Any thinking person would. The other vaccines you mention have not been politicized making one's refusal an "idiot's badge of honor".
IU and the rest of us win in court
- Thread starter Courtsensetwo
- Start date
This means all IU athletes vaccinated which means we will avoid the crap show which will occur with sports teams that have low vaccination rates. The Colts have less than 50 percent vaccinated and they are not alone. Has anyone one seen any numbers on college football teams?
^^^ THIS ^^^
My whole family has been vaccinated and though I understand there are individuals choosing not to obtain a vaccine, I am completely behind the requirement to have one to attend in person.
Of course there will be some individual cases where a vaccine poses deeper issues (medical/religious) and those can be dealt with on a case by case basis. But, we already have routine vaccinations as part of our attendance requirement … just don’t see the issue here.
This is not a “liberty or die” issue or an argument about “being sheep” … this is a simple step that helps curtail the spread of a known disease.
Hell … let’s all get TB and polio again … rage against the machine!
sec commissioner had a press conference and said that teams need to reach 80 percent and only 6 of the 14 football teams have reached that level, stated there will be no rescheduling of games if you have a covid outbreak the game will be forfeited, a reasonable stand in my opinion.
Politicization of vaccines have been going on for years. The majority of states allow exemptions from childhood vaccine requirements for philosophical reasons. Vaccine resistance grew with the rise of attention to organic food, non GMO food, and other green and natural household products. In Colorado the lowest rate of vaccinated kids was in deep blue Boulder County.
Then along came COVID. As is typical with anything these days it was immediately politicized. No longer are those who refuse vaccines seen as devotees to natural immunities and not wanting chemicals injected into their veins, but as “idiots”.
For me, I hate being patronized and the Biden approach to COVID education is patronizing as hell. Good forthright and honest information without the lectures about taking one for the team is sufficient.
This is the first time a vaccine has been the poster child for a political ideology., completely different that a relationship with organic foods. This is about scoreboard and laundry as you unwittingly demonstrated in your last paragrah.
Political ideology? LMAO. I’m old enough to remember when Biden, Harris, Cuomo, and probably a few more Democrats said they wouldn’t take it until it was proven safe and effective by people not part of the Trump administration. And just like that, on January 20, the vaccine switched parties.
Vaccination also seems to be the only prevention method that can be readily confirmed. Trying, after the fact, to determine other causes for a large local outbreak is unreliable.
Contrast asking questions like, "When you were around other people in Florida last week, (1) Did you and everyone else around you always maintain social distancing?, (2) Did you and everyone else always use handsanitizer before and afterward every encounter during the entire week, and (3) Did you and everyone else around you always wear a mask when around others?"
with a simple "Are you fully vaccinated?"
As we've seen, there seems to be a correlation between failing to get the vaccine and the upsurge in positive Covid tests. If we didn't have vaccines during this upsurge, I don't think we would ever be sure whether the other factors contributed to the upsurge. People just can't remember whether they truly observed the other preventive measures several days earlier. Vaccines or no-vaccinations is a simple vetting factor that seems to be of major significance right now.
dumbass trump caused this whole mess, the only positive is it got him out of office
Wish you'd tell Goat that. We had a long discussion with that, where he claimed that was never the case with Harris.
correction,
Democrats said they wouldn’t take it, if its EUA approval was forced by the administration, overruling scientists, such that it would be approved before the election, merely for political advantage.
The FDA and all reputable scientists said that they needed at minimum 3 months of clinical trial safety data (mid-August to mid-November) to assess durability of the antibody response, evidence for T cell activation, and lack of side effects emerging in the first 90 days, which historically is the timeframe for vaccine reactions to emerge, in order to grant EUA approval.
The FDA and all reputable scientists also say that they need at minimum 12 months of clinical trial safety data (mid-August 2020 to mid-August 2021) in order to grant full approval. Now right wing nut jobs are trying to discredit the vaccine for following this timeframe for approval, precisely.
There is an apolitcal science-based and fact-based timeframe for these things.
Please try to understand. Ask Lucy for help. I have explained this before.
Last edited:
I found the following discussing the right to
refuse treatment:
This first link says:
"A threat to the community: A patient's refusal of medical treatment cannot pose a threat to the community. Communicable diseases, for instance, would require treatment or isolation to prevent the spread to the general public. A mentally ill patient who poses a physical threat to himself or others is another example."
Do You Have the Right to Refuse Medical Treatment?
Most patients have the final decision on medical care, including the right to refuse treatment. Learn the exceptions and how to use this right.
This next link says, "In most of these cases, a patient may not refuse treatment if doing so will extend his time away from work and his ability to support himself. He must continue to rely on others to provide him with income.
Do You Have the Right to Refuse Medical Treatment?
Most patients have the final decision on medical care, including the right to refuse treatment. Learn the exceptions and how to use this right.
However, I could not find any link identifying specific diseases for which the government or some institution/employer can require treatment. Does anyone know? Can the govt or any particular industries or institutions require treatment for any of these?
Covid
AIDS
Leprosy
Ebola
Tuberculosis
Typhoid
STDs
Others?
Thanks in advance.
That is the funniest quote Ive seen from a Joe Biden worshiping fool all year!!! Holy crap you call that stammering and stuttering compared to the POS you voted for for president? I give you props on being such a total blinded fool to even attempt to post that. What an idiot you are!!!!
Nothing to do with what school it is from , be it ND Alabama or where ever, when a Biden loving fool talks about someone else stuttering, stammering and having no leadership it draws comparisons.
Ya. Who are you implying is being penalized, and who is the few? Your forced to get a vaccine (penalty) because a few people got sick?
Nope. That’s not what the Dems. If there is any validity to your point, it comes from the candidate spin doctors. In any event they politicized the vaccine.
Your second point had to do with a general duty to mitigate losses. That’s a different issue, but there is some overlap.I found the following discussing the right to
refuse treatment:
This first link says:
"A threat to the community: A patient's refusal of medical treatment cannot pose a threat to the community. Communicable diseases, for instance, would require treatment or isolation to prevent the spread to the general public. A mentally ill patient who poses a physical threat to himself or others is another example."
Do You Have the Right to Refuse Medical Treatment?
Most patients have the final decision on medical care, including the right to refuse treatment. Learn the exceptions and how to use this right.www.verywellhealth.com
This next link says, "In most of these cases, a patient may not refuse treatment if doing so will extend his time away from work and his ability to support himself. He must continue to rely on others to provide him with income.
Do You Have the Right to Refuse Medical Treatment?
Most patients have the final decision on medical care, including the right to refuse treatment. Learn the exceptions and how to use this right.
However, I could not find any link identifying specific diseases for which the government or some institution/employer can require treatment. Does anyone know? Can the govt or any particular industries or institutions require treatment for any of these?
Covid
AIDS
Leprosy
Ebola
Tuberculosis
Typhoid
STDs
Others?
Thanks in advance.
The first point is the basis for most of the litigation. The most obvious issue is child blood transfusions. Many adults are strongly opposed, but child protection agencies usually win those cases in court over parental objections. In transfusion cases, there is usually a clear nexus between treatment and life-saving benefit. In vaccine cases, not so much.
I don't know if what you're saying is true, but anyone basing their decision on whether to get vaccinated on what a politician says is a numb-skull. The fact remains (I believe) that more Ds are vaccinated than Rs.
Well that's pretty much what Harris said in a CNN interview she gave back in early Sept...
No "spin." Plain words...
Asked by CNN's Dana Bash in a clip released Saturday whether she would get a vaccine that was approved and distributed before the election, Harris replied, "Well, I think that's going to be an issue for all of us."
"I will say that I would not trust Donald Trump and it would have to be a credible source of information that talks about the efficacy and the reliability of whatever he's talking about," she continued in the clip from an exclusive interview airing Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" at 9 a.m. ET. "I will not take his word for it".
Now that doesn't say anything about people "outside of the Trump Admin". It basically says competent people who could translate for Trump, since I don't think even you believe he knows the meaning of terms like efficacy and reliability. YOU made the jump to saying that eliminated "people within the Trump Administration". Not Harris...
All your post shows is how idiotic and ignorant you and Harris are. The summer of 2000 full of news about the vaccine trials. Outside shooter was a participant. I know of others. THE TRIALS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH TRUMP. Yet Harris, Biden, Cuomo and others deliberately made the vaccine about Trump. Why? . To politicize the vaccine having already weaponized the pandemic.
The point was that Trump had lost all credibility when it came to the pandemic response. That was of his own making.
I'm 'implying' that those who have been vaccinated should not be told to wear a mask or have the economy shut down again because some don't want the vaccine.
According to the CDC, you don't have to worry if you've been vaccinated and the statistics bear that out.
The cost of caring for (or burying) those who choose not to protect themselves and those close to them will be borne by us all, vaccinated or not.
You have a short memory. Of course Harrison backtracked when called on her initial statements. But Pence nailed her with it in the debate.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-balked-at-coronavirus-vaccine-under-trump
LMAO. No. According to you and millions of others Trump had absolutely no credibility to lose. The Democrats and the media trashed everything associated with Trump and his administration from the get go. They weaponized the pandemic for the 2020 election. This included the vaccine.
That is completely false. Harris, in particular, said she wouldn't trust (and take) the vaccine on Trump's word alone. " At the Vice Presidential debate in early October 2020, she said, "If Dr. Fauci, the doctors, tell us that we should take it, I'll be the first in line to take it."
Harris and Biden received their first doses in December 2020 while Trump was still president. Both were filmed/photographed receiving the first dose, and Biden was also photographed receiving the second dose on January 11.
So, no, the vaccine didn't suddenly "switch parties" on January 20 and, yes, you're full of crap.
Similar threads
Trump has failed to pay over $380k in legal fees in UK
- anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
- The Water Cooler
