Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, H B Lowrey said:

If you had a point in that we might be able to discuss it.  I don't get your point.  Would you care to explain it? 

the point is the politicians are saying the same things about the unvaccinated

that they said about the Jews back in the day

to justify their totalitarian crackdowns on them

and imposing similar restrictions on them as well for similar reasons

obvious parallels are obvious

open your eyes

they simply changed who the scapegoat is

Edited by Yzermandius19
Posted
1 minute ago, Yzermandius19 said:

the point is the politicians are saying the same things about the unvaccinated

that they said about the Jews to justify their totalitarian crackdowns on them

and imposing similar restrictions on them as well for similar reasons

obvious parallels are obvious

open your eyes

they simply changed who the scapegoat is

Oh bullshit.  You may have decided to leave your job or decided to be "denied your "right" to eat like you want to right now at some restaurant.  What have YOU been denied by what entity?  Be specific.  

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, H B Lowrey said:

Oh bullshit.  You may have decided to leave your job or decided to be "denied your "right" to eat like you want to right now at some restaurant.  What have YOU been denied by what entity?  Be specific.  

that's how it started with the Jews too

being forced out of jobs, not being able to go to certain businesses 

like I said, you don't know your history

changing the targeted group from Jews to Unvaccinated throws you off the scent apparently

Edited by Yzermandius19
  • Like 1
Posted
4 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

that's how it started with the Jews too

being forced out of jobs, not being able to go to certain businesses 

like I said, you don't know your history

changing the targeted group from Jews to Unvaccinated throws you off the scent apparently

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn, wrong analogy.  See the indigenous peoples of euro conquest.  

Posted (edited)
5 minutes ago, H B Lowrey said:

Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaawn, wrong analogy.  See the indigenous peoples of euro conquest.  

yeah because treating the Unvaccinated like the Indians is good policy

clown show

no one cares what analogy you prefer, the point still stands

Edited by Yzermandius19
Posted
Just now, Yzermandius19 said:

yeah because treating the Unvaccinated like the Indians is good policy

clown show

See your primary care physician.  Pretty simple.  Your hysterics are, well, hysterical.

 

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, H B Lowrey said:

See your primary care physician.  Pretty simple.  Your hysterics are, well, hysterical.

treating the Unvaccinated like untermensch is hysterics

being against that is not

Edited by Yzermandius19
Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

treating the Unvaccinated like untermensch is hysterics

being against that is not

This Lowrey guy is beyond gullible.  “Just see your doctor.”  Rainbows and unicorns for everyone.  This is how we ended up in this mess.  It’s funny that he still buys the BS, but clearly he’s not alone.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Posted (edited)

We have been at it for a while now, and I would like to summarize the discussion so far. Up to now, no sufficient arguments have been presented for mandatory; forced; or coerced mRNA treatments.

  • Proportionality of use of a publicly financed system is not and was never a valid argument.
  • Treatments do not prevent infection and transmission.
  • Overriding public benefit has not been explained, substantiated and proven.
  • A claim of public benefit is not sufficient grounds to infringe on individual rights.

Treatments can be mandated in specific, clearly defined work areas where it can have direct and strong effect on the health and safety of the vulnerable people. That is the only valid case, based on arguments presented so far.

And that begs the question, given the length of the discussion: is it because strong convincing arguments simply not here, but can be found elsewhere; or is it because they do not exist?

 

Edited by myata

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
19 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I’ve never used that phrase.  Lazy pidgin holing.  Liberal versus Conservative is over.  Those are quaint notions from a world that no longer exists.  Our political parties have demonstrated how little discretion they have.  Canada is very vulnerable.  Even the US is struggling to maintain its freedoms, but it’s certainly faring better than we are.  

I never said you used it, but your post was little more than a stream-of-consciousness ramble of government conspiracy clichés and how they're responsible for a long list of things that upset you.  Pounding out a 500-page rant, however, doesn't qualify as thoughtfulness.  Though you may not appreciate a one-sentence response to such an effort and consider it lazy, it was of equal mental substance.   

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted
1 hour ago, myata said:

We have been at it for a while now, and I would like to summarize the discussion so far. Up to now, no sufficient arguments have been presented for mandatory; forced; or coerced mRNA treatments.

  • Proportionality of use of a publicly financed system is not and was never a valid argument.
  • Treatments do not prevent infection and transmission.
  • Overriding public benefit has not been explained, substantiated and proven.
  • A claim of public benefit is not sufficient grounds to infringe on individual rights.

Treatments can be mandated in specific, clearly defined work areas where it can have direct and strong effect on the health and safety of the vulnerable people. That is the only valid case, based on arguments presented so far.

And that begs the question, given the length of the discussion: is it because strong convincing arguments simply not here, but can be found elsewhere; or is it because they do not exist?

 

The arguments were made and the rationale was provided.  You're just refusing it all.  Nobody can untwist you from your own ignorance and superstition other than yourself and you'll continue to hear what you want to hear and reject anything you don't.  

 

"A man is no more entitled to an opinion for which he cannot account than he is for a pint of beer for which he cannot pay" - Anonymous

Posted

^^^ This guy never has anything to offer but insults. ^^^

"There are two different types of people in the world - those who want to know and those who want to believe."

~~ Friedrich Nietzsche ~~

Posted
4 hours ago, Goddess said:

^^^ This guy never has anything to offer but insults. ^^^

Anyone can translate it as "sure, I have nothing to say here".

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
6 hours ago, Goddess said:

^^^ This guy never has anything to offer but insults. ^^^

Yup he’s a classic narcissist.  You’re allowed one option for your personal care, whatever he thinks you deserve.  

Posted
22 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

This Lowrey guy is beyond gullible.  “Just see your doctor.”  Rainbows and unicorns for everyone.  This is how we ended up in this mess.  It’s funny that he still buys the BS, but clearly he’s not alone.  

No, not at all.  I just don't get the hissyfitting.  We're all on our own.  See ya on the other side.  Or not.  I don't see where anyone's been forced to do anything.

Posted
9 hours ago, myata said:

We have been at it for a while now, and I would like to summarize the discussion so far. Up to now, no sufficient arguments have been presented for mandatory; forced; or coerced mRNA treatments.

  • Proportionality of use of a publicly financed system is not and was never a valid argument.
  • Treatments do not prevent infection and transmission.
  • Overriding public benefit has not been explained, substantiated and proven.
  • A claim of public benefit is not sufficient grounds to infringe on individual rights.

Treatments can be mandated in specific, clearly defined work areas where it can have direct and strong effect on the health and safety of the vulnerable people. That is the only valid case, based on arguments presented so far.

And that begs the question, given the length of the discussion: is it because strong convincing arguments simply not here, but can be found elsewhere; or is it because they do not exist?

 

It's because this is the way concentrated wealth works in times of a collective human crisis.  At least in the US.  Denied it until that blew up in their faces.  Then minimized and politicized it, and now, there's nothing left but furthering the chaos and quibbling, while further wealth is extracted, retributed and concentrated.  

I'd argue we're all on our own.  Learn to digest the primary peer-reviewed research literature for yourself.  Talk to your doctor.

Posted
23 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

This Lowrey guy is beyond gullible.  “Just see your doctor.”  Rainbows and unicorns for everyone.  This is how we ended up in this mess.  It’s funny that he still buys the BS, but clearly he’s not alone.  

Tell me more about your anxiety over losing your freedoms.  I'd like to hear more.  And specifics.

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, H B Lowrey said:

See your doctor, nothing to do with me.

has everything to do with you

you support those hysterics and criticize everyone who calls them out on it

people like you are who the politicians are pandering to when they treat the unvaccinated like untermensch

Edited by Yzermandius19
Posted

And this can be the final practical, factual proof, given the promises made and hopes raised that there can be no such thing as an enlightened, benevolent technocracy. No, it always begins with "for the common good" and inevitably winds to "yes, we know what's good for you, no, no questions allowed and we insist".

A human herd just cannot handle the condition of unlimited, unchecked power. There's no immunity.

  • Like 1

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
21 hours ago, myata said:

We have been at it for a while now, and I would like to summarize the discussion so far. Up to now, no sufficient arguments have been presented for mandatory; forced; or coerced mRNA treatments.

  • Proportionality of use of a publicly financed system is not and was never a valid argument.
  • Treatments do not prevent infection and transmission.
  • Overriding public benefit has not been explained, substantiated and proven.
  • A claim of public benefit is not sufficient grounds to infringe on individual rights.

Treatments can be mandated in specific, clearly defined work areas where it can have direct and strong effect on the health and safety of the vulnerable people. That is the only valid case, based on arguments presented so far.

And that begs the question, given the length of the discussion: is it because strong convincing arguments simply not here, but can be found elsewhere; or is it because they do not exist?

 

I think it’s because, though we have some very helpful scientific data, we also have some inconclusive data.  Even on the conclusive data there are a variety of choices we can make as to how to proceed, because politicians have to weigh the threat of Covid and the options to deal with it against a number of other human interests/needs.  Man does not live by bread alone. Man does not order one’s entire life around fighting one transmissible ailment.  No government should have the right to subordinate rights and freedoms to one health risk, especially one that is diminishing as our treatments improve of a relatively mild variant.  

  • Like 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

No government should have the right to subordinate rights and freedoms to one health risk, especially one that is diminishing as our treatments improve of a relatively mild variant.  

But governments always do what they are allowed to and can get away with. It's just as simple as that and there's no solutions or cure other than keeping all authority in check and accountable at all times and any time.

If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant

Posted
11 hours ago, Yzermandius19 said:

has everything to do with you

you support those hysterics and criticize everyone who calls them out on it

people like you are who the politicians are pandering to when they treat the unvaccinated like untermensch

No one was ever guilty of anything some half-witted anonymous poster assigned to them on line pard.  If you don't like the advice of the scientists and medical professionals, don't follow it.  It's not like you have been anyway.  You're not my problem, and you will never be allowed to become such.

Posted
13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

Yup he’s a classic narcissist.  You’re allowed one option for your personal care, whatever he thinks you deserve.  

Tell me more about your anxiety over losing your freedoms.  I'd like to hear more.  And specifics.  Who has forced you to do what exactly?

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,908
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    miawilliams3232
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Benz earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Barquentine earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • stindles earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • stindles earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...