Mandatory covid 19 vaccination

Started by grounded, November 21, 2021, 10:49:12 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Should the Covid 19 vaccination(s) become mandatory by law in Ireland(North and South)?

Yes
45 (50%)
No
45 (50%)

Total Members Voted: 90

Voting closed: November 24, 2021, 10:49:12 PM

sid waddell

Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:39:47 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 11:36:27 PM

Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:14:57 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 09:34:49 PM

Quote from: Orior on November 23, 2021, 08:57:38 PM
Have you heard of anyone getting polio recently?

No. That's because 100% vaccine rollout does work.
Dunno if it that's for my benefit? It won't work because you can't force people to take it - physically (or morally).
Do you have children? If so did you have them vaccinated against various illnesses?
What has that got to do with the price of butter?  I'm not talking about the rights and wrongs of it, it's the practicalities.  Current situation is there's millions  of militant anti-vaxxers you can't physically force vaccinate them ffs.

Would a woke Liberal like yourself advocate forcefully vaccinating refuseniks - Literally holding a person down and injecting them?
I asked you a question.

Why don't you answer it?
Yes my kids are vaccinated (& for covid), I'm not stupid nor anti-vax. I really don't see the point of your Question in this context, wasting my time is all you're doing.

Do you think mandatory vaccination for Covid in the current circumstances will work? Physically forcing people to take an injection if required?
So you forced your kids to be vaccinated. Because what else is vaccinating babies and young children?

You say morally we can't force anybody to take a vaccine.

Morally we can put in place measures which make it extremely difficult for them to function as part of society if they refuse to be vaccinated.

And given the stakes, it would be more than justified.




Eire90

Quote from: sid waddell on November 24, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:39:47 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 11:36:27 PM

Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:14:57 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 09:34:49 PM

Quote from: Orior on November 23, 2021, 08:57:38 PM
Have you heard of anyone getting polio recently?


given the stakes politicians should face severe punishment if anyone has a death or a severe adverse reaction i bet they wont do it if they know they could face a severe penalty if someone gets hurt if they think the vaccines are 100 percent safe then put their money where there mouths are.
No. That's because 100% vaccine rollout does work.
Dunno if it that's for my benefit? It won't work because you can't force people to take it - physically (or morally).
Do you have children? If so did you have them vaccinated against various illnesses?
What has that got to do with the price of butter?  I'm not talking about the rights and wrongs of it, it's the practicalities.  Current situation is there's millions  of militant anti-vaxxers you can't physically force vaccinate them ffs.

Would a woke Liberal like yourself advocate forcefully vaccinating refuseniks - Literally holding a person down and injecting them?
I asked you a question.

Why don't you answer it?
Yes my kids are vaccinated (& for covid), I'm not stupid nor anti-vax. I really don't see the point of your Question in this context, wasting my time is all you're doing.

Do you think mandatory vaccination for Covid in the current circumstances will work? Physically forcing people to take an injection if required?
So you forced your kids to be vaccinated. Because what else is vaccinating babies and young children?

You say morally we can't force anybody to take a vaccine.

Morally we can put in place measures which make it extremely difficult for them to function as part of society if they refuse to be vaccinated.

And given the stakes, it would be more than justified.

Eire90

given the stakes then politicians (TDS) should face severe punishment if someone has a severe adverse reaction  if the politicians think the vaccine is 100 percent safe then put their money where their mouths are.

Eire90

Morally tds should face punishment if severe reactions also morally anyone that goes to a nightclub  or  pub even if  double  jabbed should then be socially outcast by your logic and also old people shuld be throwing out of society even if double jabbed.

trueblue1234

Quote from: sid waddell on November 24, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:39:47 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 11:36:27 PM

Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:14:57 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 09:34:49 PM

Quote from: Orior on November 23, 2021, 08:57:38 PM
Have you heard of anyone getting polio recently?

No. That's because 100% vaccine rollout does work.
Dunno if it that's for my benefit? It won't work because you can't force people to take it - physically (or morally).
Do you have children? If so did you have them vaccinated against various illnesses?
What has that got to do with the price of butter?  I'm not talking about the rights and wrongs of it, it's the practicalities.  Current situation is there's millions  of militant anti-vaxxers you can't physically force vaccinate them ffs.

Would a woke Liberal like yourself advocate forcefully vaccinating refuseniks - Literally holding a person down and injecting them?
I asked you a question.

Why don't you answer it?
Yes my kids are vaccinated (& for covid), I'm not stupid nor anti-vax. I really don't see the point of your Question in this context, wasting my time is all you're doing.

Do you think mandatory vaccination for Covid in the current circumstances will work? Physically forcing people to take an injection if required?
So you forced your kids to be vaccinated. Because what else is vaccinating babies and young children?

You say morally we can't force anybody to take a vaccine.

Morally we can put in place measures which make it extremely difficult for them to function as part of society if they refuse to be vaccinated.

And given the stakes, it would be more than justified.
Sid I'm all for trying to get people vaccinated. But that argument doesn't stand up. There's a difference in making a decision for your children in light of their well fare and forcing adults to take a vaccine they don't want. If I decide my kids aren't allowed out this wkend as they haven't been working hard enough in school it doesn't mean I'm in favour of imprisonment of adults who don't work. The whole relationship is different.
Grammar: the difference between knowing your shit

bennydorano

#50
Quote from: sid waddell on November 24, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:39:47 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 11:36:27 PM

Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:14:57 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 09:34:49 PM

Quote from: Orior on November 23, 2021, 08:57:38 PM
Have you heard of anyone getting polio recently?

No. That's because 100% vaccine rollout does work.
Dunno if it that's for my benefit? It won't work because you can't force people to take it - physically (or morally).
Do you have children? If so did you have them vaccinated against various illnesses?
What has that got to do with the price of butter?  I'm not talking about the rights and wrongs of it, it's the practicalities.  Current situation is there's millions  of militant anti-vaxxers you can't physically force vaccinate them ffs.

Would a woke Liberal like yourself advocate forcefully vaccinating refuseniks - Literally holding a person down and injecting them?
I asked you a question.

Why don't you answer it?
Yes my kids are vaccinated (& for covid), I'm not stupid nor anti-vax. I really don't see the point of your Question in this context, wasting my time is all you're doing.

Do you think mandatory vaccination for Covid in the current circumstances will work? Physically forcing people to take an injection if required?
So you forced your kids to be vaccinated. Because what else is vaccinating babies and young children?

You say morally we can't force anybody to take a vaccine.

Morally we can put in place measures which make it extremely difficult for them to function as part of society if they refuse to be vaccinated.

And given the stakes, it would be more than justified.

You mean follow a possible route like the one I already outlined and is already being employed - Covid passports?

[Mandatory vaccination won't work. Covid passports are a much better tool to engender compliance. No vaccine = no covid passport - that's a person's own look out, if you're denied entry to places because you've no covid passport, that's tough titty for you and a bonus for the vaccinated public.]

Please outline how you would plan to physically make refuseniks submit to a vaccine injection.


tbrick18

Quote from: grounded on November 24, 2021, 08:21:02 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on November 23, 2021, 04:41:08 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on November 23, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
When driving on the road I don't just want to drive sober I want those around me to drive sober also.

Yes this is my opinion too.
Covid can be as deadly as drink driving and probably moreso.
It's an unprecedented situation we find ourselves in and with that unprecedented measures are needed. Vaccines reduce the risk of catching and dying from Covid, but don't eliminate the risk.
We all want some resemblance of pre-covid life in terms of socialising, work and holidays and the only way to get that is with everyone vaccinated, imo.
Even with that there is risk and I think we are never going to abolish covid entirely but have to learn to live with it.

If vaccines are not going to be mandatory, the ONLY option is that the unvaccinated can't socialise, work and interact with the rest of us. Controversial I know, but I think it has to be one or the other. Covid passports at a minimum but probably both mandatory vaccine and a passport to prove you've had it.
We, the public, have had the chance to be sensible by taking the vaccines and not abusing the freedoms we take for granted. But too many un-vaccinated people interacting has got us to where we are now and something has to change.
Incidentally, I know of several people with fake vaccine cards so they can go into bars in the South. Absolute sc**bag move in my opinion, but highlights the requirement for passports to be digital and controlled.

Who gets to decide which of their liberties/freedoms are removed and which they might be allowed to keep?
      Surely if the unvaccinated can't work, socialise or interact with the vaccinated it pretty much excludes them from society.
      So they can't go to work, school, public hospitals/clinics, places of worship public amenities/areas etc. I'd guess given the nature of the current voting system they wouldn't be able to vote.
      (Perhaps they might be allowed a postal ballot or maybe a seperate polling station).
       One hypothetical question for you (excluding the unvaccinated who would already be dealt by this exclusion)
          Lets just say it could be proven, that one particular cohort or group in society(even if they were vaccinated) were significantly more prone to both carching and transmittng the covid 19 virus than the general population should they also have some of their freedoms removed/curtailed?
        Surely the logic is the same? By removing that small cohort from society you are protecting the general public from the virus. You are lessening the burden on the Hospitals and in particularly the acute services in ICU.
        Of course you could use the argument that the group didnt have a choice as the unvaccinated do,  but in that case the exclusion of the the unvaccinated would then be surely seen as some form of punishment for not getting vaccinated as opposed to protecting the public health and lessening the burden on our overstretched health services. Isn't this what its all about?
       

The point I'm making is that there is an option there which would permit everyone to play a full part in society and help reduce the spread of covid. That option is the vaccine.
By not choosing to avail of that option then you are instead choosing to put other people at risk as well as yourself.

To go back to the drink driving analogy, it's illegal to drink and drive to protect other road users. It is still the responsibility of the driver to follow the law or ignore it. If they ignore by drinking and driving they put others lives at risk. There is a strong parallel here with covid vaccines.
To expand further, there is already precedent for other cohorts to not be allowed to drive. People who speed, people who have medical issues etc. So to answer your query, if there is a cohort of people who are an increased risk of spreading covid then that risk would need to be assessed and if deemed serious enough then yes, some type of measure would need to be put in place to protect the masses who avail of vaccines and follow the regulations.

I have yet to hear a good reason for not taking the vaccine. It is currently a choice, but that choice should not afford you the same freedoms as the rest of us given what we have come through so far.

screenexile

Quote from: tbrick18 on November 24, 2021, 11:43:04 AM
Quote from: grounded on November 24, 2021, 08:21:02 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on November 23, 2021, 04:41:08 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on November 23, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
When driving on the road I don't just want to drive sober I want those around me to drive sober also.

Yes this is my opinion too.
Covid can be as deadly as drink driving and probably moreso.
It's an unprecedented situation we find ourselves in and with that unprecedented measures are needed. Vaccines reduce the risk of catching and dying from Covid, but don't eliminate the risk.
We all want some resemblance of pre-covid life in terms of socialising, work and holidays and the only way to get that is with everyone vaccinated, imo.
Even with that there is risk and I think we are never going to abolish covid entirely but have to learn to live with it.

If vaccines are not going to be mandatory, the ONLY option is that the unvaccinated can't socialise, work and interact with the rest of us. Controversial I know, but I think it has to be one or the other. Covid passports at a minimum but probably both mandatory vaccine and a passport to prove you've had it.
We, the public, have had the chance to be sensible by taking the vaccines and not abusing the freedoms we take for granted. But too many un-vaccinated people interacting has got us to where we are now and something has to change.
Incidentally, I know of several people with fake vaccine cards so they can go into bars in the South. Absolute sc**bag move in my opinion, but highlights the requirement for passports to be digital and controlled.

Who gets to decide which of their liberties/freedoms are removed and which they might be allowed to keep?
      Surely if the unvaccinated can't work, socialise or interact with the vaccinated it pretty much excludes them from society.
      So they can't go to work, school, public hospitals/clinics, places of worship public amenities/areas etc. I'd guess given the nature of the current voting system they wouldn't be able to vote.
      (Perhaps they might be allowed a postal ballot or maybe a seperate polling station).
       One hypothetical question for you (excluding the unvaccinated who would already be dealt by this exclusion)
          Lets just say it could be proven, that one particular cohort or group in society(even if they were vaccinated) were significantly more prone to both carching and transmittng the covid 19 virus than the general population should they also have some of their freedoms removed/curtailed?
        Surely the logic is the same? By removing that small cohort from society you are protecting the general public from the virus. You are lessening the burden on the Hospitals and in particularly the acute services in ICU.
        Of course you could use the argument that the group didnt have a choice as the unvaccinated do,  but in that case the exclusion of the the unvaccinated would then be surely seen as some form of punishment for not getting vaccinated as opposed to protecting the public health and lessening the burden on our overstretched health services. Isn't this what its all about?
       

The point I'm making is that there is an option there which would permit everyone to play a full part in society and help reduce the spread of covid. That option is the vaccine.
By not choosing to avail of that option then you are instead choosing to put other people at risk as well as yourself.

To go back to the drink driving analogy, it's illegal to drink and drive to protect other road users. It is still the responsibility of the driver to follow the law or ignore it. If they ignore by drinking and driving they put others lives at risk. There is a strong parallel here with covid vaccines.
To expand further, there is already precedent for other cohorts to not be allowed to drive. People who speed, people who have medical issues etc. So to answer your query, if there is a cohort of people who are an increased risk of spreading covid then that risk would need to be assessed and if deemed serious enough then yes, some type of measure would need to be put in place to protect the masses who avail of vaccines and follow the regulations.

I have yet to hear a good reason for not taking the vaccine. It is currently a choice, but that choice should not afford you the same freedoms as the rest of us given what we have come through so far.

I'm all for the Vaccine I really am but it's not stopping the spread, cases are ramping up at a rapid rate again.

I think the only way you will get the case numbers down is a regiment of monitored testing a couple of times a week.

StephenC

Quote from: Eire90 on November 24, 2021, 09:24:26 AM
if this happens then tds should put thier lives on the line if their so confident the vaccine is 100 percent put their lives on the line if anyone dies or has a severe adverse reaction then what happens is a random draw happens in the dail and whatever tds name gets drawing out they face the death penalty they want to make vaccine mandatory then put your money where your mouths are tds your confident thats its that safe then put your lives on the line i bet they wouldnt.

Class  ;D ;D

trueblue1234

Quote from: StephenC on November 24, 2021, 12:07:55 PM
Quote from: Eire90 on November 24, 2021, 09:24:26 AM
if this happens then tds should put thier lives on the line if their so confident the vaccine is 100 percent put their lives on the line if anyone dies or has a severe adverse reaction then what happens is a random draw happens in the dail and whatever tds name gets drawing out they face the death penalty they want to make vaccine mandatory then put your money where your mouths are tds your confident thats its that safe then put your lives on the line i bet they wouldnt.

Class  ;D ;D
Would make for a great mini series.
Grammar: the difference between knowing your shit

imtommygunn

They could do russian roulette like deerhunter?

Rossfan

Quote from: Eire90 on November 24, 2021, 09:24:26 AM
if this happens then tds should put thier lives on the line if their so confident the vaccine is 100 percent put their lives on the line if anyone dies or has a severe adverse reaction then what happens is a random draw happens in the dail and whatever tds name gets drawing out they face the death penalty they want to make vaccine mandatory then put your money where your mouths are tds your confident thats its that safe then put your lives on the line i bet they wouldnt.

Skipped English class again?
Davy's given us a dream to cling to
We're going to bring home the SAM

Last Man

Quote from: screenexile on November 24, 2021, 12:06:47 PM
Quote from: tbrick18 on November 24, 2021, 11:43:04 AM
Quote from: grounded on November 24, 2021, 08:21:02 AM
Quote from: tbrick18 on November 23, 2021, 04:41:08 PM
Quote from: armaghniac on November 23, 2021, 11:11:37 AM
When driving on the road I don't just want to drive sober I want those around me to drive sober also.

Yes this is my opinion too.
Covid can be as deadly as drink driving and probably moreso.
It's an unprecedented situation we find ourselves in and with that unprecedented measures are needed. Vaccines reduce the risk of catching and dying from Covid, but don't eliminate the risk.
We all want some resemblance of pre-covid life in terms of socialising, work and holidays and the only way to get that is with everyone vaccinated, imo.
Even with that there is risk and I think we are never going to abolish covid entirely but have to learn to live with it.

If vaccines are not going to be mandatory, the ONLY option is that the unvaccinated can't socialise, work and interact with the rest of us. Controversial I know, but I think it has to be one or the other. Covid passports at a minimum but probably both mandatory vaccine and a passport to prove you've had it.
We, the public, have had the chance to be sensible by taking the vaccines and not abusing the freedoms we take for granted. But too many un-vaccinated people interacting has got us to where we are now and something has to change.
Incidentally, I know of several people with fake vaccine cards so they can go into bars in the South. Absolute sc**bag move in my opinion, but highlights the requirement for passports to be digital and controlled.

Who gets to decide which of their liberties/freedoms are removed and which they might be allowed to keep?
      Surely if the unvaccinated can't work, socialise or interact with the vaccinated it pretty much excludes them from society.
      So they can't go to work, school, public hospitals/clinics, places of worship public amenities/areas etc. I'd guess given the nature of the current voting system they wouldn't be able to vote.
      (Perhaps they might be allowed a postal ballot or maybe a seperate polling station).
       One hypothetical question for you (excluding the unvaccinated who would already be dealt by this exclusion)
          Lets just say it could be proven, that one particular cohort or group in society(even if they were vaccinated) were significantly more prone to both carching and transmittng the covid 19 virus than the general population should they also have some of their freedoms removed/curtailed?
        Surely the logic is the same? By removing that small cohort from society you are protecting the general public from the virus. You are lessening the burden on the Hospitals and in particularly the acute services in ICU.
        Of course you could use the argument that the group didnt have a choice as the unvaccinated do,  but in that case the exclusion of the the unvaccinated would then be surely seen as some form of punishment for not getting vaccinated as opposed to protecting the public health and lessening the burden on our overstretched health services. Isn't this what its all about?
       

The point I'm making is that there is an option there which would permit everyone to play a full part in society and help reduce the spread of covid. That option is the vaccine.
By not choosing to avail of that option then you are instead choosing to put other people at risk as well as yourself.

To go back to the drink driving analogy, it's illegal to drink and drive to protect other road users. It is still the responsibility of the driver to follow the law or ignore it. If they ignore by drinking and driving they put others lives at risk. There is a strong parallel here with covid vaccines.
To expand further, there is already precedent for other cohorts to not be allowed to drive. People who speed, people who have medical issues etc. So to answer your query, if there is a cohort of people who are an increased risk of spreading covid then that risk would need to be assessed and if deemed serious enough then yes, some type of measure would need to be put in place to protect the masses who avail of vaccines and follow the regulations.

I have yet to hear a good reason for not taking the vaccine. It is currently a choice, but that choice should not afford you the same freedoms as the rest of us given what we have come through so far.

I'm all for the Vaccine I really am but it's not stopping the spread, cases are ramping up at a rapid rate again.

I think the only way you will get the case numbers down is a regiment of monitored testing a couple of times a week.

+1 it is increasingly apparent that it will never work, has to be testing for now until they come up with something that does. Stop panicking and apply logic.

sid waddell

Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 11:07:46 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 24, 2021, 09:47:53 AM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 24, 2021, 07:52:49 AM
Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:39:47 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 11:36:27 PM

Quote from: sid waddell on November 23, 2021, 11:14:57 PM
Quote from: bennydorano on November 23, 2021, 09:34:49 PM

Quote from: Orior on November 23, 2021, 08:57:38 PM
Have you heard of anyone getting polio recently?

No. That's because 100% vaccine rollout does work.
Dunno if it that's for my benefit? It won't work because you can't force people to take it - physically (or morally).
Do you have children? If so did you have them vaccinated against various illnesses?
What has that got to do with the price of butter?  I'm not talking about the rights and wrongs of it, it's the practicalities.  Current situation is there's millions  of militant anti-vaxxers you can't physically force vaccinate them ffs.

Would a woke Liberal like yourself advocate forcefully vaccinating refuseniks - Literally holding a person down and injecting them?
I asked you a question.

Why don't you answer it?
Yes my kids are vaccinated (& for covid), I'm not stupid nor anti-vax. I really don't see the point of your Question in this context, wasting my time is all you're doing.

Do you think mandatory vaccination for Covid in the current circumstances will work? Physically forcing people to take an injection if required?
So you forced your kids to be vaccinated. Because what else is vaccinating babies and young children?

You say morally we can't force anybody to take a vaccine.

Morally we can put in place measures which make it extremely difficult for them to function as part of society if they refuse to be vaccinated.

And given the stakes, it would be more than justified.

You mean follow a possible route like the one I already outlined and is already being employed - Covid passports?

[Mandatory vaccination won't work. Covid passports are a much better tool to engender compliance. No vaccine = no covid passport - that's a person's own look out, if you're denied entry to places because you've no covid passport, that's tough titty for you and a bonus for the vaccinated public.]

Please outline how you would plan to physically make refuseniks submit to a vaccine injection.
Vaccine mandates do work. They've been in use in America for centuries.

Italy is currently using them.

I have no problem in saying I favour no vaccine, no job. And no welfare.

We'd soon see how "principled" the flat earthers are then.

Eire90

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10233341/Musician-40-suffered-brain-haemorrhage-induced-AstraZeneca-Covid-vaccine-inquest-hears.html




so was he a flat earther too you said lets see how principled flat earthers are well how about politicians face the death penalty if someone has a severe side effect why do your precious politicians get to sit back with no penalty if they think the vaccine is so safe what do they have to worry about.