Healthcare Workers should be Fired

[Immanuel Can]

Are you saying that no medic should help you when you are injured or dying until and unless you have given the medic express permission to do so?

I'm not even saying any medic should have the right to forgo the treatment of any patient. I'm saying that patients have a right to determine their own care. That's quite a different proposition.

I agree as far as the patient has the status and function of a patient vis a vis a medic. But as a member of society vis a vis other members of society the individual has a different status and function.

That doesn't make sense, Belinda.

If you are saying that the patient has a right to determine his/her own care, even contrary to the preferences of a doctor, what gives the mass of uninformed non-doctors the right to force treatment on him/her? That would seem far less obvious even than saying, "The doctor is the expert, and he should decide."

The huddled masses have no particular expertise at all.

[commonsense]

To all those who object to the infringement of individual rights:

IF, having decided for yourself and having found yourself in agreement with TPTB regarding getting your vaccination, would you take the vaccine?

Likewise, if TPTB were to desist from pushing the public to get vaccinated, wouldn’t you find yourself in agreement with the PTB?

There are no tricks here. I just want to establish that I am understanding your position.

My position: I'll get jabbed when and if I deem it necessary.

I won't be bulldogged in to gettin' the jab by family, friends, society, or The State.

Currently: I see no reason to get jabbed, and, even if I were inclined to be jabbed, the evidence, as I see it, indicates the jab is woefully ineffective and potentially harmful.

Tomorrow: we'll see. Tomorrow, a jab may be introduced I find acceptable. Tomorrow, I may see the need to accept this improved jab.

But: not today.

As I say: if you want the jab, please, accept it. I will not.

So, my understanding is that you won’t take the shot because it is unnecessary in your estimation. Right?

[Immanuel Can]

So, my understanding is that you won’t take the shot because it is unnecessary in your estimation. Right?

People don't owe us any explanation as to why they refuse a medical intervention. It's simply their right, for whatever reasons they have. They may think the shot is unnecessary, insufficiently tested, capable of interfering with natural immunities, or downright toxic. They don't owe us any justification of why we don't get to pry open their bodies and pour stuff in.

[henry quirk]

To all those who object to the infringement of individual rights:

IF, having decided for yourself and having found yourself in agreement with TPTB regarding getting your vaccination, would you take the vaccine?

Likewise, if TPTB were to desist from pushing the public to get vaccinated, wouldn’t you find yourself in agreement with the PTB?

There are no tricks here. I just want to establish that I am understanding your position.

My position: I'll get jabbed when and if I deem it necessary.

I won't be bulldogged in to gettin' the jab by family, friends, society, or The State.

Currently: I see no reason to get jabbed, and, even if I were inclined to be jabbed, the evidence, as I see it, indicates the jab is woefully ineffective and potentially harmful.

Tomorrow: we'll see. Tomorrow, a jab may be introduced I find acceptable. Tomorrow, I may see the need to accept this improved jab.

But: not today.

As I say: if you want the jab, please, accept it. I will not.

So, my understanding is that you won’t take the shot because it is unnecessary in your estimation. Right?

As I say: I'll get jabbed when and if I deem it necessary.

I can't be any clearer than that.

[henry quirk]

So, my understanding is that you won’t take the shot because it is unnecessary in your estimation. Right?

People don't owe us any explanation as to why they refuse a medical intervention. It's simply their right, for whatever reasons they have. They may think the shot is unnecessary, insufficiently tested, capable of interfering with natural immunities, or downright toxic. They don't owe us any justification of why we don't get to pry open their bodies and pour stuff in.

Absolutely right. I don't owe anyone an explanation of why, but I'm tryin' to have a temperate, non-hostile conversation with the Robot Overlord. He sez he wants to understand my refusal. It serves my purposes to lend him a hand.

[Belinda]

I'm not even saying any medic should have the right to forgo the treatment of any patient. I'm saying that patients have a right to determine their own care. That's quite a different proposition.

I agree as far as the patient has the status and function of a patient vis a vis a medic. But as a member of society vis a vis other members of society the individual has a different status and function.

That doesn't make sense, Belinda.

If you are saying that the patient has a right to determine his/her own care, even contrary to the preferences of a doctor, what gives the mass of uninformed non-doctors the right to force treatment on him/her? That would seem far less obvious even than saying, "The doctor is the expert, and he should decide."

The huddled masses have no particular expertise at all.

The "mass of uninformed non-doctors " has delegated powers to qualified doctors and similar scientists and engineers to keep the shared environment safe.

[commonsense]

So, my understanding is that you won’t take the shot because it is unnecessary in your estimation. Right?

People don't owe us any explanation as to why they refuse a medical intervention. It's simply their right, for whatever reasons they have. They may think the shot is unnecessary, insufficiently tested, capable of interfering with natural immunities, or downright toxic. They don't owe us any justification of why we don't get to pry open their bodies and pour stuff in.

Right. No one owes an explanation. However, HQ’s answer aids further discussion. For Henry it would seem that the crux of the matter is the necessity of the shot.

So, Henry, what makes you believe that the shot isn’t necessary (again, no tricks here; just trying to drill down to where the rubber meets the road)?

[henry quirk]

For Henry it would seem that the crux of the matter is the necessity of the shot.

Not exactly, no. The crux my seein' the necessity.


So, Henry, what makes you believe that the shot isn’t necessary (again, *no tricks here; just trying to drill down to where the rubber meets the road)?

Accordin' to the antibody test, I've had it and am immune, but even if I weren't, I don't believe beer virus is anything but a nasty cold; I don't believe it's the Caronapocalypse, but, even if it were, the current jabs are, I believe, ineffective and dangerous.

And: no, I'm not interested in a rehash of whether beer virus is or is not the Caronapocalypse. Been there, done that several times over the past year and a half, in-forum and IRL. My reasons and reasoning can be found in multiple places, if you're interested.

This conversation is about, I think, a person's claim to himself vs the claim others believe they have on him. I say others have no claim on him. You seem to be sayin' they do have a claim on him.

*really, you don't have to keep sayin' that...it's meaningless...if you wanna play fast and loose with me, you will, and, if you do, I'll just stop talkin' to you

[commonsense]

Possible reasons that the jab would be unnecessary that I can think of:

1. Covid has been over-hyped
— it is rarely fatal
— it predominantly affects those near end-of-life
— it is a hoax perpetrated by illegitimate news sources
— those who warn of its dangers lack credibility

2. The shot is ineffective
— it doesn’t prevent infection by Covid-19
— it doesn’t protect against the delta variant
— it doesn’t result in herd immunity
— those who proclaim its effectiveness lack credibility

3. Even if it works, it’s unnecessary on account of #1 above

Which of the above are actually true?

EDIT: I had not read your preceding post when I wrote this. Still, it’s pretty good for summarizing up until then.

[Immanuel Can]

The "mass of uninformed non-doctors " has delegated powers to qualified doctors and similar scientists and engineers to keep the shared environment safe.

They have no such legitimate authority. All they've got is power, which is never the same thing.

[Immanuel Can]

Caronapocalypse

More of a Karen-apocalypse.

[henry quirk]

The "mass of uninformed non-doctors " has delegated powers to qualified doctors and similar scientists and engineers to keep the shared environment safe.

They have no such legitimate authority. All they've got is power, which is never the same thing.

I am one of the supposedly uninformed: I delegated nuthin' to nobody.

[henry quirk]

Caronapocalypse

More of a Karen-apocalypse.

Slavers gonna slave.

[Immanuel Can]

Caronapocalypse

More of a Karen-apocalypse.

Slavers gonna slave.

Oh great...

Now I've got Taylor Swift running through my mind.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Do you take any medications at all? Everything has some kind of potential side effect.

Nope. At 59 I'm healthy as a [insert your favorite robust, hard to kill, animal]. When the day comes my physician advises medicines, I'll be the one who decides that I will or won't take his advice.


The main reason for getting as many people vaccinated as possible is so that hospitals don't get overwhelmed.

That's the line, yeah. It may even be true. Now, explain how that obligates me to take the jab?


Nothing sinister or 'conspiratorial' -- so life can get back to relative normality for everyone.

Mebbe, mebbe not. Stiil not seein' where I'm obligated to accept the jab.


There are people with other health problems and other emergencies who can't get the attention they need because of fuckwits who refuse to be vaccinated.

Mebbe, mebbe not. Specifically, though, you have the same burden Commonsense does: Prove that I, Henry Quirk, am a public hazard, a bonafide threat, becuz I will not accept the jab.


Even your hero Trumpy has been vaccinated

So what?

In my dear grandmother's words 'pig-headed'. It's not a terribly intelligent stand to take. A bit like being in a burning car and being told to leave it but refusing to on the grounds of 'freedom'.
You aren't interested in 'freedom' Henry. You just hate being told what to do. I doubt if you are a genuine 'salmon'. I've spent my whole life 'going against the flow' but that's only because 'the flow' is usually wrong. Not in this case though.
I suspect that your cockiness stems from the fact that you've already had the virus, in which case you will have natural immunity (for a certain amount of time anyway)--although I doubt if it was the delta variant. Those who are advocating for 'natural immunity' might as well say that it's better for children to get diptheria because it gives them 'natural immunity'. That's loon territory.