Will you take the Covid Vaccine?

[Jaybird1980]

Just heard this moments ago:

Are corporations being good corporate citizens? You bet they are. Someone brought the hammer today declaring that our insurance (Cigna) might be in jeopardy if my employer is found to NOT be following Covid-19 protocols.

There y'all go! Right here is some UNUSUAL form of manipulation.

American health insurance company holding corporate subscription at-risk if corporation does not manage employees at-work behaviors adequately.

This isn't really new, insurance companies have been used to manipulate things for years.

 

[HoughMade]

While I think it's fair to criticize the fact-checking a meme when the truthfulness of the facts being challenged don't affect the overall validity of the meme, if the meme's central message depends on the correctness of the fact, then the meme itself deserves criticism.

But, as you've you've hit a very relevant point, it's not a meme just because someone has converted text one side likes to an image. It doesn't render bullet points ineligible for criticism just because they're part of an image with other bullet points.

A joke/obvious sarcasm/satire does not need to be 100% factually accurate.

Something that purports to be fact either is or is not and has no validity if it is not...regardless of the format presented.

Putting claimed facts in a meme does not, and should not insulate it from criticism. It's a clever tactic to ignore presenting misleading or false information by attacking the person who points it out, though. Classic misdirection.

 

[jamil]

Yeah, I heard of the considerations of our government considering tracking and tracing. Are they doing it? Will they do it? I don't know. Has it actually been asked of me? No. AOC and many others want the GOV to do all kinds of crazy crap. We aren't doing that stuff.

Just heard this moments ago:

Are corporations being good corporate citizens? You bet they are. Someone brought the hammer today declaring that our insurance (Cigna) might be in jeopardy if my employer is found to NOT be following Covid-19 protocols.

There y'all go! Right here is some UNUSUAL form of manipulation.

American health insurance company holding corporate subscription at-risk if corporation does not manage employees at-work behaviors adequately.

I heard about that yesterday. That insurance might not pay if companies don't follow C19 protocols.

My own thoughts about the subject. If an employer requires an experimental shot as a condition of employment, they should be on the hook for all liability. Hough is probably going into convulsions right now, but the way I see it, if society is going to impose something for the greater good, it's not individuals who should be on the hook for those times when it goes bad. Society should be responsible if it's a societal solution.

 

[Sylvain]

Why should we assume that getting the shot is doing the right thing? I’m not opposed to it. Will get around to getting it myself. I don’t think of it as something even to consider as the right thing to do. It’s not a moral issue. I’m not doing it for humanity. That’s ridiculous.

If you get the shot because someone paid you $1M, good for you, but bad on the government who paid the prize with other people’s money.

If you get the shot to protect you and yours, great. If you don’t get it because you’re concerned about the risks, okay. Great. But if you get it to save humanity then it looks to me like you (rhetorical “you”) might tend to think less of the people who decide not to take the risk on an experimental vaccine.

Maybe I should have said that it feels like the right thing to do for me.
That doesn't me I think people who don't want the vaccine (for whatever reason) are doing the wrong thing.

To me I don't see a different between "humanity" and "you and yours" ... maybe it's just semantic.

To to me humanity is literally all the other humans around me, whether or not I personally know them.
It's my family, my community, random foreigners I get to meet etc.

I'm not at risk myself, my age group is not eligible to get the vaccine yet where I live.

It was offered to me for other reasons and mainly to protect people around me.Not to protect myself.

I see it as a selfless act but maybe I'm wrong and ridiculous.

 

[jamil]

A joke/obvious sarcasm/satire does not need to be 100% factually accurate.

Something that purports to be fact either is or is not and has no validity if it is not...regardless of the format presented.

Putting claimed facts in a meme does not, and should not insulate it from criticism. It's a clever tactic to ignore presenting misleading or false information by attacking the person who points it out, though. Classic misdirection.

Yep. But there are more reasons to convert text to images that have more to do with the practicalities of character limits of micro-blogging. I wouldn't classify that as a clever tactic. People get around the 180 character max lengh by converting text to an image.

But, then when it's an image, the effect seems to be that it gets circulated on social media that has no such limits, and it tends to be treated as a meme would be. But it is a tactic to claim that what's not a meme is a meme so that it can escape criticism. Like I said, if whatever underlying fact in dispute is central to the point, even if it is a meme, it's fair criticism. And if it's just text copied as an image, anything in it that's false is fair game.

 

[jamil]

Maybe I should have said that it feels like the right thing to do for me.
That doesn't me I think people who don't want the vaccine (for whatever reason) are doing the wrong thing.

To me I don't see a different between "humanity" and "you and yours" ... maybe it's just semantic.

To to me humanity is literally all the other humans around me, whether or not I personally know them.
It's my family, my community, random foreigners I get to meet etc.

I'm not at risk myself, my age group is not eligible to get the vaccine yet where I live.

It was offered to me for other reasons and mainly to protect people around me.Not to protect myself.

I see it as a selfless act but maybe I'm wrong and ridiculous.

I don't really believe there is a such thing as selfless. Not that I don't believe there is altruism. But I think that altruism in a way is self serving. Wanting to protect those around you at your own risk is still self serving. It's instinctive. And nothing wrong with that. But stepping outside of human nature to just think about it, ya, the instinct is kinda ridiculous.

If it's instinctively/emotionally driven, it's not an objectively moral thing. It's also not necessarily "wrong" but it's also not rational. In your explanation we're probably not too far off, but I don't believe people have any moral duty to be vaccinated.

 

[avboiler11]

See, you just can't even discuss it without impugning those who have a different opinion.

In absolutely no way did I "impugn those who have a different opinion" - I simply said those people should make their decisions based on reality and values, not misinformation or fear. While a good number of people here have shared misinformation and fear to justify their decisions, what I wrote is not REMOTELY the same thing as saying everybody with a different opinion came to that differing opinion based on misinformation or fear.

As to the virus response being judged by the same set of characteristics, I agree with you 1000000000000%.

 

[CampingJosh]

Jeez... INGO meme fact checkers should get a life...

I wasn't "fact checking" the post; I was answering his question, posted with the image, about why Facebook had taken it down as false information.

Facebook had already done the fact checking.

 

[rooster]

Of course the vaccine is a “choice”

but if your in the military and you don’t get it you won’t get to take leave.

Unvaccinated soldiers should not expect 'business as usual' summer leave, says Fort Campbell general | ClarksvilleNow.com

Fort Campbell soldiers choosing not to receive a COVID-19 vaccine could find their plan for summer leave effected, according to Commanding General JP McGee.

clarksvillenow.com

 

[mbills2223]

this has to be what Soviet Union felt like. In the 70’s and 80’s.

Oh come on lol

 

[jamil]

Et tu, Jamil?

What? You post that without further comment so I'm left guessing which part you didn't like.

I'm an unapologetic individualist. Yes. That's my ideological bias informing my point of view. So. No. There is no objectively moral duty to be vaccinated. Such a moral duty is purely a social construct. It's not universal. Individuals are more important than the group. I'd say it's 90/10.

 

[jamil]

The whole cherry-picking part. It's illogical to think that decades old multibillion dollar companies aren't going have some lawsuits, faulty products, and run afoul of regulators.

J&J has a lawsuit about their baby powder causing cancer, so that means their vaccine is suspect?


How is that good science (or even good reasoning)?



If I applied the same reasoning to other industries, I'd never get in a car, or fly, or eat anything from a grocery, or...

I think it's fair to point out some things because it brings us to the reality that the people running companies are flawed humans, and sometimes flawed humans care more about certain humans than other humans, and the decisions they make reflect that.

That does not mean that the vaccine is bad, but, I wouldn't expect J&J to make public about every bad thing they've discovered about their own vaccine. Science is political and it's reasonable to acknowledge that and not use it as a tool to shut down other opinions about it.

And personally, and I've made this point many times, I think it's ridiculous to argue each other through expert proxies. I don't care if you're an MD or a pipe layer. If you're not an immunologist with first-hand understanding of the science, unless you've done the research you're trusting the people who did. You can read a study. Fine. So?

I think we'd be better served if the scientists who are researching this could debate their points in public. If those people who are pushed down to the deep dark webz to peddle junk science then it becomes a simple matter of belief, and not real knowledge. If science has nothing to hide then debate it openly with the skeptics. If they have a bad argument the sunlight will kill it.

That goes with any controversial topic where people beat each other up with "trust the science." Okay. So how about this? Trust my ass. It has never failed me. Well. That's not exactly true. There was a couple of times when I really, really thought it was air.

 

[printcraft]

**** you bidet, and **** your voters.

 

[Sylvain]

**** you bidet, and **** your voters.

Yeah, not really a choice.

Get vaccinated now, or get vaccinated later.

 

[printcraft]

Yeah, not really a choice.

Get vaccinated now, or get vaccinated later.

Option C

 

[JCSR]

Yeah, not really a choice.

Get vaccinated now, or get vaccinated later.

 

[JettaKnight]

What? You post that without further comment so I'm left guessing which part you didn't like.

I'm an unapologetic individualist. Yes. That's my ideological bias informing my point of view. So. No. There is no objectively moral duty to be vaccinated. Such a moral duty is purely a social construct. It's not universal. Individuals are more important than the group. I'd say it's 90/10.

The part about it being "experimental" was what I was commenting on. (I did hightlight that in bold)

The J&J is using tried and true means, and the Pfizer et al are using means that have been studied for decades. And the Pfizer is almost got full authorization.

Which to me, doesn't fit the definition of "experimental".

 

[nonobaddog]

The vaccines are approved for "emergency use". That does not mean "tried and true" and it does not mean "studied for decades". It means "emergency use".

 

[bwframe]

 

[jsx1043]

NO.

**** you.

This just sealed the deal that I will not ever get the vaccine and will die in a pile of brass while they hold me down and inject it in me.