Support NeoGAF

[JumpMan1981]

I don’t understand where are you going with it - he has every right not to get vaccinated. But he has to face consequences of his actions i.e. not having the same liberties as people vaccinated given current sanitary context. Once again - going out to a restaurant or cinema is not a right.

You are so angry you aren't even paying attention properly.

Read my post. I am vaccinated.

I am not concerned about young people, or other people in general, not being vaccinated as I feel it is their choice.

I made my decision and I am comfortable with it. Unlike you, I also understand the concept of consent and so I am fine with other people making their own decisions.

"he has every right not to get vaccinated. But he has to face consequences of his actions i.e. not having the same liberties as people vaccinated given current sanitary context"

You aren't even reading people's posts before you go on your mindless rants. I talked not only about being vaccinated but also about having the EU covid certificate and travelling inside the EU. You are still harping on about me facing the consequences.

I get it. You love this aggressive, angry, style of trying to berate people who won't get vaccinated. Sorry to tell you though that I had both doses of Pfizer ages ago and am totally fine.

I am also totally fine with people not getting it and being around people who haven't got it because that is my, and their, personal decisions.

 

[MilkyJoe]

right so now all you have is arguing over definitions of the relative "sharply" and wondering if i'm drinking?

get tae fuck

Scottish, that an "aye"

 

[MilkyJoe]

From the age of 50 to 80 there is a 30x increase in risk for men and a 36x increase for women.

A gradient is a gradient and that's over 30 years.

 

[funkygunther]

Scottish, that an "aye"

not Scottish and not drinking and it doesn't really make a difference, I know a banged up motor running on fumes when I see one

I'll be there next time you make a total fool of yourself, so that's something you can look forward to

 

[MilkyJoe]

not Scottish and not drinking and it doesn't really make a difference, I know a banged up motor running on fumes when I see one

I'll be there next time you make a total fool of yourself, so that's something you can look forward to

And I'll be waiting for another seemingly unrelated reply with great eagerness

In the mean time, if you find out where the 99.7% came from, do be a lamb and let me know, I've still not found a county with that rate.

Spoiler

 

[funkygunther]

And I'll be waiting for another seemingly unrelated reply with great eagerness

In the mean time, if you find out where the 99.7% came from, do be a lamb and let me know, I've still not found a county with that rate.

Spoiler

the number is irrelevant, you're the one that used it and then failed to understand it or give another number despite two people pointing out how wrong you were

 

[Bernd Lauert]

Has it occurred to you that by not getting vaccinated now, you could be contributing to the continuing mutation of the virus, which could result in that Andromeda strain that does kill you? Not that this is likely, just trying to understand the mindset of 'wait and see' when there's no real point or practical purpose to it.

Yes, but the chance of that happening is even smaller than all the other stuff happening so it's not really a factor. And there is a point to the wait and see approach, you just don't value it because you think everything is safe and The Science™ is settled.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

What does the last line say?

I don’t think you know what consent means, or that line. It doesn’t apply but don’t let it stop you from digging.

 

[Cyberpunkd]

You are so angry you aren't even paying attention properly.

I am paying attention, still don’t get what are you trying to say. It’s is a mix of ‘muh rights’ and something else I don’t think you know clearly yourself.

Feel free to mingle with the unvaccinated, I will do the same. I draw the line when it concerns hospital system - if they want they can stay the fuck home till this thing blows over. Fine with me.

 

[MilkyJoe]

I don’t think you know what consent means, or that line. It doesn’t apply but don’t let it stop you from digging.

It means if you do not consent to the vaccine then your rights are not to be affected in any way.

 

[Punished Miku]

It means if you do not consent to the vaccine then your rights are not to be affected in any way.

Then we get into the question of what are your rights?

 

[Chaplain]

Rarely, there are serious adverse effects of the covid vaccine. You probably have heard of the Miami doctor who died shortly after getting the Pfizer vaccine. I made a video about that already, but since that video, I’ve learned some new things about that case in an autopsy report, which I’ll talk about in my next video. But for this video, I’m going to look at the overall benefits vs risks of the COVID vaccines, particularly the mRNA vaccines Pfizer and Moderna, and the Johnson & Johnson vaccine. The mRNA vaccines contain a tiny piece of mRNA, that tells the cells of the body to make some proteins, in this case, antigens. These antigens then stimulate the immune system to make antibodies that specifically become ready to attack the antigens of the virus. So these mRNA vaccines make the immune system get to work in a very specific, targeted manner, much like a precise missile strike. On the contrary, when a virus infects you, its like a bomb goes off within the immune system. Things are chaotic and messy. And this is why immunological processes like Guiilan Barre syndrome, myocarditis, and immune thrombocytopenia are more likely to occur after a viral infection, and much less likely to occur after a vaccine.

 

[FireFly]

And I'll be waiting for another seemingly unrelated reply with great eagerness

In the mean time, if you find out where the 99.7% came from, do be a lamb and let me know, I've still not found a county with that rate.

The actual CFR (Case Fatality Rate) is much higher, for example 2% for the UK and 1.7% for the US.

Mortality Analyses - Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center

How does mortality differ across countries? Examining the number of deaths per confirmed case and per 100,000 population. A global comparison.

coronavirus.jhu.edu

But the number of people who have had COVID will be higher than those that have received a positive test result. So the IFR (Infection Fatality Rate) will be lower, and can only be imperfectly estimated.

However we know that in Hungary, the registered deaths represent 0.3% of the population. The figure is 0.29% for Bosnia and 0.28% for Czechia. Brazil is sitting at 0.27%, but the deaths don't seem to be stopping.

COVID-19 deaths per capita by country | Statista

COVID deaths worldwide were highest in Peru, topping a list that compares deaths per million in 210 countries worldwide.

www.statista.com

 

[ManaByte]

 

[MilkyJoe]

Then we get into the question of what are your rights?

Everything you could do before.


However, upon checking it appears that the US left UNESCO in 2018, so that chap may well and truly be fucked, if that's where he's from. Land of the free, indeed.

 

[Punished Miku]

Everything you could do before.

I know that's what you mean in a generalized sense. But lots of businesses and governments are clearly out to play hardball, so we have to get specific about it. A lot of this stuff we do everyday is not an actual right.

Do we have a right to enter airports without any restrictions? Do we have a right to go to public school without any vaccines? This is kind of what I'm getting at. People's actual rights are specific, and limited. There's a ton of grey area though which is when things go to court, but you get my drift.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

I know that's what you mean in a generalized sense. But lots of businesses and governments are clearly out to play hardball, so we have to get specific about it. A lot of this stuff we do everyday is not an actual right.

The biggest threat to the public isn't COVID, it's the growing and blatant authoritarianism popping up around the world.

 

[funkygunther]

The biggest threat to the public isn't COVID, it's the growing and blatant authoritarianism popping up around the world.

Define threat, define authoritarianism, define "around the world"

We can all make general statements that probably sound better in our heads

 

[MilkyJoe]

I know that's what you mean in a generalized sense. But lots of businesses and governments are clearly out to play hardball, so we have to get specific about it. A lot of this stuff we do everyday is not an actual right.

Do we have a right to enter airports without any restrictions? Do we have a right to go to public school without any vaccines? This is kind of what I'm getting at. People's actual rights are specific, and limited. There's a ton of grey area though which is when things go to court, but you get my drift.

Yeah, it's really going to depend from country to country. France has gone all out East Germany and here in England are threatening to bring in domestic vaccine passports in order to coerce young people into getting the vaccine. HOWEVER, and it's a big however, tucked away in the fine print of the exemption detail, under guidance for venues and establishments is this little get out of jail free card

.
That last paragraph;

If your customer confirms that they have a SELF DECLARED exemption...

That's the holy grail, that one line there. That same line was on the exemption page for mask wearing.

And that next line "YOU SHOULD ALLOW THEM ACCESS TO YOUR VENUE OR EVENT". This little paragraph fulfills the UDBHR and goes against the government narative.

Want exemption.

Print this and hang it off a Sunflower patterned lanyard

 

[Punished Miku]

The biggest threat to the public isn't COVID, it's the growing and blatant authoritarianism popping up around the world.

Climate change is up there as well.

The solution to that one is going to require a much heavier hand than anything you've seen so far. I'm a fan of freedom, but freedom is letting us all down right now. That's not something I enjoy facing, but it's true. Freedom is the trust that people are smart enough to make the right choices, but that is clearly not happening on a number of fronts. Our last hope is that education can win over disinformation, because the only alternative to that will be authoritarianism. People are going to be angry when the worst affects of climate change begin to start, and become irreversible - and all the free people that lied about it for decades are going to be nailing the final nail into the argument for freedom.

 

[poppabk]

The survival is far greater than 99.7%

this Oxford Uni calculator will give your life expectancy

Licence | QCovid™ risk calculator

qcovid.org

Mine is ;

COVID associated death

0.0028%

1 in 35714

That is not your risk of dying of COVID if you get it, that is your risk of catching and dying of COVID over a 90 day period assuming peak numbers.

Survival rate is your chance of survival once you already have it.

Not sure how you guys assess risk, but if there was a football game at a 35000 capacity stadium and they announced that after the game every 90 days they would be choosing at random 1 person from the crowd to be killed, I would probably want to skip the game.

 

[DeepBreath87]

That is not your risk of dying of COVID if you get it, that is your risk of catching and dying of COVID over a 90 day period assuming peak numbers.

Survival rate is your chance of survival once you already have it.

Not sure how you guys assess risk, but if there was a football game at a 35000 capacity stadium and they announced that after the game every 90 days they would be choosing at random 1 person from the crowd to be killed, I would probably want to skip the game.

What else would you skip? Would you stay home the entire 90 days, based on that minuscule level of risk. It’s easy to skip a hypothetical football game. Would you skip your kid’s graduation? Cancel your wedding? Vacation? There’s always next year right? But what if covid isn’t gone next year?

 

[poppabk]

What else would you skip? Would you stay home the entire 90 days, based on that minuscule level of risk. It’s easy to skip a hypothetical football game. Would you skip your kid’s graduation? Cancel your wedding? Vacation? There’s always next year right? But what if covid isn’t gone next year?

It was just an analogy to show how 1 in 35000 risk sounds low until you put it in a real situation. I can't skip this risk of getting COVID, it's already factored in to that 1:35000 number.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

I'm a fan of freedom, but freedom is letting us all down right now.

If you actually were, you wouldn't say something as retarded as that.

 

[Punished Miku]

If you actually were, you wouldn't say something as retarded as that.

So free people can never make the wrong choice? What if a whole bunch of free people can't even distinguish what is real and what isn't real in the news? Do you think those are going to be useful opinion makers in times of actual danger, when major decisions need to be made?

What you don't yet grasp is that when people start having their security and health threatened, the tolerance for people making the exact wrong decision in the name of freedom will disappear overnight. When climate change hits, no one is going to care what you think is infringing on your rights, and it will be the fault of the people that lied about it for decades - who had the freedom to do the right thing and stubbornly insisted that they wouldn't. Put a stubborn liar up against security concerns and see which one wins out in the end. It wont be pretty, it wont be what I want - but I think that's where we'll end up.

 

[DeepBreath87]

It was just an analogy to show how 1 in 35000 risk sounds low until you put it in a real situation. I can't skip this risk of getting COVID, it's already factored in to that 1:35000 number.

I know. My point is that it’s not as simple as skipping a football game. It’s how much of your life are you going to sacrifice to minimize already minimal risk?

 

[RAÏSanÏa]

The thread is now more or less full of two types of people:

1. Those who believe Covid is a very serious pandemic and that vaccines are our best and only real to way to tackle it. And they (we) get frustrated when others can’t see this.

2. People who are anti-vax, or sympathetic to anti-vax opinion, but know they can’t be explicit or honest about it because they’ll eat a ban.

Therefore, there’s a lot of pointless arguing around the subject, and obfuscating of opinion.

I find this cartoon about antivaxxers from the 30s is almost perfert for describing group 2 and the issues of today. Even the labels.
Anti-vaccination, Faddist(Ginger Ale), Mr. Careless(Got mine), Anti-everything.

These are not the people whose opinions should be given much weight in regards to personal health. They don't really care about you, nor are they paid to, or trained to, or part of the infrastructure that is in place to take care of you.

The only thing the comic doesn't show of the modern era is the platform these types are given with the internet to drive masses of people over a cliff. Still a bit in shock over Tennessee needing that aide to clarify for their legislature that the Governor isn't giving Cow the vaccine to get it to constituents in the meat yesterday. And that was only one of mistakes in their thinking that's influencing their decisions over the health of their constituents.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

So free people can never make the wrong choice?

A choice that you disagree with isn't "wrong".

 

[Punished Miku]

A choice that you disagree with isn't "wrong".

Obviously. What about a choice backed up by the overwhelming majority of scientists for decades?

The dynamic you're missing is that deterioration of basic security / health leads to loss of freedom. Think of the military. Is there a lot of choice and freedom involved in the military - when people are in danger and have to be trusted to carry out important tasks during critically important times without the option to choose something else? No, there's no choice. That's the point. Let the conditions of society deteriorate enough and the same thing will happen.

 

[FunkMiller]

Yeah, it's really going to depend from country to country. France has gone all out East Germany and here in England are threatening to bring in domestic vaccine passports in order to coerce young people into getting the vaccine. HOWEVER, and it's a big however, tucked away in the fine print of the exemption detail, under guidance for venues and establishments is this little get out of jail free card

.
That last paragraph;

If your customer confirms that they have a SELF DECLARED exemption...

That's the holy grail, that one line there. That same line was on the exemption page for mask wearing.

And that next line "YOU SHOULD ALLOW THEM ACCESS TO YOUR VENUE OR EVENT". This little paragraph fulfills the UDBHR and goes against the government narative.

Want exemption.

Print this and hang it off a Sunflower patterned lanyard

Good luck on the legality of that if you get refused and want to use the EA 2010:

“Can the anti-vaxxer belief be protected under the Equality Act 2010? The guidance in Grainger v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4, stated the position as:

• The belief held must be genuinely held.
• It must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available.
• It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour.
• It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.
• It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.”

Don’t think you’ll get very far myself.

Knowing the U.K, wearing that card will get you laughed out of the building, and then laughed out of court if you chose to pursue it.

 

[ManaByte]

Good luck on the legality of that if you get refused and want to use the EA 2010:

“Can the anti-vaxxer belief be protected under the Equality Act 2010? The guidance in Grainger v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4, stated the position as:

• The belief held must be genuinely held.
• It must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available.
• It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour.
• It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.
• It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.”

Don’t think you’ll get very far myself.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Don't change the subject until you've properly acknowledged the response to your former point.

Provisional Mortality Data — United States, 2020

The age-adjusted death rate increased by 15.9% in 2020. Overall death

www.cdc.gov

345K is a lot bigger than 40K.



Do you have a response to this?

You think I'm saying something I'm not.

I'm not a Covid denier. I don't think anyone here is. I'm saying now that everyone who wants to be vaccinated has gotten it and alternative treatments are gaining traction, it's time to start opening back up.

My state in particular has, as of 10 seconds ago, a 2 death 7 day rolling average. I'm not afraid of it because it would be irrational to be afraid of it.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

Obviously. What about a choice backed up by the overwhelming majority of scientists for decades?

The dynamic you're missing is that deterioration of basic security / health leads to loss of freedom. Think of the military. Is there a lot of choice and freedom involved in the military - when people are in danger and have to be trusted to carry out important tasks during critically important times without the option to choose something else? No, there's no choice. That's the point. Let the conditions of society deteriorate enough and the same thing will happen.

You mean a choice like doctors telling people that cigarettes weren't harmful, the same way we're being told experimental vaccines aren't harmful now?

If people keep pushing for freedoms to be restricted, society is going to deteriorate a lot faster.

 

[Punished Miku]

If people keep pushing for freedoms to be restricted, society is going to deteriorate a lot faster.

They'll beg for it. They always do during / after a crisis.

That's why it's a decent idea for free people to try and avoid a crisis typically.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

They'll beg for it. They always do during / after a crisis.

Only the stupid ones.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

I do wonder how this would all be going if the media didn't lose all credibility over the last 5 years.

Perhaps being caught in lie after lie has harmful effects on the population?

 

[Punished Miku]

Only the stupid ones.

I'm not talking about passing judgment on them. Call them stupid or smart, doesn't really matter in the end. The point is that history shows us they exist in large numbers, and this is what happens. Look at any crisis and tell me different. Look at 9/11.

So knowing that this is exactly how things will play out for a large number of people, do you choose to intentionally walk society into one crisis after another and purposefully do anything you can to roadblock basic interventions to deal with the problem in advance? That's my question to you.

If the answer is yes, I want to intentionally try and help destabilize society and exacerbate multiple crises (COVID, climate change), then you're kind of shooting yourself in the foot now, and later when things get worse in terms of the backlash and authoritarianism creep. That's my final attempt to try and explain how your own self-interest is not being served on multiple fronts, but as we know - discussion doesn't seem to have much effect anymore. Good day sir.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

I'm not talking about passing judgment on them. Call them stupid or smart, doesn't really matter in the end. The point is that history shows us they exist in large numbers, and this is what happens. Look at any crisis and tell me different. Look at 9/11.

So knowing that this is exactly how things will play out for a large number of people, do you choose to intentionally walk society into one crisis after another and purposefully do anything you can to roadblock basic interventions to deal with the problem in advance? That's my question to you.

If the answer is yes, I want to intentionally try and help destabilize society and exacerbate multiple crises (COVID, climate change), then you're kind of shooting yourself in the foot now, and later when things get worse in terms of the backlash and authoritarianism creep. That's my final attempt to try and explain how your own self-interest is not being served on multiple fronts, but as we know - discussion doesn't seem to have much effect anymore. Good day sir.

And a lot of people called out the BS of the US and Bush while they were freaking out and overreacting.

So it doesn't make sense to be quiet and let people freak out now.

And the people in charge were saying anyone that disagreed with them were "disloyal, uneducated, selfish" etc. Just like now.

Saying that people should just shut up and do whatever the mob tells you to do when they're freaking out is ridiculous.

 

[FireFly]

It was just an analogy to show how 1 in 35000 risk sounds low until you put it in a real situation. I can't skip this risk of getting COVID, it's already factored in to that 1:35000 number.

These kinds of risks are measured in micromorts, which is a 1 in a million chance of death. You "consume" about 1 micromort per day from non-natural causes, just going about your life. A risk of 1/35000 is 29 micromorts, so that's a month of living normally, or 4 sky dives. It's not an insubstantial risk, but one that may be worth watching a football game for.

 

[MilkyJoe]

Good luck on the legality of that if you get refused and want to use the EA 2010:

“Can the anti-vaxxer belief be protected under the Equality Act 2010? The guidance in Grainger v Nicholson [2010] IRLR 4, stated the position as:

• The belief held must be genuinely held.
• It must be a belief, not an opinion or viewpoint based on the present state of information available.
• It must be a belief as to a weighty and substantial aspect of human life and behaviour.
• It must attain a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance.
• It must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.”

Don’t think you’ll get very far myself.

Knowing the U.K, wearing that card will get you laughed out of the building, and then laughed out of court if you chose to pursue it.

That's from the UK government website, you rantallion, And I've been doing it for a year with the masks and no one said shit. Those Sunflower lanyards are Karen-proof

It amazes me how little people know their rights, must be why they are so eager to hand them over.

PS - Official gov guideline site vs frantically googled article entitled "Can the anti-vaxxer belief be protected under the Equality Act 2010" in order to get one over on a stranger on the interwebs - What are you like?

P.P.S your quote is regarding a Protected Belief (religion or veganism) NOT a medical exemption, you soppy tart

 

[Razorback]

I do wonder how this would all be going if the media didn't lose all credibility over the last 5 years.

Perhaps being caught in lie after lie has harmful effects on the population?

Agreed.

But reverse stupidity isn't intelligence. Just believing the opposite of whatever they say won't give you the truth.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Agreed.

But reverse stupidity isn't intelligence. Just believing the opposite of whatever they say won't give you the truth.

Wooooosh

 

[Razorback]

Wooooosh

Sorry, was there a joke that I missed?

 

[Punished Miku]

And a lot of people called out the BS of the US and Bush while they were freaking out and overreacting.

So it doesn't make sense to be quiet and let people freak out now.

Calling out is fine, if its accurate.

To better complete this analogy to climate change and authoritariasm - during the Bush years it would have been a lot better to listen to Richard Clark and take prevention of terrorist threats more seriously in advance so that we don't enter a crisis. A crisis does no one any favors. Everyone loses. Once the ball started rolling on that crisis, it was exploited for 20 years internationally and domestically (we're still there). The reason that prevention is better is that it's far cheaper, far more effective, and that once people enter that state of fear and decreased security - they don't listen to other opinions much, and government overreach gets created that never really goes away.

And the people in charge were saying anyone that disagreed with them were "disloyal, uneducated, selfish" etc. Just like now.

Saying that people should just shut up and do whatever the mob tells you to do when they're freaking out is ridiculous.

The COVID crisis already is here, so yes the parallels are similar. Shaming, etc. I was talking about the next upcoming crisis mostly. As you can see, once it gets this bad - the tendency to demand more authoritarian response is pretty much unavoidable. Every day we will see more restrictions and mandates. The COVID damage is already done.

 

[Nobody_Important]

Not to just cast aspersions here but it seems we have a lot of neo members suddenly joining in…

Yeah. Funny that.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

If the answer is yes, I want to intentionally try and help destabilize society and exacerbate multiple crises (COVID, climate change), then you're kind of shooting yourself in the foot now, and later when things get worse in terms of the backlash and authoritarianism creep.

BTW, me deciding what's best for myself instead of letting some emotionally unstable nutjob in favour of totalitarianism is not "trying to help destablise society". That is just fucking ridonkulous.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

The COVID crisis already is here, so yes the parallels are similar. Shaming, etc. I was talking about the next upcoming crisis mostly. As you can see, once it gets this bad - the tendency to demand more authoritarian response is pretty much unavoidable. Every day we will see more restrictions and mandates. The COVID damage is already done.

And that's why people should speak out against it - to prevent the creep of restrictions and authoritarianism.

Just rolling over and letting it happen helps no one.

 

[Punished Miku]

BTW, me deciding what's best for myself instead of letting some emotionally unstable nutjob in favour of totalitarianism is not "trying to help destablise society". That is just fucking ridonkulous.

1) Nothing I said is emotionally unstable at all.
2) Nothing I said is in favor of totalitarianism. I said that our last chance to avoid it is education winning over misinformation, and that is what I want - and why I even put effort into these discussions in the first place.
3) "Trying to destabilize society" is what it means to ignore overwhelming scientific evidence and common sense preventative measures on COVID and climate change. You may not like those words, but it's completely accurate.

So, wrong 3x in a row. About the only part you got right is that you're trying to decide what is best for yourself. I believe that. However, you're also failing at that too but just don't know it yet.

And that's why people should speak out against it - to prevent the creep of restrictions and authoritarianism.

Just rolling over and letting it happen helps no one.

That's fine. Best of luck.

 

[FunkMiller]

That's from the UK government website, you rantallion, And I've been doing it for a year with the masks and no one said shit. Those Sunflower lanyards are Karen-proof

It amazes me how little people know their rights, must be why they are so eager to hand them over.

PS - Official gov guideline site vs frantically googled article entitled "Can the anti-vaxxer belief be protected under the Equality Act 2010" in order to get one over on a stranger on the interwebs - What are you like?

P.P.S your quote is regarding a Protected Belief (religion or veganism) NOT a medical exemption, you soppy tart

The point of my post was that you won't be able to draw on the Equalities Act to back up your anti-vax beliefs. Which is pretty clear if you actually read it.

And using medical exemptions to avoid wearing a mask, or getting a vaccine, when you have no decent medical reason not to wear one or get it makes you a bit of a cunt, to be honest. There are a lot of people who genuinely can't do either, and would like to be able to.

 

[ArgleBargleFooferah]

1) Nothing I said is emotionally unstable at all.
2) Nothing I said is in favor of totalitarianism. I said that our last chance to avoid it is education winning over misinformation, and that is what I want - and why I even put effort into these discussions in the first place.
3) "Trying to destabilize society" is what it means to ignore overwhelming scientific evidence and common sense preventative measures on COVID and climate change. You may not like those words, but it's completely accurate.

So, wrong 3x in a row. About the only part you got right is that you're trying to decide what is best for yourself. I believe that. However, you're also failing at that too but just don't know it yet.


That's fine. Best of luck.

I wasn't referring to you as any of those things. I meant the people pushing for more authoritarianism.

And your definition of "destablising society" basically amounts to disagreeing with you.

If I decide what is best for myself instead of letting someone else do it, how is that "failing"?