Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions

Are you for or against Mandatory Vaccinations

  • For

    Votes: 292 57.4%
  • Against

    Votes: 221 43.4%

  • Total voters
    509

Remove this Banner Ad

Apr 29, 2012
24,113
34,585
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
How do you quantify that you have a higher chance of dying in a car accident? For the last 5 years the national average per deaths on the road every month is 79. Now if we assume every single person that drives a car has covid, are you seriously suggesting only 79 would die per month?
Probably less
 

Romeoh1

Premiership Player
Apr 27, 2021
3,473
4,712
AFL Club
Geelong
Looks like that might be the case. Hopefully it doesn’t get to that.
It will be like that for awhile. And you will just have to accept being excluded. Probably when we get to 90% of sensible people being vaccinated, it’ll ease up.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Aug 25, 2005
11,642
16,690
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
I wear them because I choose to wear them, sometimes I don't wear them. I wouldn't tell someone else to wear them or not wear them.

I've gotta ask....

So although it's literally illegal to not wear a seatbelt, and the government has mandated that you must wear one for your own safety if you get in a car - you're cool with it. Even though a vast, vast majority have no choice but to use a car to function. You're Ok with this?

But not being vaccinated is not illegal, and you don't have to get it unless you're in only a handful of professions - and you're strongly against it??

I'm battling with the logic here.

You'd jump in your car and comply with your freedom being taken from you by being forced to wear a seatbelt - but then arrive at work and crack the shits that your freedom is being taken from you by being forced to do something by your employer?
 
Apr 29, 2012
24,113
34,585
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
I've gotta ask....

So although it's literally illegal to not wear a seatbelt, and the government has mandated that you must wear one for your own safety if you get in a car - you're cool with it. Even though a vast, vast majority have no choice but to use a car to function. You're Ok with this?

But not being vaccinated is not illegal, and you don't have to get it unless you're in only a handful of professions - and you're strongly against it??

I'm battling with the logic here.

You'd jump in your car and comply with your freedom being taken from you by being forced to wear a seatbelt - but then arrive at work and crack the shits that your freedom is being taken from you by being forced to do something by your employer?
I see the benefit in using seatbelts at high-speed, so i do it. I don't see the benefit in the vaccine so other than the coersion I wouldn't have had it. I don't agree anything should be forced onto anyone unless it justifies the harm principle so as such i'd never suggest that you or anyone else has to wear a seatbelt or get the vaccine. As for rallying against government - on seatbelts I agree that they're helpful, so i don't protest, covid vaccines being mandatory, i don't think is helpful, hence I protest it. See the difference?
 
Sep 20, 2009
10,478
15,072
Pascoe Vale
AFL Club
Geelong
I see the benefit in using seatbelts at high-speed, so i do it. I don't see the benefit in the vaccine so other than the coersion I wouldn't have had it. I don't agree anything should be forced onto anyone unless it justifies the harm principle so as such i'd never suggest that you or anyone else has to wear a seatbelt or get the vaccine. As for rallying against government - on seatbelts I agree that they're helpful, so i don't protest, covid vaccines being mandatory, i don't think is helpful, hence I protest it. See the difference?

Helping to protect people who cannot get vaccinated due to legitimate medical conditions....that doesn't satisfy this criteria for you?
 
Apr 29, 2012
24,113
34,585
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Helping to protect people who cannot get vaccinated due to legitimate medical conditions....that doesn't satisfy this criteria for you?
No, because they could catch the virus practically almost as easily from someone who is vaccinated.

Say an unvaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we were to assume a 100% liklihood of transmission, that individual would catch covid. Now say a vaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we assume the same 100% likelihood of transmission, less the percentage that the vaccinne allegedly reduces transmission (approximately 60%), that person could catch covid, and if they didn't at that time would likely still catch covid the second time they came into interaction, or the third.

I'm not pro-mandatory vaccines for something that is a coin toss more effective than doing nothing for those individuals.

The ONLY reason to get vaccinated is if you are worried about personal effects to you and to reduce the severity of illness TO YOU.

Therefore it has no impact on harm principle and cannot be mandated under a libertarian system of government. Any effort to mandate the vaccine or coerce its acceptance is totalitarian and that is a fact.
 
Aug 25, 2005
11,642
16,690
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
I see the benefit in using seatbelts at high-speed, so i do it. I don't see the benefit in the vaccine so other than the coersion I wouldn't have had it. I don't agree anything should be forced onto anyone unless it justifies the harm principle so as such i'd never suggest that you or anyone else has to wear a seatbelt or get the vaccine. As for rallying against government - on seatbelts I agree that they're helpful, so i don't protest, covid vaccines being mandatory, i don't think is helpful, hence I protest it. See the difference?

Yes, I do.

It feels quite hypocritical to be honest though.

Reads a bit like you're Ok with being forced to do something when it suits you, but not Ok when it doesn't.
 
Sep 20, 2009
10,478
15,072
Pascoe Vale
AFL Club
Geelong
No, because they could catch the virus practically almost as easily from someone who is vaccinated.

Say an unvaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we were to assume a 100% liklihood of transmission, that individual would catch covid. Now say a vaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we assume the same 100% likelihood of transmission, less the percentage that the vaccinne allegedly reduces transmission (approximately 60%), that person could catch covid, and if they didn't at that time would likely still catch covid the second time they came into interaction, or the third.

I'm not pro-mandatory vaccines for something that is a coin toss more effective than doing nothing for those individuals.

The ONLY reason to get vaccinated is if you are worried about personal effects to you and to reduce the severity of illness TO YOU.

Therefore it has no impact on harm principle and cannot be mandated under a libertarian system of government. Any effort to mandate the vaccine or coerce its acceptance is totalitarian and that is a fact.
Ok, so we're back to the beginning again with the standard antivax arguments claiming vaccines are useless if they're not 100% perfect, and how herd immunity is bullshit.

You guys really need to learn some new lines.
 
Ok, so we're back to the beginning again with the standard antivax arguments claiming vaccines are useless if they're not 100% perfect, and how herd immunity is bullshit.

You guys really need to learn some new lines.

The looney bunch are pretty hilarious, when in doubt just go back to the same line as before, waiting for the my body my choice line to be next lol
 
Aug 25, 2005
11,642
16,690
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
If we assume the same 100% likelihood of transmission, less the percentage that the vaccinne allegedly reduces transmission (approximately 60%), that person could catch covid, and if they didn't at that time would likely still catch covid the second time they came into interaction, or the third.

% don't work like that.

I don't think you're fully understanding the figures. What you're describing is what I would call an incredibly strong case FOR everyone being vax'd.

If you go from 100% down to 60%, that's huge.

Of course the key is that if I didn't catch it because I was vax'd, then went to someone else's house, they are not at risk of catching it either.
Then when we both visit other houses, those people are not at risk.

etc. etc.

For each vax'd person in the community, the chain of transmission is nearly twice as likely to be broken.

This is why it's a community health response, as opposed to a 'yeah but it's my health, why do you care if I'm vax'd it not' situation.

The more unvax'd people in the community, the less effective that 60% efficacy becomes overall because contact with infected people will be more common.

If 100% of people were vax'd, the virus would be wiped out it in a relatively short period of time.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Apr 29, 2012
24,113
34,585
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
Ok, so we're back to the beginning again with the standard antivax arguments claiming vaccines are useless if they're not 100% perfect, and how herd immunity is bullshit.

You guys really need to learn some new lines.
From a government mandate perspective - yes that's literally basic fundamental principles.
 

Nickoo

Norm Smith Medallist
May 13, 2015
6,700
6,239
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory
I know a few who refuse. All of my close friends got vaccinated as quickly as possible. I dont actually understand the mindset of those who dont. Apparently its a mix of poorly educated and highly educated PhD types who think they are smart but have PhDs in the non-sciences.

I dont know of any STEM types who are opposed to getting vaccinated.

The psychological construct of the anti vaxes and the ‘preference’ people is very similar regardless of education. Both think they’re smarter than everybody else and that they can either wait or avoid getting vaccinated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

Nickoo

Norm Smith Medallist
May 13, 2015
6,700
6,239
Melbourne
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Melbourne Victory
% don't work like that.

I don't think you're fully understanding the figures. What you're describing is what I would call an incredibly strong case FOR everyone being vax'd.

If you go from 100% down to 60%, that's huge.

Of course the key is that if I didn't catch it because I was vax'd, then went to someone else's house, they are not at risk of catching it either.
Then when we both visit other houses, those people are not at risk.

etc. etc.

For each vax'd person in the community, the chain of transmission is nearly twice as likely to be broken.

This is why it's a community health response, as opposed to a 'yeah but it's my health, why do you care if I'm vax'd it not' situation.

The more unvax'd people in the community, the less effective that 60% efficacy becomes overall because contact with infected people will be more common.

If 100% of people were vax'd, the virus would be wiped out it in a relatively short period of time.

Or just be a nuisance disease as other corona viruses are such as common cold.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Jul 18, 2010
10,067
15,229
Australia.
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
West Perth.
Gamble with their lives?? Sorry what’s the survival rate of Covid?? Isn’t it above 99%?
You have more of a chance dying in a car accident or being hit by a car that dying from Covid.
The media have struck fear into everyone.
Nope. The car deaths per 100,000 was 4.4/100,000 last year.
Covid is currently at 4.9/100,000....and we havent even opened or had that many cases yet!
The UK is at 204 and the US is at 209.
Even Israel is at 88/100,000
 
Feb 23, 2009
32,142
45,745
Melbourne
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
New York Jets
Similarly with people willing to have a crack with something cooked in a bikie’s bathtub
I love this one, I remember having a conversation with some mates about vaccines, some of them "Nah won't get the vaccine, don't know what's in it, don't trust the government, do your own research". These are the same people I've seen snort powder/ take pills from randoms off a toilet cistern that they have no ******* idea what could be in it.
 

OnlyPowerForever

Cancelled
Mar 22, 2021
2,682
3,821
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
No, because they could catch the virus practically almost as easily from someone who is vaccinated.

Say an unvaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we were to assume a 100% liklihood of transmission, that individual would catch covid. Now say a vaccinated person with covid visits that individual. If we assume the same 100% likelihood of transmission, less the percentage that the vaccinne allegedly reduces transmission (approximately 60%), that person could catch covid, and if they didn't at that time would likely still catch covid the second time they came into interaction, or the third.

I'm not pro-mandatory vaccines for something that is a coin toss more effective than doing nothing for those individuals.

The ONLY reason to get vaccinated is if you are worried about personal effects to you and to reduce the severity of illness TO YOU.

Therefore it has no impact on harm principle and cannot be mandated under a libertarian system of government. Any effort to mandate the vaccine or coerce its acceptance is totalitarian and that is a fact.
This is the sensible position that isn't "vaccines will save us all" and isn't "anti-vax".

I would add that there is a second argument to get vaccinated, that is to help reduce the peak of illness/hospitalisations to that which the health care system can cope. As it stands, the science tells us that's at least 80% vacc but I'm not going to query the numbers. If we get to that "magical" number without mandating (and it looks like we will) then great.
 

OnlyPowerForever

Cancelled
Mar 22, 2021
2,682
3,821
AFL Club
Port Adelaide
Ok, so we're back to the beginning again with the standard antivax arguments claiming vaccines are useless if they're not 100% perfect, and how herd immunity is bullshit.

You guys really need to learn some new lines.
You really shouldn't poke arguments by claiming things that some people clearly don't write. This isn't a binary yes/no discussion. Only the extremists (on both sides) make it to be.
 
Apr 29, 2012
24,113
34,585
Perth
AFL Club
Carlton
This is the sensible position that isn't "vaccines will save us all" and isn't "anti-vax".

I would add that there is a second argument to get vaccinated, that is to help reduce the peak of illness/hospitalisations to that which the health care system can cope. As it stands, the science tells us that's at least 80% vacc but I'm not going to query the numbers. If we get to that "magical" number without mandating (and it looks like we will) then great.
That's right, and I a thoroughly of the belief that people, when given a free opportunity outside external coercion will take the safest and best option to them. It's like when they conducted studies on roads with no speedlimits, individuals self-regulate their speed to levels that are safe. People are not, as a collective, mad men undertaking activities that are dangerous to them. If the population felt the vaccine was necessary, they would take it - as we have seen throughout the past six months. The issue is, once you start having coercion it muddies the waters.
 
Oct 20, 2004
17,112
20,904
Brisbane
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Pompey
That's right, and I a thoroughly of the belief that people, when given a free opportunity outside external coercion will take the safest and best option to them. It's like when they conducted studies on roads with no speedlimits, individuals self-regulate their speed to levels that are safe. People are not, as a collective, mad men undertaking activities that are dangerous to them. If the population felt the vaccine was necessary, they would take it - as we have seen throughout the past six months. The issue is, once you start having coercion it muddies the waters.
Are you kidding? I moved with a bunch of expats to Timor a few years back. Within a few weeks, seat belt compliance was near zero. Despite the fact that road accidents are common and emergency departments nonexistent.
 
Aug 25, 2005
11,642
16,690
Grogansville
AFL Club
Gold Coast
That's right, and I a thoroughly of the belief that people, when given a free opportunity outside external coercion will take the safest and best option to them. It's like when they conducted studies on roads with no speedlimits, individuals self-regulate their speed to levels that are safe. People are not, as a collective, mad men undertaking activities that are dangerous to them. If the population felt the vaccine was necessary, they would take it - as we have seen throughout the past six months. The issue is, once you start having coercion it muddies the waters.



I get your sentiment, and don't necessarily disagree. However the concept of people being smart enough to use common sense is something that just has never, ever proven to work.
Historically, people just continually * s**t up when left to exercise common sense and use their judgement.

We're dumb. We just are.

Not only are we dumb, self-interest always prevails. We're dumb and we're selfish.

How did the common sense approach work with toilet paper last year?


Having said that, here in Australia we're far, far more inclined to be told constantly what we can and can't do, and were far more inclined to go along with it than what I've seen and experienced overseas.

It's a cultural thing IMO.
 

guruisatiger

Grand Poohbah of Ganymede
Oct 25, 2006
23,355
35,806
from the hinterlands of sri lanka and tibet
AFL Club
Richmond
Other Teams
B.S.C youngboys.. Borussia Dortmund
The 'apparently' was in relation to Trump trying to save the world for us. I can't say it's a fact, cause it seems far fetched and frankly, completely at odds with everything that Trump actually stands for.

The 'yes' part was in response to your question as to whether Trump is the self-proclaimed "Father of the Vaccine". Yes, he is. That's what he has stated himself.
Excellent
 
Back