Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
People keep saying stuff like this, and it's like... That's our end goal? Just to end freedom? Really? Like, no higher purpose? It's just the most idiotic bull**** I keep hearing repeated.
But people think this one is special, just because it's new. You're used to seatbelt laws, and helmet laws, and school vaccinations laws, and speeding laws, and restaurant health codes, and even requirements as to which side of the road you drive on. So why is this one so different? Just because it's new and there's such a furor about it, that's the only reason. It's not more restrictive than any of the ones I mentioned.
dude whether it's rational or not people see this one as different because it hasn't gone through extensive longer term studies to monitor for long term effects, there are distinct albeit thankfully not too common side effects that can be very serious and you're talking about a virus that for the majority of people is not that serious and wildly disproportionately affects the eldery, the unwell and the overweight/metabolically challenged.
The first edict of medicine is first do no harm so young healthy people not wanting to risk taking something that has a 1 in 50,000 chance of giving them myocarditis isn't irrational. Mandating something in this situation is a slippery slope and comparing this to seatbelts, all the childhood diseases, polio etc is just a little silly at best and disingenuous at worst.