(That's an everyday speech 'imply', not a mathematical 'imply'; where of course the existence of sets containing x says nothing about the existence of sets not containing x.)
actual facts
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/covid-deaths-in-israel-h...
look at that chart and then recall the absolutely mad state so many people went into Summer 2021
"time to blame the 'unvaccinated'"
"time to inject them against their will"
"time to violate their basic human rights"
https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/i-know-what-you-did-last...
maybe, just maybe, the "unvaccinated" were able to see something you weren't and chose the better path
Even if they did work, the profile of who was at risk was clear, it wasn’t healthy young people. So why was it pushed on healthy young people?
From the outset the risk reward ratio was not clear for those without high comorbidites, the minute the myocarditis signal showed up it should have been pulled for most people.
Bearing in mind we now know myocarditis is just one of a multitude of negative side effects.
So why did it go on being pushed and coerced to healthy people, actively harming them?
How is that selfish?
> If you would like to be selfish, you should do it in a very intelligent way. The stupid way to be selfish is … seeking happiness for ourselves alone. … the intelligent way to be selfish is to work for the welfare of others.” - Dalai Lama
Specific individual rights can and do trump collective rights, but this is a conversation we have to have as a society. For instance, if I am down range, my individual right trumps everyone’s right to fire a gun down that range. It’s the flip side of the same coin. Positive freedoms are zero sum with negative freedoms. Realizing that is step one to having a productive conversation about these things.
Once we get past that fact, by realizing that it is zero sum, and your individual right takes away some collective right (and vice versa) we can look at specific instances and debate those. But when the conversation begins with “you’re taking away my rights”, the rest of the conversation is guaranteed to be unproductive, because, depending on your perspective, both outcomes take away someone’s rights.
I agree, though:
a) I didn't make that claim
b) You may as well just say "one right does not always trump another", which is just as true and more insightful
Which makes this part:
> This lack of nuance in your argument is absurd.
actually absurd. And this part:
> The selfish part is suggesting that your individual rights trump everyone else’s rights.
as I've already pointed out, is not something I claimed. This was my claim:
“To protect or support one individual's rights is to protect or support everyone's individual rights."
Perhaps you'd like to try again, and this time actually address me with some respect, not least by actually replying to what was written and not what is most convenient to you in the fantasy argument you've spilled out from your head.
Yay for facts, and not emotions! For the obtuse: the last sentence was sarcastic.
Give me a long detailed scientific paper and then maybe it's worth considering.
The shots were sold as “If you get this shot you won’t get the virus” but apparently people still are getting the virus. And not just getting the virus, but dying from it. And dying from it in greater numbers than before the shots! WTF is up with that?!
Clearly the shots don’t work as they were supposed to.
And they are killing people. Excess deaths are way up in mRNA injected countries.
And they are preventing people from being born. Birth rates are way down in mRNA injected countries.
Not good.
From 1 screenshot graph! Is that all the data you need to draw your conclusions? Is the graph even real, or is a graph from a random blog good enough because it supports your viewpoint? (Let's be honest, "both sides" have this deficiency; "This PNG supports my viewpoint, I'm right!"). Let's see the vax rates (to me the page is trying to trick people by presenting "Over 95% are vaccinated" but that's for people over the age 50. Let's see the rate of "returning to normal" and partying and mingling by people who think since they were vaxxed 6 months ago they were safe.
> And they are preventing people from being born. Birth rates are way down in mRNA injected countries.
Oooh... it must be the vaccine! How about the fact that there's been economic instability since the pandemic? Nah: mRNA introduced, birth rates down, must be mRNA!
Look, birth rates have been down since 2007, oh, must be Bill Gates' time machine: https://www.aei.org/economics/the-reasons-for-americas-birth...
Sorry if you're insulted, but geez, either this comment slaps some sense into you (here I am fighting against a windmill) that you're an idjit who needs to be more scientific about his way of thinking, or you're just going to reaffirm your beliefs, because it's more comforting to think that you have a clue and everyone else are the idjits[2]. A toast to that!
[1] Yeah TBH it's a foreign substance, I don't know what liquid they injected into me, at the end of the day I had my faith in the scientists making and checking the vaccine, just like we all put faith that the burger we're eating have been checked properly - by whoever is in charge for checking those things - for mad cow and other diseases.
[2] https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont... - Yes, arguably your "facts" won't change the minds of "I have faith in the vax" people either...
It's Google's chart. Search for "covid", then select Israel from the country drop down.
The poster you replied to is asserting that this chart should look much better by now, given the promises made when the vaccine when it was introduced. I don't see why you need "a long detailed scientific paper" to agree or disagree with this.