The controversial #COVID19 vaccines should not be forced on our military for a virus that is not dangerous for non-obese people and those under 65. With 6,000 vax related deaths and many concerning side effects reported, the vax should be a choice not a mandate for everyone.
Someone explain why we need to be protected from statememts like this? TIA
I'd say its obvious...she is not a lib. They are fully protected from misinformation posts by all the hypocrites that run our media, public and private
"Someone explain why we need to be protected from statememts like this? TIA"
Great topic.
Because it has lies that, if believed will cause many people to NOT get vaccinated, get COVID and some will die.
People that align politically with one side, in today's age will believe most of what they say(and people on that side) because they trust people who are on "their side" and don't trust people that are on "the other side"
That's why Trump can bs his way to hell and back but has been put up on a pedestal of unquestioned infallibility.
metmike: Should people have the right to say what they want, so that others get all opinions? Absolutely, but this is an extraordinary situation that has never happened before.
It's just like calling fire, when there is no fire in a crowded theater.............
Here's a perfect example of a usually bright person that will read a statement like that and believe every word of it. There are millions just like that out there.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/72648/
Ahh, I see. So Suggesting that a vaccine not be mandatory is heresy, right? And we the people should not be exposed to heresy, right? Because extreme extremests need to be dealt with extremely in these extreme times. Certain ideas, and even words, are extreme and should be dealt with extremely.
I just had an idea. What we really need in this country is a Ministry of Extreme. Where one person, or a small group decides on just what is too extreme and should be dealt with extremely. Certain phrases or ideas can be labeled as "extreme". And other words ot phrases are actually considered violent now. For example, if you call a trans person he or she, regardless of their anatomy, thats a form of violence now.
Our Ministry of Extreme would be responsible for "educating" us and then punishing us when we stray from their teachings.
What a wonderful country we'll have then, right? No more wondering about whats correct. No more fear of "misinformation", because the Ministry of Extreme would be the de facto Ministry of Truth too.
"ministry of the extreme" seems we are too late. We the combination of this little weasel and our current corrupt FBI we have all the pieces already in place and functioning just as the left believes it should.
now MM just where do we go from here. Seems we are already around the bend. Next stop, concentration camps and rebooting of the common peoples minds who thought we lived in America.
I totally, totally get the freedom of speech thing.
But I have a problem of using it to defend and take a stand on telling a huge, irrefutable anti science anti factual lie that hurts people.
It’s the quintessential analagy of shouting FIRE in a crowded theatre if there ever was one.
Why not base your position and this cherished freedom and right (which should be significant)on something that is good for people.....instead of something that with 1,000% certainty will hurt people?
You will lose the ethical argument every single time because you are representing evil in this case and the other side is representing the common good.....not just the speculative common good.....the real world, proven, scientific common good for mankind.
If you can’t appreciate that rock solid fact, it explains your position.
Sorry MM. Never going to agree.
Because, ultimately, when you have self proclaimed "gaurdians of the truth", they will get far more wrong than they get right. History, even current events are loaded with examples. Do I really need to list a few? You do it yourself all the time. Examples of what the "truth" is percieved to be, presnted to be, versus the actual facts. Consensus is not fact.
And these self proclaimed "gaurdians of the truth" without fail, have an agenda.
Ethically, morally, logically, you cannot ban the free expression of opinions. That is the root of totalitarianism.
I couldn't agree more with mm that the vaccination is the smart ,logical ,safest , practical etc etc thing to do for combating the covid but Tim's concern about limiting freedoms trumps all of that in my opinion.
Limiting freedoms always seem to escalate into "No Good". Like taxes , the "Limiting" parts never go away.
We have to deal with the not so smart stuff during life but let's not destroy Hope voluntarily by imposing too many restrictions on our thoughts.
John
Give me examples that I will agree with til the cows come home. This is not one of them.
You can’t yell FIRE in a crowded theatre when ther is no fire......because it will cause people to die for no reason.
You can’t lie about COVID and the vaccination for political reasons because it will cause far more deaths tnan the previous example that you used here in the past.
Have you Adjusted your applying that principle because the politics of the right are blinding you from being objective?
That was rhetorical.
Be consistent and don’t let your political party/affiliation steal your intelligence.
The fear that this will morph into complete control of what we can state freely is totally misplaced.
Nobody is tryiimg to do that.
Do you think I want that?
We are just....plain and simple, nothing nafarious exactly as it appears....trying to save lives because there is well supported scientific and factual reasoning to support it.......
Make your misguided freedom of speech stand on something else.....not on something that kills people.
There are hundred of other great and legit freedom of speech situations to defend.
You will lose the ethical battle every time if you hang your hat on the freedom to say and do things that kill people.
Thanks for your sincere comments!
The biggest problem is that you have,been convinced that what she is saying is the truth and you think that you are defending the truth.
Is a proven factual lie and contradicts the indisputable science that is currently saving millions of lives.
You aren’t against saving more lives are you?
That was rhetorical.
Take back your right to know the truth from people like this who are stealing your intelligence for their political gain.
They are targeting and using you because you align with them.
Democrats don’t believe her horse manure, do they.
She is targeting YOU!
I have in no way made any statement about the validity or her's or anyone's opinion. That has no bearing on the discussion of whether people have a right to express opinions.
But fatality rate for covid is very low for healthy individuals and no one can honestly say with any certainty that there is no risk in getting the vaccine.
If you are basing your argument on either of the above, you are even more wrong.
But my only argument remains.. Once you give an entity the authority to approve the expression of opinion, the list of banned speech will only grow. Even if they start out with using extreme measures on extremists because of extreme circumstances.
To draw on an anology once again... Many believe the climate crisis is an existential threat to the human race. This is far more extreme than a virus with a fatality rate in the low single digits. Using your logic, banning the climate deniers from misleading people is not only justified, but essential, right?
Facebook, Twitter et al are simply trying to drive the crazies over to the sites that welcome them. Keep them out of sight of the women and children.
Like one right winger the other day complaining how he is being silenced, all while writing an editorial in the Wall Street Journal.
Give me a break. Get your own platform.
Yes, of course. The old question.. Censorship or common sense... Much like the old question.. Lynching, or common sense. Right?
I mean, if the evidence is pretty convincing and the crime is bad enough, that stupid old "innocent until proven guilty" nonsense can be discarded and the community will save a fortune.. Right?
But a funny thing about Facebook and Twitter, et al colluding with the government to support the approved narrative and drive "unnacceptable" opinions to other platforms.. Big tech shuts down those other platforms...
But of course, we both know, you are all for silencing this "heresy".. Right?
A word to the warning. Comments like "Protecting Women and Children" will eventually be forbidden on this course you seem to like. Sexist and mysoginic doncha know. Probably racist too. Better get woke before it's too late.
Give me a break. Get your own platform.
BTW, are you claiming some kind of ownership of assorted platforms. A place where only "certain kinds" of opinions and people are allowed?
I'll answer for you. Yes, you are. And you have no idea how ironic and ignorant that thinking is. You embrace it.
The paranoia is strong with this one.
You want to hear ironic. Just how does this person with these strongly held views and biased thinking end up in charge of molding young students minds? Pretty ironic that he pushes CRT, no rah rah America is exceptional, libs have the keys to he kingdom and all MSM. If that is not enough they will become the keepers of all thought in "his" classroom. Good Lord do the parents up there in that district even attend school board meetings and let the administration know who is in charge of their children and just who that classroom, its curriculum, its budget, its very key to the door belongs to.
The paranoia is strong with this one.
Hillarious!! :-)
Thanks for letting me start the week with another chuckle :-)
Interesting discussion here:
https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/627134/is-it-illegal-to-shout-fire-in-crowded-theater
“
“By mcfarm - July 25, 2021, 8:59 p.m.
You want to hear ironic. Just how does this person with these strongly held views and biased thinking end up in charge of molding young students minds? Pretty ironic that he pushes CRT, no rah rah America is exceptional, libs have the keys to he kingdom and all MSM. If that is not enough they will become the keepers of all thought in "his" classroom. Good Lord do the parents up there in that district even attend school board meetings and let the administration know who is in charge of their children and just who that classroom, its curriculum, its budget, its very key to the door belongs to.”
I‘m finished Mike. Sorry.
"The paranoia is strong with this one.
Hillarious!! :-)
Thanks for letting me start the week with another chuckle :-)"
Can you please clue me in on the chuckle Tim?
I agree with many of mcfarmer's points here and, like him it appears that paranoia as the result of unjustified fears about what this means.........is clearly one of the emotions driving the right on this issue.
par·a·noi·a/ˌperəˈnoiə/ 
Learn to pronounce nounnoun: paranoia
It's hilariously typical of leftists. When the don't understand or agree with a statement, they label the originator either mentally deranged or stupid. It's the kind of thinking that allows them to continue to believe that socialism is a swell idea.
But as you indicate an agreement with Mcfarmer, I'm sure I'd find it equally entertaining for you to idemtify just what you felt I said that indicated paranoia.
Tim,
You must be overlooking mcfarms comments which is what this is all about.
Nobody said that Tim was being paranoid. Tim said that mcfarmer, claiming that statements like mcfarms are paranoid.....are hilarious and gave him a chuckle and I asked why. This is mcfarms statement:
"now MM just where do we go from here. Seems we are already around the bend. Next stop, concentration camps and rebooting of the common peoples minds who thought we lived in America."
So Tim, please tell us why that statement is NOT paranoid?
Never mind.................that was rhetorical. Of course that was paranoid and mcfarmer was justified in responding that way.
Maybe mcfarm really didn't mean that and it was just an eye rolling absurd statement that most of us would think was the hilarous statement, not the paranoid comment and just go on.
mcfarmer called it paranoid, so instead of defending the statement as not paranoid or agreeing with him, you make your demeaning comment about his legit comment..........which is when its starts entering hurt feelings-land and taking things personal-land.
No big deal except that this turns a potential constructive conversation and exchange of legit ideas into a pissing match with the objective of belittling the opponent and making them look bad in an argument that you want to win
I totally realize that I'm nitpicking on something that is not even close to any violations but this and the comment about teachers by mcfarm, was very personal to mcfarmer, who was a school teacher for decades and it was very hurtful to mcfarmer.
mcfarmer is an extremely valuable poster here because he brings something good to the forum that it would otherwise never get.
He is outnumbered and thats exactly why we need him and his alternate, sometimes on the money, intelligent views.
Otherwise, this place just becomes an echo chamber with the far right dominating and metmike doing his best, with WxFollower to make it more well rounded.
sorry if my smart ass line caused grief. Most of us around here know how lacking libs are with anything pertaining to a sense of humor which seems started this. Sorry.
On the to more serious stuff. If McFarmer took a hit personally he will recover. Our children maybe not so much. I only restated what McFarmer has said in previous posts about indoctrination of our youth and the way he teachers American history. He will not even admit the national conversation we are having in our schools right now about CRT. the national leader of the countries largest teachers union recently admitted it and more. This CRT has finally been outed and is being fought tooth and nail. As I stated parents are in control, not teachers or administrators. Parents will decide what is taught and when. Parents will decide there will be no indoctrination of young students. No little kids bearing the burden of past wrongs or being called privileged because of the color of their skin. I am not going to apologize for standing up for small impressionable kids.
One more thing. Why is McFarmer allowed to use my long held handle with a small adjustment? Seems this is just as confusing as someone new coming here and using metmikey or vandi with an I instead of y and may have led to several misunderstandings.
No problem mcfarm, I was mainly just showing how a silly remark can end up being the source of something that is amplified because of 2 or more parties already primed for battle because of their pre existing political differences.
In this case, I actually think it was more of the school teacher thing that was offensive and it was metmike that targeted Tim for demeaning the mcfarmer paranoid remark..............but wanted to show support for mcfarmer because he's a valuable guy here and his feelings were for real.
At times like this, I seriously feel like I could be way more productive doing 100 other things.
On names, mcfarm and mcfarmer.
I understand how their could be confusion. In the previous post, when I was using both names repeatedly to discuss the posts and other things, I can see how this would be especially confusing.
However, both your last names start with mc and both of you farm for a living and both have had that handle for MANY years.
mcfarmer has as much right to his handle, even if you had yours a bit longer and when I use the search engine to look things up based on a posters handle, it makes it easier for me if a poster has kept the same name.
I guess we'll need to ask Mcfarmer to whom he refered.. But the comment of McFarm's you refered to was made about 830 in the morning. I replied to McFarmer at about 8:06 PM and Mcfarmers Paranoid statement was made at 8:32 PM, or 12 hours and several replies after McFarms "concentration camp" and the very next comment in the thread after my reply.
I'm sure you'll understand that if I misunderstood McFarmers intent, the timing and order of events certainly support my thinking.
If we are going to start concentrating on insults, may I suggest that calling someone paranoid should be included in the list?
You’ll forgive me now.......if I focus my attention on more productive things in other areas rather than who said what and when they said it and who has the right to call themselves what handle here.