So going with the data you have on hand, but then changing your position when more data says proves your current position is wrong is lying?
@WuWei doesn’t believe in unfettered individualism, he believes in unfettered freedom.
Hence he claims that it is okay for him to drive drunk so long as nobody gets hurt, or shoot into a crowd so long as he doesn’t hit anybody.
Does he? I don’t think you understand what he believes.
Harm ~ Potential Harm.
You just keep proving up that prior restraint thing for me. Thanks.
Yes…right…my mistake…any action should be permissible unless it causes harm…then the harm must be redressed.
In general…I agree.
Except where that breaks down in a public health crisis is where an action of yours can cause harm, but the odds the harm can be directly traced back to your action are nearly zero.
Why ideology is bad. I may have the ideology of a Hammer. But not every situation is a Nail.
That doesn’t mean the 0.1% of the time the situation isn’t a Nail, my freedom to be a Hammer is forever lost.
He didn’t change his position. In fact he said he’s do it again next time.
You did it in this thread.
Why? You realize that is the rationalization for all prior restraint right?
And you keep misusing prior restraint. You’re welcome.
I expanded on that post.
No prior restraint is fantastic…until one hits a situation where no prior restraint doesn’t work.
No I didn’t. If you don’t understand, ask.
Said he’ll do what next time?
I am sure that you believe that to be true.
There is only one of us who is vaccinated that is advocating for people being unvaccinated.
That is the strange part.
I’ll say.
A commercial airplane isn’t public property. An airline isn’t publicly owned. That being said, they keep getting a lion’s share of taxpayer money.
That is the no harm, no foul philosophy of freedom.
It’s surreal. Most people on here wore masks when needed and got vaccinated when tbe could but will argue against it all day long.
I don’t really understand this attempted analogy. You talk like the choice is yours, it’s not.
In general I agree with the sentiment, but it is incomplete.
Take carrying a gun. Just because I carry a gun doesn’t mean I have to use it. In fact it is probably an inappropriate response in all but 0.1% of situations. But because some people did some thing some where, there are those, many, who would take my hammer away.
These “decisions” are being imposed, not chosen. Which means they aren’t decisions at all.
I support the vaccination for me. If somebody asks me my opinion about it, I will tell them with the caveat of for me, my point of view, the way I see the science.
What I will not do is decide for them and/or unperson them for their decision. If I disagree with them, I simply stay away from them.
And that goes for pretty much everything.
If I decide to board a plane with 150 people on it, I make several assumptions:
- They are not all really vaccinated, even if they claim it.
- Some of them are sick.
- A couple of them are crazy.
- A couple of them are carrying a weapon of some kind and know how to use it.
- If I didn’t get the first punch on a couple of them I’d get the hell beat out of me and maybe to death. And might anyway.
- At least one of them is thinking about opening the cabin door in flight.
- At least one of them has committed a major violent crime, like murder.
- Several of them are rape victims.
- Several are addicts and high now.
- Several are drunk.
- At least one of the stewardesses is a basic bitch or Karen.
- If any of them decide to act on it, I am going to wish I had my hammer. But I won’t, because somebody else decided.
Every flight.
And the same kind of list for any shared space. Restaurants, bars, concerts, etc.
Most of the time it’s ok, but it’s always there. It is the environment I chose to enter. And deal with.
How do you know the restaurant you are eating in is in compliance with anything, much less everything?
You’re going to go to NYC and show them your vaccination papers to get in; are they going to show theirs for every employee to every customer? Are you going to check the papers of the other customers too?
I believe the vaccine is safe for the vast majority of citizens and I hope they take it, for their own sake. Not for mine.
I think the private sector should be able to set the conditions for admission without coercion either way. If one side is going to coerce, it opens the door to the other side.
It is not the government’s purview to protect me and mine from you and yours, it can’t do it. Anymore than police can protect me from you if you decide to harm me. All it can do is punish you after you harm me.
2 Likes
I’m not arguing against either. I argue against government mandates.
Ok…the government has mandated. Businesses are protecting their bottom line.
The latter is not a concern for me. The former certainly is.
Sure he does. Words have meanings. And there is an objective truth.
