BearForce2 said:
Big C said:
BearForce2 said:
Big C said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
sycasey said:
BearForce2 said:
dimitrig said:
bearister said:
Republican senator claims there's 'no reason to be pushing' Covid vaccines
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/apr/23/ron-johnson-republican-senator-covid-vaccines?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Yeah, because he caught it and recovered.
That's the Republican solution! Catch COVID-19 and hope to recover.
That's what Jesus would do.
The Senator has a point:
Quote:
"The science tells us the vaccines are 95% effective, so if you have a vaccine quite honestly what do you care if your neighbor has one or not?" Johnson said. "What is it to you? You've got a vaccine and science is telling you it's very, very effective. So why is this big push to make sure everybody gets a vaccine? And it's to the point where you're going to shame people, you're going to force them to carry a card to prove that they've been vaccinated so they can still stay in society. I'm getting highly suspicious of what's happening here."
No, he doesn't. Not everyone can take vaccines. Herd immunity helps protect them. Unless the Senator is saying we shouldn't give a s*** about the immunocompromised.
Plus we don't yet know how long these vaccines will protect you for or if there will be new variants that start spreading or what. I'm not as paranoid about this stuff as some other people, but I acknowledge that there are unknowns and that it's logical to gain as much protection as possible against them.
The Senator is an idiot.
The Senator is not against taking vaccines, we have a fundamental right to control what happens to our own bodies as well as our children's, not the government. While the benefits of the vaccine known, there are still concerns about vaccine injury as well as government's relationship with the pharma industry. There have already been documented cases of injury and death as a result to adverse reactions to vaccines, the government has no right to force its citizens to accept this risk for the current vaccine or future vaccines in response to variants, this should be left up to the individual.
He said "So why is this big push to make sure everybody gets a vaccine?"
Only an idiot doesn't know the answer. It's the same reason you would get any vaccine. Your arguments are anti-vaxxer conspiracy arguments. Millions of people have already gotten these vaccines and the benefit is obvious.
Take his comments in context:
Quote:
"For the very young, I see no reason to be pushing vaccines on people." Johnson said. "I certainly am going to vigorously resist any kind of government use or imposing of vaccine passports That could be a very freedom-robbing step and people need to understand these things."
He's not against the government distribution either. Johnson also said he "strongly" backed Operation Warp Speed and thinks the government's current role is "to help ensure transparency so that people have as much information as possible to make an informed decision for themselves." Taking vaccines should still a personal choice, your arguments are hypocritical.
These "personal choice" people... how did they feel about draft dodgers?
I thought someone was going to bring up abortion instead.
If somebody believes that a fetus shouldn't be aborted, I think they have a legitimate claim (to me, depending on the circumstances).
Being against draft dodgers, but not being against anti-vaxxers seems to be a better analogy. We're talking about giving up some personal freedom for the public good, which is also an element of patriotism, IMO. I don't get the anti-COVID vaxxers, or the anti-maskers. Don't they love America and want to help out their fellow-Americans?
There's a distinction to be made between those who wear masks and vaccinate but are against government mandates and those who are anti-everything. There's also good reason not to always trust government.
I've always thought the best way to get people to wear masks and get vaccinated was not to "mandate" it anyway, since realistically, it's not going to be enforced. Encourage it and explain why people should do it. Seems like selling it as an act of patriotism would be effective. Related tact, a leader could "direct" people to do it, which sounds less authoritarian than "mandating", but more serious than "encouraging".
When push comes to shove, I've found that the vast, vast majority of Americans want to do the right thing, when they understand what that is.
