RE: Covid 19 conspiracies dump
January 11, 2022 at 10:11 pm
(This post was last modified: January 11, 2022 at 10:12 pm by Irreligious Atheist.)
We may have some idea about some things, Rye, but to claim that we know everything there is to know a year after the vaccines have come out is nonsense, and I think you know that. There is still much to learn. Your stance here is anti-scientific imo.
What does the word 'safe' mean when it comes to the covid vaccines? People mean different things by safe. I think you can argue that the vaccines are reasonably safe, but they can also rightfully be called risky vaccines, which I have no problem calling them. These vaccines were put out extremely quickly and I think nurses should have the right to make this risk assessment for themselves when there are still many unknowns out there. I believe you are certainly overstating what we know at the moment, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. This short video below explains my position on this pretty well. I think your position is anti-scientific.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGElw8Txs9A&t=607s
And as far as the George Floyd thing goes, I waited for the trial to make up my mind completely, and before the verdict came out, my position was that he was guilty of manslaughter, so I didn't think Chauvin should have gotten off. George Floyd jumped out of the back of the police car after he was placed in there, which can be considered an escape attempt, so I understood why Chauvin put him in the restraint for those actions, but after the Floyd situation happened, I agreed with everyone else that Chauvin's actions were immoral and that he held Floyd down for way too long.
What does the word 'safe' mean when it comes to the covid vaccines? People mean different things by safe. I think you can argue that the vaccines are reasonably safe, but they can also rightfully be called risky vaccines, which I have no problem calling them. These vaccines were put out extremely quickly and I think nurses should have the right to make this risk assessment for themselves when there are still many unknowns out there. I believe you are certainly overstating what we know at the moment, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that point. This short video below explains my position on this pretty well. I think your position is anti-scientific.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGElw8Txs9A&t=607s
And as far as the George Floyd thing goes, I waited for the trial to make up my mind completely, and before the verdict came out, my position was that he was guilty of manslaughter, so I didn't think Chauvin should have gotten off. George Floyd jumped out of the back of the police car after he was placed in there, which can be considered an escape attempt, so I understood why Chauvin put him in the restraint for those actions, but after the Floyd situation happened, I agreed with everyone else that Chauvin's actions were immoral and that he held Floyd down for way too long.