Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Jeff Buchanan]

Yesterday, the State Department listed 80 countries Americans should not travel to. EIGHTY!!! The reason for the update to the no travel list was to conform to the CDC's Levels system that lists most of the 80 countries on State's list as Level 4 (Don't travel there due to COVID).

What isn't accounted for is Americans being vaccinated at very high levels. Last week, the CDC published another intentional scare Americans bull-shit announcement that 5800 people had been re-infected after being fully vaccinated ...... ooooooooh. This number was out of 77M fully vaccinated persons.

It didn't take long for people to go, hey, that's a 1:11000 chance of getting re infected after I get vaccinated, right? Well, yes it is. Moreover, this risk ratio is just for getting re-infected. Your risk of serious illness or death from that reinfection is as close to zero as one can get.

So, if I have that low of risk of getting re-infected and zero risk of getting really sick and/or dying why in hell should I not travel to country A, B or C, if they'll have me with proof of vaccination (Greece just opened it's boarders to anyone who can show proof of vaccination, France will probably follow)? BTW the closest risk of dying from something other than getting re-infected is getting electrocuted (1:13000).

Greece and the Greek Isles are really nice in July. I'm going. I can already book a cruise out of Athens. Cruise ports are open there while they are still closed to cruise ships in the US.

[Hannibal]

My sympathy for anyone who is eligible and doesn't take the vaccine is non-existent.

And I get a good bit of satisfaction when a virus denier gets the virus. Fuck those morons.

There's some point at which the tradeoff between taking the vaccine and taking your chances on a 99.99% survival rate for Covid makes sense, but it's probably for people much younger than all of us in this forum.

[CGVT]

No. It is about protecting others as well as yourself as is the case with all vaccines

[Hannibal]

Once everybody has had a chance to take the vaccine it becomes about protecting you. In Ted Nugent's case, he could have been easily fully vaccinated by now.

[lineygoblue]

I can understand why some are hesitant to get vaccinated. No, I'm not talking about the 'there's microchips in the vaccine' crowd. Back in the late 50's and early 60's when I was starting grammar school, my parents refused to allow me to have the Polio vaccine. They did so for religious reasons. That was their Constitutional right. They exercised it. As I got older, they later relented, and I was vaccinated. And for good measure, when I joined the USCG, all of my vaccinations were brought up to date. In later years, when my mother legally adopted my niece, she had her fully vaccinated before attending school. People change.

So, I don't automatically say "F them" to ALL who refuse to get vaccinated. Some refuse due to constitutionally protected, legitimate reasons. Best policy to follow, is if you are upset because others aren't getting vaccinated, then get vaccinated yourself, and their choice will have no effect on you. The only ones they affect, are others who choose not to be vaccinated.

That almost sounded like a pro-abortion statement.

[CGVT]

Fuck em. Their “choice” puts others in danger.

[lineygoblue]

And a woman's "choice" of an abortion kills a pre-born human being.

I'd say that's putting another life in danger. Yes?

[Hannibal]

Fuck em. Their “choice” puts others in danger.

It only endangers other people who don't want to take the vaccine.

[CGVT]

And a woman's "choice" of an abortion kills a pre-born human being.

I'd say that's putting another life in danger. Yes?

Depends on when "life" begins. A clump of cells in not a human being.

YMMV

[Jeff Buchanan]

I don't think there's a reasonable argument that counters the reality that the more people that get vaccinated, the quicker the global population returns to some level of normalcy. Normalcy returns not as a result of the facts on the ground but rather on individual government's perceptions of circumstances. It should not be complicated like this. Facts on the ground should drive public health policy. Those of us here keeping track know this isn't the case. Perceptions, often not founded in realty, are driving them - CDC is a case in point.

Having said that, if you don't have any legitimate medical or religious reasons for not getting a COVID shot(s), you're contributing to the slowdown of return to some level of post-COVID normalcy and should be drawn and quartered. 😁

[lineygoblue]

Depends on when "life" begins. A clump of cells in not a human being.

YMMV

But its still a "choice", right?

Roe v Wade was decided not on when life begins, but on a "privacy" basis. Which is the same part of the Constitution that protects religious liberty.

And Roe would fail miserably if it ever had to stand the test of when life begins. Even the quackiest doctor would have to admit that heartbeat and brain activity can be detected as early as 5 weeks.

[Hannibal]

blm-media-trial-stonetoss-political-cartoon.png?fit=715%2C500.png

[Ghengis Jon]

Liney, abortion, like assisted suicide, is a subject where the law and religion has no place. These decisions are individual choice of the deepest essence. What you do with your body during life's course, or it's ending, is NO ONE'S business but your own. I have no right, nor should I, to influence decisions of that nature that you make for yourself. If you find it abhorrent that your tax dollars would be spent on such issues, then that is a specific issue for the ballot box.

Victor Frankl, a Holocaust survivor, psychiatrist and philosopher, pointed out that man is inherently free, even under dire circumstances. In situations where gov't (or religion) tries to impose it's will on an inherently free person with the severest of sanctions, that person can always choose death. Man always has a choice, it is an undeniable right.

Questions that fundamentally affect one's being, belong fundamentally to the individual, not gov't or religion. When life begins is an irrelevant and valueless argument.

[lineygoblue]

So Jon. If I get drunk, go out on I-75 and hit a car carrying a pregnant woman who is 3 months along, causing her death and that of her "fetus", should I be charged with one or two counts of negligent homicide? The law certainly will have a say in a case like that. And rightly so. When life begins is a significant matter in a case like that.

Why it doesn't carry over into a situation where a pre-born human being is aborted for the sake of (in)convenience is something that I guess I'll have to remain dumb and ignorant about. In my stupidity, I just can't get past equating a life with a heartbeat and brain activity as a blob of cells. If that means I'm stupid, I'll remain stupid.

I completely disagree that law and religion have no place in the discussion of assisted suicide or abortion. I've stated my reasons previously in here, and we will have to agree to disagree.

[UMStan White]

What "religious belief" can justify a parent's decision to refuse to vaccinate a child against polio?