Here's a percentage for you - 99.2% of the people that died of COVID in June were unvaccinated. That's the percentage you should care about
Mandatory Vaccine for kids...
- Thread starter Jwilliamsiii
- Start date
First paragraph is clearly wrong: https://www.aamc.org/news-insights/how-are-covid-19-deaths-counted-it-s-complicated
It should be obvious that Floyd wasn’t counted as a covid death if you paid any attention to the trial, because cause of death is as a major sticking point. Covid was never mentioned. But here you go: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-autopsy-idUSKBN23B1HX.
There is almost nobody who’s at greater risk from the vaccine than they are from Covid, in part because there is almost no risk from the vaccine. I have no idea how you came up with the comparison to vaping, but the stuff about “long-term side effects” is coming out of left field. Side effects that don’t appear for more than 2 months after vaccination aren’t really a thing. They almost never happen with vaccines. But we’re well over a year past the first clinical trials of the mRNA vaccines, and we’re now something like 8 months into a mass vaccination campaign where hundreds of millions of these vaccines have been given. So we’re well into the “long-term” or “medium term” side effect range, and these things you’re afraid of aren’t showing up. (https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/93064)
Last edited:
I mean they did invent the war on christmas in order to play the victim and rile everyone up over nothing. Never mind what they are doing now with CRT. Which is equally bogus made up hate mongoring.
People other than Fox News have been talking about CRT and other far left social justice ideologies for a long time. There’s a measure of moral panic to some of the discussion of it, but it’s a reaction to another very real moral panic that’s driving schools and businesses to adopt extreme ideology into curricula and DEI programs. I have no idea how you’re calling any of it “hates mongering,” unless you’re referring to proponents of CRT.
This is a pretty oblique tangent, though.
lol please cite the papers you've read on the topic to support your take. Otherwise skirt back to just echo chambering right wing talking points. CRT is a college level topic for law. There are lots of papers on the subject orginating out of the 70's. It has to deal with specifically how the LAW deals with race. Thats the context for it. The idea that its taught to children in k-12 is beyond misinformed. Please cite where CRT is being taught to k-12. Also, hi Tucker.
I studied critical theory (not specifically critical race theory, which you seem to be confusing with critical legal studies) in grad school, for one. I didn’t specialize in critical theory, but I know it pretty well.
I don’t know if it’s just willful misunderstanding or actual misunderstanding on your part, but nobody is saying that children are being taught the theory of critical race theory- they’re saying that it’s being applied in curricula and in many DEI programs. It very clearly is being applied in those contexts. It really seems like some of the people saying what you’re saying are either playing dumb, or they just don’t know what CRT is and it’s the water they swim in.
This is really not the thread to discuss this, but here are actual definitions of critical race theory from proponents of the theory:
Delgado, Richard. Critical Race Theory, Third Edition. NYU Press. Kindle Edition, p. 3.
The critical race theory (CRT) movement is a collection of activists and scholars engaged in studying and transforming the relationship among race, racism, and power. The movement considers many of the same issues that conventional civil rights and ethnic studies discourses take up but places them in a broader perspective that includes economics, history, setting, group and self-interest, and emotions and the unconscious. Unlike traditional civil rights discourse, which stresses incrementalism and step-by-step progress, critical race theory questions the very foundations of the liberal order, including equality theory, legal reasoning, Enlightenment rationalism, and neutral principles of constitutional law.
Thompson, Sherwood. Encyclopedia of Diversity and Social Justice. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Kindle Edition, p. 65.
Critical race theory (CRT) is a scholarly and political approach to examining race that leads to a consequential analysis and profound understanding of racism. It argues, as a starting point, that the axis of American social life is fundamentally constructed in race. As a result, the economic, political, and historical relationships and arrangements that social actors have to institutions and social processes are all race based. CRT also argues that, as a whole, this idea has been purposefully ignored, subdued, and marginalized in both the dominant and public discourse and that there are serious repercussions that arise from this structural blindness (Mills, 1997, p. 153)…. One of the important tenets of CRT is the assertion that race is socially constructed, yet it denotes explicitly and implicitly how power is used and appropriated in society
No that is not correct. The safest way for an individual who is in a higher risk bracket and I'm not sure what that is but it's something like 2% chance of dying if they get the virus, is for them to self quarantine or for them to limit their exposure to people who have been vaccinated (assuming the vaccine has a high efficacy rate).
You cannot force others to make up for individuals who don't care to take responsibility for themselves and I don't see that happening BTW. I think you're making this problem up so you can control everybody. Also, you're trying to make this a selfish argument which is just an extension of your collectivist mindset for everything.
No because they chose not to get vaccinated. You would need to show that this caused others to die.
Like most people when the lose an argument, they change the argument to try and shift the discussion. I never said vaccines don’t work. Where was that every implied by me?
This thread is called “Mandatory Vaccines for Kids”. My argument is against mandatory vaccines for anybody and certainly for kids. And I’ve discussed very clearly with specific data as to why shutting down the country and the pandemonium reaction by many to masks, vaccines etc is absurd. Try and stay on point.
Taking the vaccine is the safest way for individuals to move forward in life with protection. Its an absolute fact.
You have said numerous times that you think the deaths and seriousness of the virus aren't real. Those thoughts in your head are the only thing that is made up.
This idea of controlling people because of a public health crisis is classic tinfoil hat talk.
There have been lockdowns, mask mandates etc and then once a great drop in cases started due to vaccines, things have opened up quite a bit just like before.
Without people who see the safety and benefit of getting vaccinated, we would still be struggling. It is a selfish thing to see what we've gone through as a world the past 18 months through a "me" prism.
Again, 400k people don't die from text while driving a year. You seemed to have gotten off track and made a horrible point.
You're going off topic by making this about me and what I think about the virus. From a purely objective standpoint, the safest way for an individual to proceed is for them to take actions to protect themselves from the uncertainty that they may face from others who may have the virus. If they (high risk old people with other health conditions) would like to reduce their risk of death from 2% to 0.1% then they should limit their exposure to those who have a 95% chance of not having the virus (AKA vaccinated). Assuming 95% efficacy rate for the vaccines.
That is absolutely not the most optimal/efficient way to go about protecting yourself from the virus.
The efficacy means that that a person reduces their chances of new disease by 95%. Not that of 100 people who take the vaccine, 5 people will get covid. Also it is shown to be close to 100 percent reduction in severe symptoms and or death vs not having the vaccine.
You keep saying that high risk adults should limit exposure to those vaccinated and I'm not sure why. The ones they should be limiting their exposure to are the ones who are not vaccinated. But again, all of that is solved very easily by getting oneself vaccinated.
You decrease your chance of death/serious illness exponentially but also of having any covid symptom.
so you're saying that your ilk are such thin skinned babies that because some people were mean to you about taking the vaccine, you aren't doing it out of spite?
>hurrr i was going to get the vaccine, but then user ClemsonTigerFan69 called me an idiot and now i'm not doing it
yes, it's 600k deaths AFTER we instituted nearly a year long shutdown
i wonder what it would have been like if we didn't shut anything down?
This doesn’t make any sense. Sure, the “safest” thing to do would be to stay in your house and never have contact with anybody. I’m not sure how limiting exposure to vaccinated people would help. But the whole point of measures like masking and vaccination is to make it so you don’t have to hide in your house to go about your normal life while avoiding disease.
This makes no sense. These deaths were almost certainly caused by exposure to other people who were unvaccinated, which caused them to die.
Last edited:
You were trying to make your point by citing percentages as a way to argue that it's only a small number of people who die due to exposure to the virus, when your focus should be on the percentage of people who won't die because they took the vaccine. If we could get complete buy-in from the obstinate, anti-vaxx crowd, there would be no need for harsher measures to control it. That's the simple and more important point.
I understand that point but is this going to be the new normal for every time a new virus comes out? Each virus is unique. I don't see how the covid virus should be treated any different than the flue virus. They both cause certain people to die under certain conditions. We vaccinate kids in school for measles and chicken pocks mostly because they are forced to be there and nobody wants to deal with an outbreak. When have we ever forced the general population to get vaccinated for the flu?
I haven't read up lately on CDC results of testing but I think you are overstating the effect of the vaccine. At least from what they know.
The answer from our side is the same. Also note that we dispute the number of deaths. Regardless, we would say the same with or without the lockdown.
You've read nothing and think i'm overstating because of a hunch?
Good work there sherlock.
No, this was extraordinary. We’re also not even discussing forcing people to get vaccinated. It’s just discussion of the same kinds of requirements for participation that we have for other vaccines.
Understood. We don't force flu vaccinations for attending football games. I've already scheduled something else for the UGA game just bc I think they will require a vaccine.
wow, so easily convinced by a checkless tweet from a random nobody with 300 followers. that couldnt be bullshit. couldnt be.
you will really believe anything. i'm going to start a religion about the sky being green. dan you and your facts, the sky is green. you can't prove otherwise. also, i need 10% of your income to keep the shill alive
So this you believe, but the CDC reports deaths and you don't believe that. Truly impressive.
You post non-ending bullshit about obscure reasons you won't get the vaccine, but you'll never convince me it's not purely about politics
Last edited:
Fair enough. But, again, that depends on comparing this to the common flu. 2017-2018 was the worst flu season in the last decade, and the estimated deaths were in the 60Ks. Hospitalizations were somewhere between 600k and 1.4 million, whereas there were 131k hospitalizations just at one time due to COVID. Hospitalizations due to COVID are apparently much more frequent for children than they are for the flu: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/04/health/covid-flu-hospitalizations-children.html.
yes, let's post tweets of obvious bots with 8 numbers in their name with <300 followers and tout it as truth
i'm blown away by how your brain works
You’re right, it’s about 370,000. I rounded up. I guess since there are millions of people killed in auto accidents each year then the only solution is to stop driving. Got it.
LOL. So for every aspect in our life that afflicts the human race, even if less that 1/10 of 1%, we should shut the country down and force people to take medication? Ok, got it.
For all of those actions that actually kill millions of people every year, we should impose strict and mandatory rules to eliminate the problem, right? So obviously no more driving since millions are killed behind the wheel. No more cell phones (texting while driving…). No swimming in the ocean because of the millions of people who may be subjected to a possible shark attack. No more golf (lightening kills golfers every year). At what point do percentages matter when it comes to government mandates or even the court of public opinion? Serious question.
You're being intentionally stupid and you know it because it's actually much simpler than that. Imagine that we could do something really simple to prevent most car crashes from happening - say like pouring a thimble full of a solution into our gas tank? That's what the vaccine is - something really simple you could do to keep yourself and others from dying. Why is that a problem in your mind unless you want to make some type of obtuse political point?
That also isn't true. In 2019, 3,142 people died from distracted driving which we can make it easy for your argument and say it was texting.
In 2019, 36,120 people died in automobile accidents all together.
Not to mention that driving is heavily regulated. And what if we had something that could make you immune from harming yourself and others while driving that made all of those regulations unnecessary?
Thanks for making my point. 36,120 deaths isn’t enough to draw any attention or governmental mandates.
You mean like speed limits, driving tests, seat belts, manufacturer regulations etc?
The only point you've made is that you have no clue what you are talking about. We can all see that and its quite embarrassing to watch.
Similar threads
