American Politics Discussion Thread

[T-hawk]

So does that mean you are pro abortion?

Pro abortion is too simplistic to describe it. Again I have to spell out the distinction: you can have an opinion on something that is not the same as your opinion on forcible government enactment of it.

I'm against abortion but pro choice. Abortion is horrible, I would never want to encourage or see someone do that.

But it's not my place or government's to enforce that opinion on anyone else. The right way to address this in either direction is in the market of free speech and public discourse. Present your ideas and arguments and let people make their own decisions.

Really, the question is more like this: is an unborn baby entitled to the resources and support of its mother's body. I always hold that no one is ever entitled to the resources of another, and this has to include that. If the baby can't survive without that, that's tragic, and I wish the mother wouldn't make that decision - but ultimately forbidding her from doing that is the worse evil.

Also, on a practical level: if you outlaw abortion, what you get is back-alley or overseas shopping for abortions, and that doesn't help anyone.

This is the same as my opinion on guns: harmful and barbaric, and doesn't belong in a civilized society -- but the way to get there is by public discourse and education, not by forcible government enactment.

Stop pretending that vaccine mandates haven't been around for more than 100 years and that somehow this is a new power grab by the government.

Break this down: "vaccine mandates" is too broad, this includes a lot of subdivided questions. (Again, all of this is far too nuanced an opinion to fit in a media sound bite, and so we'll never get any broader consensus for something this sophisticated.)

I'm not aware that any government has ever imposed vaccine mandates for adult domestic citizens. That is a new power grab. If any existed from before Covid, I would be against it, and would want dissenters to choose to leave that country.

Particular employers like hospitals might, if they perceive that is a positive outcome for their business. The right way to do this is by the free market, let each employer choose to do that or not free of government or regulatory compulsion, and each worker to find an employer that matches their choice of mandates.

I know some countries impose it for entry for travelers. I don't like this, but really there's no way to infringe on a country's sovereignty to prevent that. Same way, the free market is the solution here, countries will do that if they're willing to give up the business from those who don't agree. I expect I'll never travel to Europe again. Their loss.

The tough spot is childhood vaccines, measles and polio and the rest. Children aren't of an age of reason to consent to that. I'm honestly not sure what the better answer here is: do we use parents' choice as a proxy for the child's, or the school's, or the government's. I lean towards parents' choice, since they're more directly invested in the lives of the child, rather than the school or government who only really care about PR appearances. What's resulted from this is basically soft mandates in most schools, in that it exists to pacify the fearful Karens, but is generally pretty easy to record an objection or exemption, or find a private school without a requirement (the affordability of that private school is a different topic.) This approach might be the least-bad, out of no good approaches when there can't be consent of the body owner.

[Amicalola]

Thanks for the information -- but I'm still going to point out the cracks in it.  June to October absolutely is lengthy, when the sane US states had already stopped most or all restrictions by June.  And going in and out of 2-week lockdowns constantly is not normal - a society can't function when you can't plan ahead for any event that might be destroyed out from under you.

Some things are limited to those who are double-vaxxed ... Interstate travel is also more difficult, although not illegal nor impossible. ... I personally have no issue with this.

You absolutely should have issue with this.  Unless you are okay with setting the precedent that the government owns your bodily autonomy in perpetuity.  Government never gives up power once acquired.

Voting medical tyranny on everyone else to assuage your own fears feels great!  Until the next time when you find your opinion is on the unpopular side and you're the one in need of the freedoms and protections you just burned down.

If you have anything at all that wasn't there in 2019, you are NOT NORMAL and never will be until you rebel against it.

Yes, T-hawk. Australia has been in some lockdown, that is my point. Your repeated claims over the past year about us are hyperbolic - 4 out of the last 12 months is not endless, and minor restrictions are not house arrest.

The US states stopped most or all restrictions once most people were vaccinated; we could not do that in June, because our Federal Government bungled vaccine distribution so spectacularly that very few Australians were vaccinated. Thus, the argument used to lower restrictions there did not apply here. We have reduced restrictions now, for this exact reason - our timeline is just behind yours. 

And no, 2021 is not normal in the way that 2019 was. That is a global phenomenon, and is what happens after a deadly global pandemic. I doubt that 1920 looked very much like 1917, or that 1355 looked very much like 1345. That is a fact of life, and I am afraid you will simply have to get used to it. Ironically, vaccines are by far the most effective way to get us back to normal.

[T-hawk]

Ironically, vaccines are by far the most effective way to get us back to normal.

No. Just dropping the restrictions and going back to normal is the most effective way to get back to normal.

The redder US states did that as soon as June or September last year, even before the vaccines. And there's no distinguishable correlation at all in the Covid outcome numbers for them compared to anyone else.

Let anyone who is still scared hide and isolate themselves. The rest of us have a life to live.

[Jowy]

Let anyone who is still scared hide and isolate themselves.  The rest of us have a life to live.

Let anyone who is still scared (of the vaccine) hide and isolate themselves. The rest of us have a life to live.

Vaccine mandates for work, vaccine passes for bars and such. Everyone can go back to normal without the disease carriers around.

[Mjmd]

[quote pid="799049" dateline="1636515333"]
I've never looked into vaccines, covid or others, so two questions.

Why are people worried about getting vaccinated? It's only an inert/weakened form of the bacteria or virus (not sure how it works for viruses), so it's highly unlikely that it affects you more than the disease itself.

What are the reasons for requiring vaccines for travel/restaurants/etc? People who are vaccinated are protected from exposure so you don't need to squash the virus generally, and with the particular profile of infectivity and deadliness of covid it looks like an extremely cost inefficient measure. There is even a danger that overvaccination can result in the virus evolving in a similar way that bacteria build resistance to antibiotics so it's best to vaccinate only the more vulnerable part of the population.
[/quote]

1) Fear of "insert random unscientific thing here". The answer to a lot of why humans do things is fear.

2) This is where statistics come in. While the odds are greatly reduced, its obviously not 0. For T-Hawk / anyone interested the CDC does have some neat graphs on vaccinated vs not (linked in a prior post). There is very clear data on that point. To answer the 2nd part the odds of a virus evolving are obviously increased the more hosts it has and the more life cycles it goes through. The two things actually combine if you think about it. The more people have it, the higher the chance it evolves a trait that gets around the vaccine. The more interaction that strain has with both vaccinated and not mean it will be more successful.

[Mjmd]

I wanted to respond to T-Hawk (and others not as vocal) in the same vein of statistics. I remember standing in my in-laws driveway at the beginning of the pandemic and being in HORROR that they were full on herd immunity let people die to stay normal train. I still remember the lies and having to explain statistics to a friend early on why "well Covid isn't as bad the flu" was total BS. The sure amount of death to unknown others so everything stays the same is just mind boggling.

I get that numbers are hard, but especially pre vaccine even if you say actual death rate was .5% (instead of 1%, but lets assume more young people catch and its lower) and not everyone would catch, lets just do some rough math. US pop of 300 million (I rounded down) * .005 = 1,500,000 deaths. Double our currently HORRIBLE numbers (see comparison almost any other country). That isn't taking into account again things like available hospital beds or chance of mutation to a deadlier variant.

So lets fast forward to now. Why not let people who make that choice die in larger numbers than those that do. Well obviously it still ends up in the death of some people who have done the right thing. You still end up impacting the health care system although not as bad. There is obviously the chance for mutation being higher. Then there is the simple fact that the unvaccinated are still Americans (insert nationality here). They have likely been lied to or misinformed. They are still someones family. Someone loves them. There is a horrible tendency in humanity to set up an us vs them. Its extremely important to remember this is not about us vs them. Its about trying to be the best. I'm not sure how much the government should do to protect people from themselves, but in cases like this where its protection for others and against future threat it seems pretty clear that the answer is "do something"

On the vein of "get back to normal". I'm pretty positive the US just could never fight WWII again. "What do you mean there aren't consumer goods available and there is rationing on certain items. I would rather more of our soldiers die than I be personally impacted!!!".

[Woden]

Stop pretending that vaccine mandates haven't been around for more than 100 years and that somehow this is a new power grab by the government.

Break this down: "vaccine mandates" is too broad, this includes a lot of subdivided questions.  (Again, all of this is far too nuanced an opinion to fit in a media sound bite, and so we'll never get any broader consensus for something this sophisticated.)

I'm not aware that any government has ever imposed vaccine mandates for adult domestic citizens.  That is a new power grab.  If any existed from before Covid, I would be against it, and would want dissenters to choose to leave that country.

Particular employers like hospitals might, if they perceive that is a positive outcome for their business.  The right way to do this is by the free market, let each employer choose to do that or not free of government or regulatory compulsion, and each worker to find an employer that matches their choice of mandates.

I know some countries impose it for entry for travelers.  I don't like this, but really there's no way to infringe on a country's sovereignty to prevent that.  Same way, the free market is the solution here, countries will do that if they're willing to give up the business from those who don't agree.  I expect I'll never travel to Europe again.  Their loss.

The tough spot is childhood vaccines, measles and polio and the rest.  Children aren't of an age of reason to consent to that.  I'm honestly not sure what the better answer here is: do we use parents' choice as a proxy for the child's, or the school's, or the government's.  I lean towards parents' choice, since they're more directly invested in the lives of the child, rather than the school or government who only really care about PR appearances.  What's resulted from this is basically soft mandates in most schools, in that it exists to pacify the fearful Karens, but is generally pretty easy to record an objection or exemption, or find a private school without a requirement (the affordability of that private school is a different topic.)  This approach might be the least-bad, out of no good approaches when there can't be consent of the body owner.

Military has required vaccinations for a while. Also, when I went back to school (state university), I had to provide my vaccine record since I wasn't coming directly from high school. Travel to certain areas require vaccines from both the destination (so you don't bring something there) and from home (so you don't bring something back). The recent mandates, which are not really mandates since you always have the option of weekly testing, are more widespread but we also have a disease that is almost as contagious as chicken pox and has killed 2% of everybody that has had it. Add in the 30% that are long haulers and you have a huge drain on our healthcare system. Extreme times call for extreme measures.

As for a power grab, most of our laws center around not hurting each other. Can't drive drunk because you could kill someone. Can't pollute because we all share the same air and water. How is this any different? As for letting the free market decide, the free market sucks at meeting the needs of society, especially in emergencies. Its why the government had to step in when all this started. If we let states and businesses decide, we would end up with the red states being more of a drain on the blue states than they already are.

As for kids, why change something that been proven with multiple diseases to work. Small pox has been eradicated to the point where the vaccine is not given anymore. Polio is on its way out. Malaria is has been snuffed out in many parts of the world. These are just a few. But thanks to all the Karens in the world, some are making a comeback. The reason we haven't seen adult vaccine mandates is because we are all vaccinated when we are children.

The problem with all the people whining about personal freedom, seem to forget that freedom isn't free. In order to be free, you have to work to make a free society and part of that work is making sure your not a threat to your neighbors. And getting vaccinated helps prevent you from infecting others.This is public health, it shouldn't be politicized.

[Charriu]

Initial post removed by request of other forum member

Just wanted to add this. With the mRNA vaccine you have no inert/weakend form of the bacteria or virus. They work on a different level. For a great read on how this stuff functions look here:

https://berthub.eu/articles/posts/revers...r-vaccine/

Initial post removed by request of other forum member

What vaccines can do though is lower the amount of viruses in your body therefore lowering the infectiousness of the virus. The goal is to reduce the opportunities for mutations.

Yes it is true that vaccines are developed for a specific virus, but that doesn't mean they are worthless against variants of that virus as has been shown with the current vaccines.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z

By the way it is possible to fully eradicate a virus and it has been done with small pox. But it will most likely not being done with SARS-Cov19 because Covid19 is less severe then small pox.

[Nicolae Carpathia]

Yes continue to open up everything and not get vaccinated you stupid motherfuckers if you continue to kill you are selves at a higher rate than the democrat's failure to pass good legislation then you might somehow botch 2024.

[Cyneheard]

Initial post removed by request of other forum member

Overvaccinated leading to mutations doesn't happen. Never has. This isn't antibiotics - reasoning by analogy doesn't work when the analogy fails. We've seen with COVID - and with other diseases in the past - that it's the unvaccinated population that's a reservoir for mutations.

Travel restrictions: Because the easiest way to protect everybody is to keep a disease from moving around; you're literally going to a place that has people you haven't been around before, so that increases the risk of contagion in both directions. The word "quarantine" is literally from the Black Death - they would make sailors quarantine for forty days (hence the name) to make sure they weren't carrying the plague. Travel restrictions due to disease/vaccination status are nothing new.

And for COVID specifically, restaurants are a relatively high-risk setting, since you're in one place for a long time, aren't going to be masked, and it's going to bring you in contact with new people. Bars are even worse, since alcohol means you're less likely to follow other rules, and it's common to spend even more time and be in even closer quarters at a bar.