Is it the mRNA thing that sets it apart?
The truth presented in a naive way.
In the US, covid is still the third leading cause of death. It is deadlier than measles.
Yep. Sadly, it’s not just these morons who are impacted. You, me, our families are impacted because these idiots only want to believe in the science that is in line with their political beliefs. If Trump went hard I mean real hard at promoting vaccines followed by Fox News and the rest of the RW propaganda apparatus, these red states wouldn’t be having issues with these preventable diseases.
Why do you refer to it as "COVID injections" which it's not, while calling other vaccines what they are?
Source? According to Merriam-Webster it's: " aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice) "
This take is weird to me. Measles vaccines and Covid vaccines are very different. Judging someone for questioning that difference is ridiculous.
Merriam-Webster would be the last source I would trust with that definition due to their actions in the Amy Coney Barrett confirmation hearings. For those not aware, ACB responded to a question saying she would not discriminate against anyone on the basis of sexual preference. For saying that, Senator Hirono immediately condemned ACB as an anti-LGBTQ bigot because the term 'sexual preference' implied that sexual orientation was a choice. Within hours after Senator Hirono making the claim that it was a term of hate speech used by bigots, Merriam-Webster changed their definition to retroactively justify the claim. They wanted ACB to be condemned as an anti-LGBTQ bigot and so they charged their definition after the fact to make it fit.
Since most people are not rational, presentation of the truth matters if you want to encourage certain behaviors, like vaccination.
No moral judgment was intended in my calling his take naive, nor do the actual differences subtract from my point.
Post hoc ergo propter hoc is a well-know fallacy, even if Krakauer was correct about the timing of the change.
"Reasoning will never make a Man correct an ill Opinion, which by Reasoning he never acquired" -- Jonathon Swift
Wishing for a thing to be true does not make it so. They did it on purpose and admitted as much in writing. Merriam-Webster released a statement when everyone asked WTF.
This does not mean the update was intended to condemn Barrett. Senator Hirono was referred to a popular sentiment at the time, and dictionaries reflect popular usage.
Gee I wonder why. Why don’t you take a wild guess
I appreciate your point of view and have zero doubt on your intention or sincerity. We just disagree. I think the massaging the truth in order to encourage certain behaviours is very much not the way to go and leads to other sequelae
Because you like to use inaccurate language to illicit a negative emotional response towards that thing from the people reading your post?
That was definitely not a popular sentiment at the time. It wasn't even much of a fringe sentiment. I live on the bleeding edge of the culture war and even I had never heard of the left trying to cancel someone for vowing not to discriminate on the basis of sexual preference. At the time, the struggle session shamers were pushing a cake-and-eat-it-too idea of it being fluid and being biologically based. They believed that many people were gay all along but society had pressed them into straight conformity. Senator Hirono came out of left field which was why everyone went scrambling for the dictionary.
