Philosophy Now Forum

Ohhh. OK, you too are doing the bait&switch trick of stretching the definition of "mandatory vaccinations" as far as it needs to fit your argument.

If an employer, backed by gov edict, sez get jabbed or you're fired , that sounds mandatey to me.

You see it otherwise: no surprise there.


Is the government going to throw you in a jail and convict you of a crime if you don't vaccinate? No? Then it's not mandatory!
Do you have the option to refuse the jab (even if it means losing yoru job)? Yes? Then it's not mandatory!
When it comes to hiring/firing peope both governments and employers operate under the same labour laws.

It's legal, so it's A-okay!: an impoverished position. Again: not surprisin'.


The employee's rights don't trump the employer's rights.

Again: the employer has no say-so over the employee outside of what is work-related (comportment, dress, duties) while on the clock.


So how about we cut your pay by $500 to off-set those costs?

Can't cut mine, Ringo: I self-employ. The 9 to 5ers, some may say, yeah, I'll take the hit as long as you hit obese Stan in accountin' with the same penalty, or diabetic Jenette over in HR, or Lou the alcoholic over in sales. If you're gonna penalze me, they say, for what you think are my bad choices, be fair and penalize everyone.

Good luck with keepin' staff, Ringo.


The issue of vaccination is a 100% personal matter - a matter of choice.

The only sensible thing you've said in this conversation so far.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 6:15 pm If an employer, backed by gov edict, sez get jabbed or you're fired , that sounds mandatey to me.

You see it otherwise: no surprise there.

Q.E.D definition-stretching.

If it's not in law - it's not a mandate.
If it carries no legal consequences - it's not a mandate.

Lets not get bogged down in the semantics, shall we? Whether it's mandatory or not has no bearing on whether a decision to fire you has merit.

it does. You are incompetent. The position requires demonstrable ability to make responsible medical choices. You can't even do that for yourself, so it's unlikely that you can do it for other patients.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 6:15 pm It's legal, so it's A-okay!: an impoverished position. Again: not surprisin'.

No. You are incompetent. So it's OK.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 6:15 pm Again: the employer has no say-so over the employee outside of what is work-related (comportment, dress, duties) while on the clock.

What is work-relted is good evidence-based medical decision-making. And you've demonstrated incompetence in this domain.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 6:15 pm Can't cut mine, Ringo: I self-employ. The 9 to 5ers, some may say, yeah, I'll take the hit as long as you hit obese Stan in accountin' with the same penalty, or diabetic Jenette over in HR, or Lou the alcoholic over in sales. If you're gonna penalze me, they say, for what you think are my bad choices, be fair and penalize everyone.

If there was a once-off, 5-minute evidence-based medical treatment that could help Stan's thyroid condition - he'd jump at the opportunity.
if there was a once-off, 5-minute evidence-based medical treatment that ensures Jannete doesn't have to administer her insulin daily - she'd jump at the opportunity.
If there was a once-off, 5-minute evidence-based medical treatment that spares Lou having to take the 12-step program - he'd jump at the opporunity.

You have options, but you won't act on them.

Not only are you incompetent, but you sound entitled. I think we are better off if we let you go. If you think that's unfair - you can challenge us in court.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 6:15 pm The issue of vaccination is a 100% personal matter - a matter of choice.

The only sensible thing you've said in this conversation so far.

Great! We agree.

So lets pick up from there. Vaccination is a personal matter so it has nothing to do with laws, Governments, self-ownership, employers, rights or mandates. All of those things are relevant in the social sphere and irrelevant in the personal sphere where every individual chooses for themselves.

Why are you making an objectively poor decision that undermines your personal wellbeing?

good evidence-based medical decision-making...

...sez the vaccines are worthless, risky, and unnecessary.


You have options, but you won't act on them.

Yes, the fatty, the drunk, the uncontrolled diabetic do have options: they choose to not avail themselves of them.

Fire 'em, Ringo.


Vaccination is a personal matter so it has nothing to do with laws, Governments, self-ownership, employers, rights or mandates

Mandated jabbing has everything to with ownness.


Why are you making an objectively poor decision that undermines your personal wellbeing?

Good question. So, tell me, why did you accept a worthless, risky, unnecessary beer virus jab?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:27 pm ...sez the vaccines are worthless, risky, and unnecessary.

And that says you are incompetent at understanding scientific research.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:27 pm Good question. So, tell me, why did you accept a worthless, risky, unnecessary beer virus jab?

I understood the evidence, understood that the vaccine is orders of magnitude less risky than the virus; and that it significantly reduces one's risk of serious illness and death.

I took it because managing risk and making good decisions is what I do for a living and unlike you, I am not incompetent at it.

Now, are you going to tell us why you are making dumb choices that are are self-sabotaging your health?

I understood the evidence, understood that the vaccine is orders of magnitude less risky than the virus itself.

No, you didn't. No, it isn't.

You're a very foolish boy, and you'll be dead or crippled from the jab within five years.

Hope your wife has a good policy on you ('cept that probably doesn't matter since she's jabbed to, yeah?).

RIP: Ringo...he did as he was told

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:44 pm No, you didn't. No, it isn't.

You're a very foolish boy, and you'll be dead or crippled from the jab within five years.

You are incompetent, Henry.

The time-scale at which the mRNA vaccine/processes/cells operate at is measured in weeks, not years.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:44 pm Hope your wife has a good policy on you ('cept that probably doesn't matter since she's jabbed to, yeah?).

You know what, Henry. I'll make you an offer you can't refuse.

$250k in escrow for 5 years. If I am still alive and uncrippled - it's mine.
If we die - it's yours.

The time-scale at which the mRNA vaccine/processes/cells operate at is measured in weeks, not years.

Diamonds are forever, and so is jab damage.


$250k

You ain't got it.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:58 pm
Diamonds are forever, and so is jab damage.

$250k

You ain't got it.

Are you worried about my finances or yours? Lets bump it to $500k.

Quit the sophistry and put your money where your mouth is.

$500k

You ain't got it.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 10:44 pm , and you'll be dead or crippled from the jab within five years.

How could you possibly have any evidence for that? Just talking out of your hairy arse again. Why would the vaccine kill people in 5 years? Do you even know what it does?

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 11:03 pm $500k

You ain't got it.

Is that your way of backing out, Henry?

There are all these people watching this forum. Nominate the escrow agency and we'll soon find out who's got what.

How could you possibly have any evidence for that?

The way anyone can, veg: I went a'lookin'.

I suggest you do the same. You're still unjabbed, yeah? If so: you're not a (future) jab fatality (unlike Ringo and his missus).

But you will be if you take the needle.

-----

Is that your way of backing out, Henry?

Can't back out of sumthin' I never agreed to, Ringo.

henry quirk wrote: ↑Sun Oct 31, 2021 11:12 pm Can't back out of sumthin' I never agreed to, Ringo.

Free money, Henry!

I'll be dead or injured in 5 years and it's all yours.

Talk is cheap. Put up or shut up.

Free money, Henry!

You don't have it.

Frankly, I'd be surprised if you had a pot to piss in.