General / Off-Topic The Covid vaccine must be mandatory ?

[Patrick_68000]

On Wednesday, Australia launched the debate on the need for countries to make the future coronavirus vaccine mandatory, as contaminations continue to rise and restrictions increase around the world.

"There are always exemptions to vaccination for medical reasons, but this should be the only one," said the Prime Minister Scott Morrison to radio 3AW Melbourne.

"Getting vaccinated should be mandatory", he said.

For my part, if the vaccine becomes mandatory, before I want certificates that all elites have been vaccinated.

 

[Morbad]

From a public health standpoint mandatory vaccination would be a given. Unvaccinated members of a population are a threat to the rest and there are virtually no rational reasons to fear vaccination itself.

From a personal liberty perspective, mandatory anything is problematic.

Personally, I am as wary of anyone stupid, reckless, or callous enough to avoid a vaccine that has been demonstrated to be reasonably safe and effective as I am of those who would try to forcibly administer it. Once the benefits of vaccination have been made clear, it seems reasonable to deny public services to those who are willfully making themselves a threat to public health, but I'm not going to hold them down and inject them.

As for the 'elites', most of them will be first in line to be vaccinated, and if they claim otherwise, or appear to not support vaccination, they are probably lying. Few among the elite are abjectly ignorant, uneducated, or ill advised and not many will turn down essentially risk free immunity or partial immunity, even if they are in a position where they have to publicly cater to a population of ignoramuses.

 

[Stigbob]

Pinning people down and jabbing them is probably a little over the top.

Do it via indirect pressure, deny the unvaccinated admission to schools, workplaces, passports, drivers licences anything that requires an application. Heavy fines for falsification.

That way you have entirely optional mandatory vaccination.

 

[Old Duck]

There is a slippery slope when it comes to "mandatory for the good of the community" policy like this. Personally, I've been injected with so much crap from my military days that I'll take this vaccine when it becomes available in the US, but not until enough "eager" people go first to guinea pig test it for me. I'm a semi-retired hermit who mostly works remotely anyway, so I am no threat to anyone, but I do NOT want that COVID, so I'd do this for myself as much as anyone. Still, a vaccine today turns into tracking software / hardware tomorrow.... If you don't believe me, just look at China and their social score system!

A slippery slope indeed...

 

[Stigbob]

There is a slippery slope when it comes to "mandatory for the good of the community" policy like this. Personally, I've been injected with so much crap from my military days that I'll take this vaccine when it becomes available in the US, but not until enough "eager" people go first to guinea pig test it for me. I'm a semi-retired hermit who mostly works remotely anyway, so I am no threat to anyone, but I do NOT want that COVID, so I'd do this for myself as much as anyone. Still, a vaccine today turns into tracking software / hardware tomorrow.... If you don't believe me, just look at China and their social score system!

A slippery slope indeed...

I've been glad of my military jabs whenever I've seen people dying of hepatitis.

The anti malaria drugs as well, they do give you mouth ulcers at the time but some of the lads who didn't bother still have recurring bouts of malaria now decades later.

 

[askavir]

Like in any good moral dilemma, I'm rather torn.

On one hand, I personally believe people should get the vaccine. I sure will as soon a vaccine is independently proven to be safe and effective. I also think anti-vaxxers are lunatics.

However...

I'm also completely against all forms of state coercion against citizens (except in extreme cases), our ancestors didn't spend millennia getting rid of emperors, monarchs, dictators, tyrants, deities and any other despotic forms of rule so that we now grant "the state" the same kind of power to force people to do stuff they don't want to (even if for their own good).

So I'm absolutely pro-vaccination but only voluntary.

 

[metatheurgist]

Just to frame the discussion, mandatory in Aus doesn't mean the jackboots will be around to put Uncle Bill's G5 Mark of the Devil in your veins. Though that is what some of the crazies do actually believe in Aus, that's how far the anti-science poison has spread from the US. What it will mean in Aus is that if you don't get the jab, don't expect to get any government subsidies or services until you do. And even tho we don't have a bill'o'rights down under, the idiots are already claiming the government is violating their rights to be idiots, yankee style.

 

[Stigbob]

Like in any good moral dilemma, I'm rather torn.

On one hand, I personally believe people should get the vaccine. I sure will as soon a vaccine is independently proven to be safe and effective. I also think anti-vaxxers are lunatics.

However...

I'm also completely against all forms of state coercion against citizens (except in extreme cases), our ancestors didn't spend millennia getting rid of emperors, monarchs, dictators, tyrants, deities and any other despotic forms of rule so that we now grant "the state" the same kind of power to force people to do stuff they don't want to (even if for their own good).

So I'm absolutely pro-vaccination but only voluntary.

It's like seat belts, drink driving or speed limits, some people think they know better and a lot of the time nothing bad happens. However they can also get themselves or others killed or injured.

The state makes them comply for the greater good with the outright approval of most of the populace and no jackboots required. It does this by fining them when they get caught, prosecuting them when it hurts others, invalidating their insurance when they've caused issues by doing it and by educating the public over time until it becomes socially unacceptable.

 

[Patrick_68000]

There is a slippery slope when it comes to "mandatory for the good of the community" policy like this. Personally, I've been injected with so much crap from my military days that I'll take this vaccine when it becomes available in the US, but not until enough "eager" people go first to guinea pig test it for me. I'm a semi-retired hermit who mostly works remotely anyway, so I am no threat to anyone, but I do NOT want that COVID, so I'd do this for myself as much as anyone. Still, a vaccine today turns into tracking software / hardware tomorrow.... If you don't believe me, just look at China and their social score system!

A slippery slope indeed...

I remember my vaccination during my military service.

We were injected with a thick liquid.

The entire dormitory had been lying for two days, KO ! , with very strong pain in the shoulder.

 

[Patrick_68000]

I've been glad of my military jabs whenever I've seen people dying of hepatitis.

The anti malaria drugs as well, they do give you mouth ulcers at the time but some of the lads who didn't bother still have recurring bouts of malaria now decades later.

The vaccination in the army is good for the whole life.

 

[askavir]

It's like seat belts, drink driving or speed limits, some people think they know better and a lot of the time nothing bad happens. However they can also get themselves or others killed or injured.

The state makes them comply for the greater good with the outright approval of most of the populace and no jackboots required. It does this by fining them when they get caught, prosecuting them when it hurts others, invalidating their insurance when they've caused issues by doing it and by educating the public over time until it becomes socially unacceptable.

To be fair, I really don't know where exactly the line should be drawn where stuff being made mandatory / forbidden becomes acceptable.

When we look at more extreme examples (like drunk driving, or criminality), the decision seems rather obvious, but when we enter the grey area territory it becomes harder and harder to me to have a strong opinion one way or the other. In my opinion, words like "mandatory" or "forbidden" should only apply in extreme cases, but I also can't point at what point exactly something becomes "extreme".

 

[Deleted member 257907]

It's like seat belts, drink driving or speed limits, some people think they know better and a lot of the time nothing bad happens. However they can also get themselves or others killed or injured.

The state makes them comply for the greater good with the outright approval of most of the populace and no jackboots required. It does this by fining them when they get caught, prosecuting them when it hurts others, invalidating their insurance when they've caused issues by doing it and by educating the public over time until it becomes socially unacceptable.

but seat belts and speed limits don't have harmful side effects.
there used to be a vaccine court where people who were harmed by vaccine could sue the vaccine company now they are immune to being sued.

 

[Patrick_68000]

To be fair, I really don't know where exactly the line should be drawn where stuff being made mandatory / forbidden becomes acceptable.

When we look at more extreme examples (like drunk driving, or criminality), the decision seems rather obvious, but when we enter the grey area territory it becomes harder and harder to me to have a strong opinion one way or the other. In my opinion, words like "mandatory" or "forbidden" should only apply in extreme cases, but I also can't point at what point exactly something becomes "extreme".

For my part, most of the time I am not disturbed by the word mandatory, but as soon as it concerns the physical, my flesh, my blood, it becomes a much more sensitive subject.

 

[Patrick_68000]

but seat belts and speed limits don't have harmful side effects.

Yeah, the important distinction material and physical .

 

[Patrick_68000]

Let people decide, if they don't want the vaccine, they just sign a declaration saying so, if/when they get the Covid, let them die in the streets like dogs.

The problem is that they can infect others.

 

[Deleted member 257907]

The problem is that they can infect others.

if the vaccin's actually work then wouldn't the unvaccinated only be able to infect other unvaccinated?

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

The problem is that they can infect others.

Not if the others have had the vaccine, surely? (ninja'd)

People always know their rights and so rarely bother with their responsibilities. I guess, if you want, it's your right to not be injected by the state but you have to accept all responsibility for it when that turns out to be a bad decision. The trouble is, they won't and at great cost, we'll take care of them.

 

[Shir]

And then, one year later, possible vaccine side effects appear.. as they have with so many other vaccines in the past. That's why vaccines are tested for years, in big numbers..

It will be an interesting thing to see democratic governments trying to enforce a vaccine on people..

 

[Dragsham]

Rights be damned...where's rights when we're all dead.?
Life takes precedence over rights.
So mandatory everyone no exceptions because they'll reinfect the population again.

 

[[PS4] Lorenzo Waringos]

Rights be damned...where's rights when we're all dead.?
Life takes precedence over rights.
So mandatory everyone no exceptions because they'll reinfect the population again.

Not much of a vaccine then, is it?