it's not about refusal to get the vaccine; it's about reckless disregard for the health of others

[unblock]

if refusing to take the vaccine was the *only* way in which they didn't abide by the rules and guidelines everyone should be following during a pandemic, then it wouldn't really be a problem.

being vulnerable to getting and spreading a nasty disease, they would simply stay in their own homes, avoiding the disease by isolation, like the most of us did during the pandemic until the vaccine came out.

but there don't seem to be a ton of people doing that. it seems that the so-called "anti-vaxxers" are invariably guilty of breaking *multiple* rules and guidelines regarding health safety during a pandemic. they don't just refusing the vaccine, they then take their unvaccinated asses out into public and engage in virus-seeking and virus-spreading behavior.

they seem to often go out in public.
they seem to congregate in crowds.
they seem to avoid masks often, as well.
they seem to disregard proper social distancing.

maybe they play by *some* of these rules, but they invariably seem to break at last one, often more than one, rule beyond merely refusing to take the vaccine.



and that's the problem. the combination of multiple points of rule-breaking translates knowingly to a greater likelihood of catching and spreading the disease, causing harm to others.

*that* is the problem.

so let's dispense with the "freedom" crap, let's stop them in their tracks with their pointedly offensive "my body, my choice" crap, because that's not what they're all about.

they're not lobbying for any right to refuse the vaccine and then stay at home.
because really, they're allowed to do that and it's not a problem *if* they stay isolated.

what they're actually clamoring for is a right to infect others. there's really no other way to describe breaking multiple rules and guidelines, in a way that predictably leads to more cases of an infectious disease.


so let's stop calling them "anti-vaxxers".

they're pro-covid, pro-virus, disease spreaders, lobbying for a right to infect, a right to catch and transmit disease.

the media needs to stop using the right-wing biased term "anti-vaxxers" because that really misses the problem. yes, they refuse the vaccine, but the problem is when they then go out and break other rules, knowingly harming others.

[Mad_Machine76]

1. +1000

[marble falls]

2. And that's exactly how we need to frame the argument. We're not aruing legality, we're ...

enforcing rules to protect public health.

[Diamond_Dog]

3. They are selfish, inconsiderate, oafs.

And I think some of the ones who pose as “tough guys” are afraid of needles.

[Mme. Defarge]

4. Depraved indifference

to human life.

[Pobeka]

5. They are viral terrorists at this point. Indiscriminately maming and killing other people.

[democrattotheend]

6. I think it depends why they are unvaccinated

Of my unvaxxed family members and friends, one of them has not gotten it due to an auto-immune condition and previous bad reactions to other vaccines. She wears masks and takes other precautions. The others just don't believe COVID is much of a threat and refuse to mask or take other reasonable precautions. I put them in very different groups.

[unblock]

9. Agreed, I know someone in a similar situation

Of course she would never call herself anti-vax. She'd love to take the vaccine if only it were safe for her to do so given her specific medical condition.

And similarly, her response, quite logically, has been to hole herself up in her home and get her exposure to other people as close to zero as possible.

Exactly my point. Not getting vaccinated isn't the problem in and of itself. The problem is then going out and breaking other rules and guidelines.

[Initech]

7. Yup, the technical term is "network externalities".

The more people who get the vaccine, the more beneficial it is to society. It's not that difficult to understand!

[IbogaProject]

8. No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service.

No Shirt, No Shoes, No Service. This one is no different, they are free to eat dinner whith their shirts off, just not in public. But their real issue is narcissist, they don't like being told what to do, they think they are immune enough and they simply don't care for those who aren't of their "strong immune" constitution and are at risk from spreaders.

[unblock]

10. Spot on. Same argument for anti-mask, and even more fitting there

Everyone is ok with businesses refusing service for people who won't cover up their naughty bits, even though there's no great medical health risk there. Psychological, sure, but bodily health risk, no, not really. As long as there's no contact, anyway.

But requiring a mask is some great infringement on rights?

How is it that they're ok with being required to wear pants then? It makes no sense, but then, making sense was never the point.

Not too many restaurants require men to wear a tie these days, but some certainly did not that long ago. What would they say about that?

[LastDemocratInSC]

11. In many states exposing a person to HIV through "reckless disregard"

is a class D felony. Why not have the same law for Covid, which is more easily transmitted?

[unblock]

13. They're happy to throw the book at gay people

Or any other minority group when possible.

But throwing the book at a bunch of republicans? Ha! Why would anyone even consider that?

[tanyev]

12. Yep, they want to refuse the vaccine and live their lives as if Covid doesn't exist.

Problem is, it does exist. And it will find them eventually.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

16. "First of all, you don't get the vaccine for yourself. You get it for other people."

Link to tweet