Vaccination Participation Pay Program
#281
#282
Memento mori is also a big thing with Orthodox Christians and Catholics. It has been since the very earliest days of the Church. There's a several-hundred year old chapel in Poland whose walls are covered with 3,000 skulls called "Skull Chapel." The crypt below the chapel contains 21,000 skeletons. The idea is to remind people of their mortality. Today, there's a nun who's trying to raise awareness around the idea of memento mori, keeps a ceramic skull on her desk, and tweets something every day regarding our impending deaths.
#283
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 5,926
The vaccinated can be fully infected and fully transmissible still carrying the same if not more viral load than an unvaccinated person. Only difference is vaccinated person is more likely going to be at work as a walking super spreader than the unvaccinated person. You would be safer sitting next to someone unvaccinated than you would be a vaccinated person.
You're stipulating by fiat that the unvaccinated are less likely to get infected when you say that one faces a greater risk sitting next to the vaccinated.
It's certainly true that the vaccinated can be infected, and can pass on the virus, like the unvaccinated. The difference is potential degree to which the virus, and associated disease, can progress in the vaccinated vs. the unvaccinated.
It doesn't really matter whether you're infected by a vaccinated person, or an unvaccinated person, if you get the virus. What does matter is the degree to which the disease may impact you, should you get infected.
If you're a vaccinated person sitting next to a vaccinated person, you can still get infected. Chances are very low that either of your will suffer significant complications.
If you're an unvaccinated person sitting next to a vaccinated person, you can still get infected. Chances are very low that the vaccinated person will suffer significant complications. You, not so much.
The vaccinated are also far less likely to become infected, or to transmit the virus to others.
At this stage, give the numbers who have been vaccinated, the sample is more than adequate to have evaluated the effects and side effects. The vaccination process may have started out as an emergency authorization, and experimental in nature. That is no longer the case.
Personally, I'm vaccinated, and when opportunity allows, I'll pick up the booster, as well. Do as you will. It makes no difference to me. If you attempt to make stupid assertions such as the unfounded notion that the vaccinated somehow present a greater health hazard to you or anyone else, insofar as the virus is concerned, expect to be called out on it. If you're going to cry that the sky is falling at least find a leg to stand on.
#284
In other posts, you've labeled abortion as a religious issue. Abortion is an example of an issue that can involve both philosophy and/or religion. It also involves a lot of science. While lots of folks invoke religion in their views regarding abortion, it's entirely possible to contruct a position for or against abortion from a completely secular point of view.
So, it'd be informative to know where APC draws the line between philosophy and religion. Further, is simply mentioning anything that involves anything to do with any kind of religion off limits? Is it not kosher to reference, for example, the fact that six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust? Can we not say something like, "Merry Christmas," or "Happy Easter," or <cringe> "#blessed"? Where's the line drawn?
#285
Lots of overlap and intersection between philosophy and religion. Where do you draw the line between where "philosophy" stops and "religion" begins? Stoicism itself can, and is viewed by some, as a religion. Seneca, for example, frequently references the gods in his writings.
In other posts, you've labeled abortion as a religious issue. Abortion is an example of an issue that can involve both philosophy and/or religion. It also involves a lot of science. While lots of folks invoke religion in their views regarding abortion, it's entirely possible to contruct a position for or against abortion from a completely secular point of view.
So, it'd be informative to know where APC draws the line between philosophy and religion. Further, is simply mentioning anything that involves anything to do with any kind of religion off limits? Is it not kosher to reference, for example, the fact that six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust? Can we not say something like, "Merry Christmas," or "Happy Easter," or <cringe> "#blessed"? Where's the line drawn?
In other posts, you've labeled abortion as a religious issue. Abortion is an example of an issue that can involve both philosophy and/or religion. It also involves a lot of science. While lots of folks invoke religion in their views regarding abortion, it's entirely possible to contruct a position for or against abortion from a completely secular point of view.
So, it'd be informative to know where APC draws the line between philosophy and religion. Further, is simply mentioning anything that involves anything to do with any kind of religion off limits? Is it not kosher to reference, for example, the fact that six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust? Can we not say something like, "Merry Christmas," or "Happy Easter," or <cringe> "#blessed"? Where's the line drawn?
If it involves anything supernatural, that's religion. A philosopher might happen to be religious, but we're not going to get into that here.
If you can't keep them straight then just steer clear.
#286
For our purposes, if it's about a person's thoughts and processes about relating to life and other people, that's philosophy.
If it involves anything supernatural, that's religion. A philosopher might happen to be religious, but we're not going to get into that here.
If you can't keep them straight then just steer clear.
If it involves anything supernatural, that's religion. A philosopher might happen to be religious, but we're not going to get into that here.
If you can't keep them straight then just steer clear.
But then, what about how the issue of abortion figures prominently in the covid vax debate? Many are arguing that because cells derived from aborted fetuses were used in the development of the vaccines, a vax mandate violates their first and fourteenth amendment rights due to their opposition to abortion. Many of the people that fit into that camp base that argument on their faith in something you would call "supernatural" but many of them would call "very real." So, who's right? Is what they believe in supernatural or real?
That issue also could involve what various religious leaders, like the Pope and the Dalai Lama, have had to say about vaccinations. But we can't discuss what they've said I suppose because they are "religious" figures even though the Pope and the Dalai Lama are very real people? There's nothing "supernatural" in the slightest about either one of them. Same with the various imams and rabbis who have spoken out in support of the vaccines.
It seems like "supernatural", then, isn't really sufficient to describe the area that's off-limits for discussion here on APC.
#287
But then, what about how the issue of abortion figures prominently in the covid vax debate? Many are arguing that because cells derived from aborted fetuses were used in the development of the vaccines, a vax mandate violates their first and fourteenth amendment rights due to their opposition to abortion. Many of the people that fit into that camp base that argument on their faith in something you would call "supernatural" but many of them would call "very real." So, who's right? Is what they believe in supernatural or real?
That issue also could involve what various religious leaders, like the Pope and the Dalai Lama, have had to say about vaccinations. But we can't discuss what they've said I suppose because they are "religious" figures even though the Pope and the Dalai Lama are very real people? There's nothing "supernatural" in the slightest about either one of them. Same with the various imams and rabbis who have spoken out in support of the vaccines.
It's good enough for the mods.
#289
No it's not, you can have philosophical thoughts about how you relate to other people and the world in general without any supernatural involvement. Philosophy and Religion are different words in the dictionary.
#290
“Sure you can. But that won't necessarily get you a religious exemption for vaccination.
The fetal cell thing seems the most likely avenue to me, and it's also more likely to be sincere since that's a common religious doctrine. But if an employer wants to pick nits, they can ask about your past use of all the OTHER meds which share that problem...
Going to sign an affidavit attesting that you've never used motrin, tylenol, tums, etc? Hopefully your medical records or 1C medical app doesn't contradict that. I'd think carefully before going on the written record with a patent falsehood, no way to take that back and you never know when it might come to light down the road.”
The fetal cell thing seems the most likely avenue to me, and it's also more likely to be sincere since that's a common religious doctrine. But if an employer wants to pick nits, they can ask about your past use of all the OTHER meds which share that problem...
Going to sign an affidavit attesting that you've never used motrin, tylenol, tums, etc? Hopefully your medical records or 1C medical app doesn't contradict that. I'd think carefully before going on the written record with a patent falsehood, no way to take that back and you never know when it might come to light down the road.”
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post