The vaccination question is simple:
Is the government allowed to dictate medical intervention?
@b6hydra there are already signs that the vaccines might be selecting for more virulent and transmissible strains of the virus.
value judgements on whether people should be allowed to harm themselves should be based on science, not political expediency.
particularly when the topic of conversation is violation of human rights
my body, my choice, no?
@skells Usually I'd agree with 'my body, my choice'. But this is a virus which affects other people too... Not sure if that's still 100% a 'my body, my choice' case.
Just something to ponder about philosophically. I know my government is not going to enforce vaccination, but a lot of people in my country are willing to vaccinate so it's thankfully not a terribly huge point of discussion here.
🇳🇱
@freemo On the other hand, those kind of reactions eliminates any discussion of some sort. I'm not a person in power, so when I say 'for the greater good', maybe it's a nice idea to discuss the why and why not, and not the 'it justifies all bad stuff' conversation killer.
You do make a point, of course. But it sure kills the discussion to just chop it off like that. ;)
+bonifartius 𒂼𒄄
my issue with "the greater good" are these points:
- "good" is really flexible in it's definition
- we (humanity) tried it often enough. it almost never worked in a way which one would consider moral in retrospective. it's seductive to do things for "the greater good" because it makes one _feel_ good. taking action "for the cause" combined with "no pain no gain". i'd say it's at the time of not going down that well trodden path and thinking of other solutions, especially if it's regarding the bodily integrity of people.
