail about the pandemic in an area. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 So a sanction imposed collectively, and indiscriminately on a group of people, with no trial, defence, due process and impartial examination of evidence. What is it? How do we understand it, because it's real yes we did it. Still the past or a sign of the future to come? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accountability Now Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 41 minutes ago, blackbird said: We get some of that on some news reports but new reports are not necessarily official reports meant to cover every detail about the pandemic in an area. I can’t seem to find it in the official reports either. Not sure if I’m just missing it or if they’re not providing it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, OftenWrong said: It’s a poor comparison. Each issue needs to be carefully thought out. New laws, restrictions need to be challenged to ensure they are valid and the penalty is fair. It’s right to challenge it, wrong to blindly accept. How can your choice be challenged by the people you're endangering if they have no say in your choice? I suppose I can look both ways at a red light but what if there's a truck stopped in a left turn lane blocking my view? I rely on a law that I have little choice but to blindly accept will be enough to prevent you from tee-boning me. My comparison looks stronger and more accurate the more I use it. Quote Government is a stupid and blunt instrument that must be forced into a confined space. When the consequences of your choices extend beyond the space you occupy they all to often become issues that need to be governed. They don't just evaporate away into a empty boundless void. Edited January 9, 2022 by eyeball Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 Canadian government is going ahead with their plan to mandate vaccinations for truck drivers. This is expected to result in the loss of thousands of truck drivers, at a time when supply chains are already on the brink of failing. Keep drivin’ the wedge in deeper and deeper there is no tomorrow, except for the reaper Specially if Trudeua decides our fate Then we’ll be screwed o’er, We Candians, in our Post-national-state 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 2 minutes ago, eyeball said: How can your choice be challenged by the people you're endangering if they have no say in your choice? I suppose I can look both ways at a red light but what if there's a truck parked in a left turn lane blocking my view? I rely on a law that I have little choice but to blindly accept will be enough to prevent you from tee-boning me. My comparison looks stronger and more accurate the more I use it. When the consequences of your choices extend beyond the space you occupy they all to often become issues that need to be governed. They don't just evaporate away into a empty boundless void. The comparison is not valid on many levels. Mandating experimental vaccines is an issue worth discussing. Debate on the validity of traffic laws that are tried and true for 50 years is not. I trust that this helps to illuminate the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 1 hour ago, myata said: Let's just reflect for a minute what we're having here. When we suspected recklessness life threatening choices in our earlier life not so long back, we would have: a) a court; tribunal, panel, arbitration, etc b) evidence c) an objective and impartial judge, arbiter etc d) thorough examination of the evidence, on all sides e) a legal specialist assisting the defendant f) a process supposedly objective and impartial g) a detailed explanation of the decision by the judge, panel etc h) a review of the decision f) a possibility of an appeal and so on. And now, scroll only a few months forward and we declare a selected group in the society "reckless", "life threatening" and many other bad things just see and listen, please attention here: based on what? Remember, those points A,B,C and so on? Was it that long ago, really? Based on the shared collective sense that rules were for everyone's good. That was probably a pretty shaky proposition going into this period of history but I think we still pretty much all agreed we need government for the same reason, and yes, it really wasn't that long ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 11 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: The comparison is not valid on many levels. Mandating experimental vaccines is an issue worth discussing. Debate on the validity of traffic laws that are tried and true for 50 years is not. I trust that this helps to illuminate the situation. No, because vaccines have been tried true and even mandated in some cases for decades as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 (edited) 31 minutes ago, eyeball said: people you're endangering The fact of "endangering" never proven. Just repeating it is not proving anything. End of story, period. Again, these are not the same "vaccines". Using same word does not make it the same reality. Simplicity, naivite is not a valid excuse. Those vaccines prevented infection and transmission, and the risk of severe disease was higher. Edited January 9, 2022 by myata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 6 minutes ago, myata said: The fact of "endangering" never proven. Just repeating it is not proving anything. End of story, period. You figure driving thru a red light is safe? Please don't go try to prove it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 (edited) 23 minutes ago, eyeball said: Based on the shared collective sense that rules were for everyone's good. Wow you've got it! Every single dictator in history can connect to "shared collective sense" which only they can see and talk on behalf of, in the absence of evidence, checks and objective impartial process. Yes you've got it: however and whenever this ends, the choice for Canadian democracy will be between: seriously damaged; irreparably damaged or not really a democracy. You have arrived. Edited January 9, 2022 by myata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 11 minutes ago, myata said: Wow you've got it! Every single dictator in history can connect to "shared collective sense" which only they can see and talk on behalf of, in the absence of evidence, checks and objective impartial process. Yes you've got it: however and whenever this ends, the choice for Canadian democracy will be between: seriously damaged; irreparably damaged or not really a democracy. You have arrived. I don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 Just now, eyeball said: No, because vaccines have been tried true and even mandated in some cases for decades as well. “Vaccines” is a big word and I’m of the opinion mrna injections are different enough to warrant calling them experimental. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 1 minute ago, OftenWrong said: “Vaccines” is a big word and I’m of the opinion mrna injections are different enough to warrant calling them experimental. Conventional vaccines are available too and no one will force you to take them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myata Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 (edited) 25 minutes ago, eyeball said: I don't get it. The concept of responsible democracy, you mean? No you don't get it, if "shared collective sense" can justify indiscriminate collective punishment, without even appearance of an objective and impartial process. Edited January 9, 2022 by myata Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 8 minutes ago, eyeball said: Conventional vaccines are available too and no one will force you to take them. No they are not. Az was pulled after a few months due to safety concerns. The only other non-mrna I know of is Johnson and Johnson “single dose”. Im pretty sure the government mandates that it has to be followed up with an mrna booster. Not a single dose, after all. It didnt help the governments cause when they tried to deny that AZ was dangerous, even after other countries declared it banned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suds Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 I'm not a big believer in mandatory vaccinations. It's like supporting women's rights on abortion. It's a 'your body', 'your choice', sort of thing. I've been thinking about what it would actually take for those who choose not be vaccinated to get vaccinated on their own free will. Would a variant maybe not so transmissible but if infected cause almost certain death do it? I'll bet it would. We should pray it never comes to anything like that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 17 minutes ago, myata said: The concept of responsible democracy, you mean? No you don't get it, Except this is precisely what I'm talking about and the fact I actually can speak to that just doesn't compute against the gaslighting you do to yourself. It's the word collective isn't it? It's just to much of a trigger. And yet, I'm sure you're able to talk about social conservatism without the word social causing your head to explode - Like I said I just don't get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 17 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: No they are not. Az was pulled after a few months due to safety concerns. The only other non-mrna I know of is Johnson and Johnson “single dose”. Im pretty sure the government mandates that it has to be followed up with an mrna booster. Not a single dose, after all. It didnt help the governments cause when they tried to deny that AZ was dangerous, even after other countries declared it banned. Governments can certainly be their own worst enemies alright. I think it's a little naive myself to have so much expectation that governments can get everything right on the first try. As for vaccine...thankfully we have more than just governments to guide our choices and the overwhelming majority of medical experts as well as my own team of doctors are recommending I get vaccinated. Full disclosure, there's enough vulnerability in my immediate household that I can easily get behind mandating vaccines and I think it's someone else's turn to go hide in their basements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted January 9, 2022 Report Share Posted January 9, 2022 https://apple.news/Au3VpeidoTQi93Vl79qrT1A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aristides Posted January 10, 2022 Report Share Posted January 10, 2022 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: https://apple.news/Au3VpeidoTQi93Vl79qrT1A The new variant with 46 mutations discovered in France originated in Cameroon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted January 10, 2022 Report Share Posted January 10, 2022 2 hours ago, Zeitgeist said: https://apple.news/Au3VpeidoTQi93Vl79qrT1A Quote Omicron Makes Biden’s Vaccine Mandates Obsolete There is no evidence so far that vaccines are reducing infections from the fast-spreading variant. There's plenty of evidence however that vaccines reduce serious symptoms from the omicron variant. You guys are usually pretty quick to hype things that seem to be effective at treating COVID so why not now? Don't forget there are still other variants out there the vaccine is effective against and there could be a new variant along anytime that the vaccine is also effective against. Now what if that variant turns out to be the deadliest one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeitgeist Posted January 10, 2022 Report Share Posted January 10, 2022 1 hour ago, eyeball said: There's plenty of evidence however that vaccines reduce serious symptoms from the omicron variant. You guys are usually pretty quick to hype things that seem to be effective at treating COVID so why not now? Don't forget there are still other variants out there the vaccine is effective against and there could be a new variant along anytime that the vaccine is also effective against. Now what if that variant turns out to be the deadliest one? I think vaccination is wise right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yzermandius19 Posted January 10, 2022 Report Share Posted January 10, 2022 On 1/8/2022 at 11:32 AM, Aristides said: Stop being such a drama queen. You are actually asked to do very little to enjoy the benefits of being a Canadian. if you are okay with Canada being a totalitarian hellhole you are the problem, not the people noticing the obvious move in that direction at a breathtaking pace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts