Goodness. Well, I guess I need to go back to my doctor then and tell him that he's clearly WRONG, because for the good of the Motherland I need to risk that severe anaphylactic reaction. At least if I die, I won't infect anyone with COVID.

Until that time, I should be perfectly content to have my civil liberties abrogated, because I am selfishly putting my personal safety over the safety of the Motherland.

@Alysandir Yes, this has always been the attitude. It's why we have a military, where people risk their personal freedoms and their life so the Nation as a whole can enjoy freedoms. Even the SCOTUS upheld the legality of the draft. So, people can be drafted because the well being of the Nation outweighs the rights of the few. That's pretty clear to me. You may not agree with that, but it's a fundamental tenet of most societies.

@TyKC's OMG settle down before you have a heart attack! LOL You must be one of them folks glued to Main Stream Media. Ya might want to watch what lots of others scientist and doctors have to say about that vaccine.

I disagree. If you truly believe all women have the right to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies, then neither you or anyone else has a right to force me to inject something into my body that I don't want, and I care not about any irrational fears you may have on the subject, that's a mental hang-up on your part. Fear keeps people blind, and being that twice now I had come close to dying from my Type 1 Diabetes, I refuse to cave in to fear, that accomplishes nothing. I'm not carrying any infectious diseases and recently tested negative for Covid, so what hard evidence do you have that would indicate I am indeed carrying Covid? You don't have any such evidence, which means you have no case and certainly no legal grounds to accuse me of spreading around a potentially lethal disease. Damn, could you people get any more paranoid, over such irrational fears at that. Nothing logical about your argument there, if you truly believed in logic and reasoning then you would go by the actual evidence instead of going by what could be.

Whether that truly be a serious issue at this point is pure speculation, and the experts can and have been incorrect on certain statements. By the way, I'm not anti vaccine, but yet again you missed the point of this post, which was not to encourage others to be anti vaccine but rather point out an idea that if ever played out would be a blatant abuse of Government power, and some people have seriously considered such an idea which should concern anyone who cares about our Constitutional rights.

@TyKC

Just so we're clear, I have learned the following today:

1. You believe that the U.S is not a country that was predicated on the principles of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That civil liberties may be freely abrogated if society - read: authority - arbitrarily decides that you don't need them and you have no inalienable right to refuse. Interesting.

2. You believe that the U.S still has a military draft. That's also pretty interesting.

Thank you for today's lessons.

@SpikeTalon You wrote, "If you truly believe all women have the right to make their own decisions regarding their own bodies, then neither you or anyone else has a right to force me to inject something into my body that I don't want.

At some point, the rights of women have to be weighed against the rights of the child. The only debate here is when does a fetus become a human and deserve their own rights. That's a political question and there can only be a political answer. It's the same with pandemics. It's a political question as to which rights take precedence. That's why we have laws. When rights conflict, there can only be a political solution. I didn't imply that you personally were carrying the disease. But you could be. And that's the point, we can't have people running around infecting others if it's possible to avoid. During war sometimes there must be rationing, even if it precludes the personal rights of some.

@Alysandir Almost all men age 18-25 who are U.S. citizens or are immigrants living in the U.S. are required to register with Selective Service. Citizens must register within 30 days of turning 18. Immigrants must register within 30 days of arriving in the U.S.

@dd54 Not true. Here is the latest cdc guidelines. If you are fully vaccinated, you can resume activities that you did prior to the pandemic. Fully vaccinated people can resume activities without wearing a mask or physically distancing, except where required by federal, state, local, tribal, or territorial laws, rules, and regulations, including local business and workplace guidance. If you haven’t been vaccinated yet, find a vaccine.

They wouldn't be giving these recommendations if they thought the disease could be spread by fully vaccinated people.

[cdc.gov]

@TyKC

Almost all men age 18-25 who are U.S. citizens or are immigrants living in the U.S. are required to register with Selective Service. Citizens must register within 30 days of turning 18. Immigrants must register within 30 days of arriving in the U.S.

That is true.

It is also true that the U.S has been a fully volunteer army for close to 50 years (1973).

@dd54 I realize that. But the efficacy rates are extremely high for these vaccines compared to the ordinary influenza vaccines. They obviously think that the situation is manageable given their current guidelines. The Lancet paper is only one opinion. If it was the opinion of the majority of scientists in this area, the CDC would be exposing people to undue risk at the expense of their reputations and careers not to mention the moral implications of such a decision. There are always minority opinions in science. There are physicists who believe that space-time is lumpy despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Space-time might be lumpy, but the majority opinion is that it's not. I suspect that the majority opinion on this is that it is reasonably safe given their guidelines. If not, I would have to engage in some massive conspiracy theory that the CDC was purposely exposing people to infections knowing the risks involved. If that's the case, society can't function like that.

@Alysandir Since there is increasing evidence that this "vaccine" does not keep you from being a carrier it is of little use at all to a healthy person.

Total BS. In all previous instances of deadly disease the approach was to isolate the vulnerable. In this one, however, everyone was locked up purely for political purposes. And, this stupidity was compounded by idiot governors like Fredo's Brother, my own dear Newsome, Whitmore, and two other losers purposely sent people know to be infected to senior homes -- the place where the most vulnerable live. And, they doubled down on stupid by sending sick/untested prisoners to other prisons not yet infected.
This disease is deadly only to people with multiple comorbidities, with very few exceptions. This has been a scam from the beginning. And, any attempt to openly discuss science or facts on this was shut down by MSM and ITmedia.

@dd54 When I use the word "opinion" I'm using it in the scientific sense. All scientific papers are considered opinions, like legal opinions are called "opinions." Not all scientists agree on conclusions. They come to different conclusions regarding the same data. So, it's important to form a consensus. That's how science works. Not all climate scientists agree that climate change is due to man made contributions, but that's certainly the consensus. It seems that this is what they did at the CDC as much as they could. You can read about it here.

[nbcnews.com]

I don't have access to the actual papers just quotes from those who participated. I don't see the massive censorship that you are referring to. Yes, during the Trump Administration, health experts were muted and silenced. But they seem more positive now, less confined. It's true, at this point, it is not necessary to mandate vaccines. But if hospitals got overwhelmed like they are in India, things could change and risks would have to be taken. Our country couldn't manage 400,000 cases a day. Certainly it would be imprudent to mandate vaccinations unnecessarily and take unnecessary risks. It seems to be the consensus, at least, in the article I posted that relieving the mask mandate is long overdue. I find ironic that so many people have criticized the government for being overly cautious. But when they relax the restrictions, they get criticize for it. I don't understand why health experts would issue guidelines that were in direct contradiction to the majority of published research. That's not how science works. What would be the motive for that? That doesn't make sense to me. I'm not an expert in this field, but I am a scientist. It just doesn't seem realistic, scientifically, that if CDC officials were recklessly relaxing safety measures that there wouldn't be an outcry from scientists who could see through the bad science or that the CDC was giving bad advice. It's got to be more than one dissenting paper. It's true under the circumstance, they can't be as prudent as they would like because there are competing concerns like reopening the economy. It's true that scientists make mistakes, but what alternatives are there? The alternative is subjective chaos, but I for one don't want that. In war, soldiers are ordered to take the hill. You can't have them asking "why." At some point, you have to put your trust in the hands of people who are trained and know what they are doing. That's why we train people in certain fields. We have to rely on them to do the right thing. The alternative is horrifying.

If you're fully vaccinated - which I will NOT be - why worry about contracting the #ChinaVirus? If you're worried, wear a mask - which I will NOT do.
If i contract this #ChinaVirus, I'd rather resort to proven medication, such as hydroxychloroquine or ivermectin, which both have been available for decades & proven to save lives - which the media & governments are trying keep quiet!
My Body, My Choice - No Vaccine for me - they can all shove it.
BTW, the recovery rate is 98%

@dd54 [facebook.com]