Coronavirus

But in the grander scheme of things, your kids are not going to do badly in life. Yes, I do worry about those who don't have access to education, but I also worry about those from exactly the same background when they do have full access to education. Those kids can bust a gut, even get excellent grades, and still be bottom of the pile. It's a very Tory ideal that everyone has the same opportunities if they just go to school.
 
Brigantium said:
But in the grander scheme of things, your kids are not going to do badly in life. Yes, I do worry about those who don't have access to education, but I also worry about those from exactly the same background when they do have full access to education. Those kids can bust a gut, even get excellent grades, and still be bottom of the pile. It's a very Tory ideal that everyone has the same opportunities if they just go to school.
Click to expand...

I know that - sadly - those kids are not going to have the same opportunities if they just go to school, but if they don't they are even going to have fewer! How about keeping them in full-time education whilst we try and revert the damage the Tories have inflicted to this country? :)

This is not just a British problem though. :(
 
GhostofCain said:
This is not just a British problem though. :(
Click to expand...
No, I completely get it. Part of the idea of public school is as a levelling ground - the idea that any kid can come there and get the same treatment and the same education, whether they be from a poor household, an abusive household, a rich household, a loving household, everything in between. Functionally, that doesn't happen, but it gets closer than otherwise. Children losing a year, two years of this environment is damaging to them, their futures, their social growth, etc. It's going to be challenging for those kids.
 
LooseCannon said:
No, I completely get it. Part of the idea of public school is as a levelling ground - the idea that any kid can come there and get the same treatment and the same education, whether they be from a poor household, an abusive household, a rich household, a loving household, everything in between. Functionally, that doesn't happen, but it gets closer than otherwise. Children losing a year, two years of this environment is damaging to them, their futures, their social growth, etc. It's going to be challenging for those kids.
Click to expand...

You hit the nail right on the head.

Just to clarify things for non-UK people, here what is called a “public school” is everything but; public schools are fee-paying posh schools. The schools I feel so strongly about are called state schools (my daughter goes to a co-educational state school).
 
Last edited:
Reading about the high number of first responders here in the US that are straight up refusing the vaccine is infuriating. I don't know if this is similarly happening around the world in other countries, but it's just baffling.
 
I've had a couple relatives say stuff about "Oh, I hear the vaccine actually does this to you!" with some bizarre debilitating symptom. I just tell them they really need to stop getting their news from memes on Facebook.
 
I haven't heard of it in healthcare workers, but there are definitely a lot of people who won't, and some who also seem to object strongly to other people getting it. My parents don't want it, although they're fairly high priority, but say they'd get it if it means they can travel abroad again.
 
Why do we even need a vaccine? A certain all-knowing, all-orange said something about just injecting disinfectant fluids that will kill the virus instantly.
 
Just to be the Devil's advocate once again, I kinda get why some people might be reluctant to take it. I mean, there'll be a cold day in Hell before I decided to try out the Russian or the Chinese vaccine (duh) and even with those proper Western ones, I still feel that they're really too new and we don't know about the possible drawbacks and risks enough. Or even how long-term do they really work. It's all just kinda too rushed for my liking, is all.

Just a gut feeling, completely unscientific, I admit, but a gut feeling nonetheless.

Doesn't mean I won't take the shot once it's relevant (so far it's just for the healthcare workers, the elderly and such), but I get the certain amount of scepticism that might be present. And I shamefully admit that I'm almost kinda glad that I don't have to go right now and that it's not even possible for my and my family right now, so I don't have to choose right now. Yeah, a coward's position. Sorry.
(on the other hand, I do my best to socially distance, wear respirators, don't go anywhere etc. - after all, we have a second baby who's a month old now, so we're trying to be extra careful and we would be doing that, vaccine or not)

That said, on the other hand, you have people who say it's been all made up and that the people in the hospitals are paid actors, but that's neither here nor there...
 
Efficacy is a bigger concern for me than safety with the first vaccines, really. Even though they've been tested on large numbers of people, different age groups etc, I'd expect that they won't prove to be quite as effective as the headline publicity has made out once massive numbers of people have been treated. And allowing for cockups in storage and administration of the vaccines. I completely get the suspicion over vaccines touted by somewhere like Russia, less so with China, actually.

It's where there's become an ingrained association of all vaccines = very bad, modern medicine = very bad, without any rational reasoning, appraisal of the individual situation or, er ' healthy' scepticism behind it that it becomes a problem. So many cliches and platitudes floating around that have become the truth through common usage and are an accepted social norm.
 
Oh, yes, I agree completely.

I mean, while yes, there can be even a 'healthy' scepticism towards a modern medicine (I personally insist there can and should be a healthy scepticism towards anything with the adjective 'modern', in fact), there should be a friggin' line.

'Cause, let's put it this way:

- I am a person who has a rather hostile relationship with the modern world quite often
- I am a person who takes into consideration even the ethical grounds of developing a vaccine (let's not get into this really deep, but let's just say that not all of the vaccines were developed in a morally licit way - it varies from company to company)
- I have concerns regarding the effects of the vaccine
- I do believe that moral (and conscious) stance is more important than bare survival - and yes, I fight for the open churches
- yet I still promote getting shot and intend to do so once it's possible and if at the time it will still be relevant (which I guess it will, the virus probably won't disappear just because of lockdown)

And that's me, a crazy, theocratic bigot.

So how far off must you be to actually fight against the vaccination, I wonder? :D


P. S. - though I agree that vaccination is not a moral obligation per se. But if you won't get vaccinated... well, let's just throw this one here?

At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines [...] must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.

(from the note of the Congregation for the doctrine of the faith)
 
Last edited:
Just against Covid or against certain diseases or all vaccinations altogether?

(also, there are always people who can't even be vaccinated)
 
JudasMyGuide said:
completely unscientific
Click to expand...
And this is where your “gut feeling” becomes irrelevant.

People need to listen to the scientists. The vaccines have been tested and approved by credible medical experts around the world. A more competent US Government would’ve had a robust public awareness campaign to go with the vaccine rollout to prevent people from being unnecessarily skeptical about the vaccine. I’m not sure if vaccines should be mandatory, but I fully support businesses strong arming individuals to take the vaccine (e.g. airlines requiring proof of vaccinations).
 
LooseCannon said:
All standard vaccinations as recommended by the appropriate entity. Which, I guess today, is:
Diphtheria, tetanus, polio, HI, pertussis, BCG, Hep A, Hep B, measles, mumps, rubella, meningococcal, pneumococcal, rotavirus, and HPV. Oh and COVID.
Click to expand...
That is a bit too intrusive. There are people with medical conditions which might make it too risky. I.e. my late father in law developed MS, something his doctors theorized was activated by a (live virus style) vaccination. This is why my wife is terrified of vaccines, since MS is hereditary and especially transmittable to females. And even disregarding that still goes against the moral fundamentals of choice which is the basis for western societies. I take all the vaccines implored by authorities, but it should remain my choice.
 
Last edited:
You know, that moment when you get so pissed at your ideological oponents that you forget that sarcasm is not by and itself clever and you lose coherence in the process... that's the moment to leave the discussion. By at least one of the parties, I guess. Which I'll promptly do.

I think some of you are just too clever and smart and funny for my ol' dumb me.

P. S.

Mosh said:
And this is where your “gut feeling” becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Just wanted to say - I know I myself made the mistake in my previous post, but you do realize that not all sciences are empirical, right?
 
Yax said:
There are people with medical conditions which might make it too risky.
Click to expand...
I'm fine with a two doctor-approved exception for medical reasons. Otherwise? Nah. It's not your freedom at risk, it's the freedom of those who you'd kill if you caused an outbreak. If the diseases would only kill you, I wouldn't give a fuck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top