Show us zee papers.. Passports of your not coming in ever….

[doctoretherParticipant 9166xp 5]

@elessar2590 that is a single study. So while it is some evidence, that is why my caveat on my link is that it is just a few studies, and so there is not a consensus.

Sorry, but in my line of work, a single published article is not enough. Not when say, you write a literature review on the particular topic containing 100+ references to papers in order to tease out the common conclusions across the board.

Why the U.S. Is Underestimating COVID Reinfection – Scientific American

Of particular importance with all the studies done is also to look at how they get their data to come to that conclusion, which is why there is again no definitive result so far.

The further question is how reinfection becomes more likely after the initial infection as time goes on.

[osbad 4279xp 0]

My point is not to deny scientific research, even when so often it is disputed or conflicting, but rather to accept that this disease can be fatal, but that really now we understand it more just to accept it as one more dangerous thing out there on the downside of life.

Its simply perspective.   So many seem terrified of this disease and are prepared to sacrifice any principle, any enjoyment in a vain attempt to avoid any chance of catching it.

But we can’t avoid all risk of injury illness or death.   It is part of life.  Accepting risk and facing up to it is a part of being human.

I just find the acceptance without challenge of undue governmental control over our lives very very depressing.

Its my human right to decide what level of risk I am willing to take.  I also have a responsibility not to harm other people.  Where the law is permitted to interject a dividing line is the very essence of politics.

For me, the virus death risk no longer justifies some of the other societal harms being mooted.  I am very nervous of engendering a society which becomes used to showing papers as a condition of assembly.  Its a Rubicon I don’t think the level of risk justifies.

[midnightblueParticipant 1300xp 6]

Back to the concerns of the Original Post…

Our “Rights” have never been unimpeachable or immune from regulation or common sense restrictions.

I’d die for my Right to Free Speech, but I also agree that yelling, “FIRE!” in a crowded theatre is not Free Speech, but Reckless Endangerment and possibly Assault, Manslaughter, &/or Murder depending on the outcome of that situation.  I also 100% believe that folks spreading disinformation on “News” and social media platforms should be held to that same standard as the individual who yells, “FIRE!”

I’d likewise die for my Right to Peaceable Assembly, but I don’t believe my Right to Peaceable Assembly means I can force my way into any building or privately owned property without adhering to the restrictions by those who own or are liable for the well-being of those in that facility/location.

And that goes back to the Original Post.  If a group running an event I want to go to tells me that I have to follow certain rules to attend (masks, vaccine record proof, no guns, no alcohol, under/over a certain age, wearing pants, etc., etc., etc.), then I have two options.  Follow the rules and attend or exercise my right not to adhere to those rules, and stay home.  Asking someone to follow rules to attend is not and has never been an infringement on the individuals rights.  The individual always has the right not to attend.

Heh, I love the folks that get all up in arms over wearing masks in a grocery store saying that the store is denying the individual their rights…when right on the door for as long as most of us can remember is a sign that says, “No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service.”  Requirements to enter a grocery store aren’t new.  Just the politics.

 

[frankdrebinParticipant 285xp 1]

Sorry, I get all the views, some very eloquent on both sides of the debate, but this thread failed at the first post, which was apparently written ‘with hate in my stomach’

Strange how someone can take the morale high ground (if you can do that based on hate) whilst advocating rioting.

So apparently having to adhere to the organisers terms of entry to an event is now morally wrong (when the terms in question is a covid passport, basically a piece of paper!!) whereas wanton thuggish violence, with he risk of damage, injury or death is the right thing?

Bloody hell…

[collins 16358xp 3]

@midnightblue has nailed this for me and I expect I have a different opinion on masks, politics, civil liberties and favourite food to them.

For me everyone I see causing a huge stink and crisis acting for social media always uses the phrase ‘you’re infringing on my rights’. It is a classic thing of I am more important than you and thus my rights are more important than yours. I would hope we can all agree that it simply isn’t true.

You have the right to have an opinion. as do i. they may differ. but if I am going to be held responsible for your safety whilst you are in my event/property/space you will be expected to follow the rules I set. if you don’t, you will not be allowed in. Why? because when you fail to meet the rules and end up suffering you will hold me responsible for your failings and probably sue me. It is as simple as that.

You have the right not to agree or accept the terms of admittance. You do not have the right to dictate what I should set as the terms of admittance for the benefit of you at the demonstrable expense of others.

[soulman 2945xp 0]

Hate in my stomach means watching this country become what our fathers and mothers fought against. As for taking to the streets… well talking and peace is not working, good luck if you want to go and see a football match.

And will you be downloading the new health App… eat well and you are rewarded…? I kid you not.

As for the Expo.. they did not need to go full security, but i guess the Expo was pressured by the Government, Lets wait and see next week how the show go`s.. cannot wait to watch video after video of people in masks being interviewed !

 

[midnightblueParticipant 1300xp 1]

@midnightblue has nailed this for me and I expect I have a different opinion on masks, politics, civil liberties and favourite food to them.

@collins well at the risk of getting controversial, I say a good steak or Mexican food.  Are we on the same team or bitter enemies?  🙂

 

[warhammergrimace 13766xp 4]

As I’ve said before being asked to wear a mask in crowded indoor environments is not a big ask. It’s hardly an infringement of rights, you have the right to choose not to wear one and not be allowed in.

When I was in the Gulf War we were told to have the plague injection. I didn’t think the risk of contracting plague was high, yet the military deemed it wasn’t a risk worth taking so we had the plague injection.

We took tablets for nerve agents and biological agents that hadn’t been rigorously tested as they should have been. We took them because there was a high risk if we didn’t and came to contact with either nerve or biological agents.

People shout about rights……your rights are only ever what the serving government deems them to be. People shout my rights, forgeting that those they’re shouting about also have rights. So if a show demands that you must comply to rules such as wearing a mask and proving you’ve been vaccinated then you have a choice you either comply with those rules or don’t. They’re within their rights to ask you meet those requirements to attend.

Now I’m not particularly keen on the government making those demands, but if a private company does then you have the right to choose if you comply or not. If you decide not to then you don’t attend, or find another job etc etc Remember it’s their rights to implement those rules. Freedom and rights aren’t just one way in your direction.

[frankdrebinParticipant 285xp 5]

Just…Wow…

‘Hate in my stomach means watching this country become what our fathers and mothers fought against’

That’s very strong and emotive.

It’s also making the very big assumption that all those fathers and mothers referred to all agree with your point view.

We all have our own interpretation of freedom. Guess that’s why it’s called freedom.

Some think they have a right to not wear a mask or not have a vacine.

Others think they have a right to not be put at risk by others who dont take the same level of safeguarding as they do.

‘As for taking to the streets… well talking and peace is not working’ – so we talk, debate, but if we dont agree we riot?? Seriously?? Is that the society that those fathers and mothers fought for, the right to be violent when our democratically elected government does something we dont agree with?

The right to protest, yes. The right to campaign, yes. The right to take over the Beasts of War site with political views, debatable. The right to incite violence ? The right to fight, attack, injury, maim, kill our fellow countrymen. For a covid passport?

 

[khusrauParticipant 1169xp 4]

I think you need to decouple Covid from the actions of Government across the world. Here in the UK we have a government that has elected to push on with legislation on legal liability, the rights of journalists, the rights of citizens to protest and the powers of devolved governments and other institutions of state such as the electoral commission.  Now without commenting on the rights or wrongs of that, it is entirely separate from legislation relating to measures to protect the public and the health service.

As for mothers and fathers, I’m old enough to remember folk crippled by polio.  If you think our mothers and fathers didn’t celebrate that vaccine, or the smallpox vaccine, then you’re very wrong.

And I would prefer not be put at risk because some folks tinfoil is wrapped too tight.

[warhammergrimace 13766xp 2]

People forget that the smallpox vaccine was made compulsory.

The Vaccination Act 1853 made it compulsory for all children born after 1 August 1853 to be vaccinated against smallpox during their first 3 months of life. Parents who failed to get their children vaccinated would be subject to a fine.

[tankkommanderParticipant 6423xp 4]

Our forefathers (who fought for our freedoms) lived in a time of isolation hospitals/wards for diseases such as TB.

And the anti-vax hate speech has reached a new low with calls for doctors and nurses to be hung. I kid you not.

The most telling thing about this is that the anti-vax ‘freedom’ mob are never adding any alternative solutions to the problem…unless that involves denying Covid exists.

Sadly no debate is possible with those that deny facts and push conspiracy theories.

[warhammergrimace 13766xp 5]

You can’t argue with stupid.

 

On one side of the debate we have professional, qualified doctors and scientists, but on the other side we have Laurence Fox, Right Said Fred, Gillian McKeith, David Icke and Piers Corbyn.

It’s a tricky one.

[blinky465 17028xp 7]

Three times I started to reply to this. Three times I gave up.

If you want to opt out of being a responible member of society, and refuse to wear a mask or get vaccinated, then that’s just fine. Go ahead. But do it properly. Opting out means opting out. Not demanding your “right” to participate in events AND refusing to do what is necessary to *protect other people*.

There are so many reasons to rail against the anti-mask, anti-lockdown, anti-vaccine movement. But it’s also just so very tiring arguing against selfishness and ignorance. Wearing a mask upsets you? Don’t wear one. Opt out. Stick to your little bubble of like-minded friends and stay away from other people. Is that so difficult?

[pagan8thParticipant 10863xp 8]

I don’t have a driving license because I can’t drive. That’s my choice.

My passport has expired and I can’t go overseas. That’s my choice.

I don’t feel that my freedom is restricted because of my choices.

I have received the covid jabs. That’s my choice. Had I chosen not to and that prevented me from doing something, the only person to blame is me.

[Author]

Posts