Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions

Are you for or against Mandatory Vaccinations

  • For

    Votes: 292 57.4%

  • Against

    Votes: 221 43.4%
  • Total voters
    509

Remove this Banner Ad

Goosecat said:
The hypocrisy and sheer abandonment of the Liberal party belief sets is quite astounding really. This party founded on individual rights and freedom of choice now lead by compromised and short-sighted failures like Sco Mo and Gladys. Absolutely disgusting how all their beliefs and principles have gone out the window and turned into nothing more than falsities whilst they get directed by short-sighted puppeteers pulling their strings. What the hell does the Liberal party actually stand for anymore, nothing?
I note the Young Liberals have come out and stated they are against mandatory vaccination:


The issue has become a flashpoint for some other conservative Liberals, including Mulgoa MP Tanya Davies who sent an email to all her fellow coalition MPs saying the government had “failed in their jobs as leaders”.

Ms Davies told the Liberal Party room earlier in the week she would introduce a bill to ban companies from mandating their employees to get jabbed, but received almost no support and was blasted by the Deputy Premier for taking a position that was “dangerous, irresponsible and threatens lives”.

Ms Davies applauded the Young Liberals for approving the motion, which passed 123 against 58.

“It's great to see the younger Liberals fighting for this,” she said.

“They could teach some of the Liberal MPs a thing or two.”

A Young Liberal source said many in the youth wing felt the party’s MPs are “stuck in ivory towers” and don’t know what’s “happening on the ground”.

“Young Libs are crying out for the government to reconsider the policy,” the person said.

“It goes against the Liberal Party mantra of individual freedom.”


LIBERAL PARTY BELIEFS FROM THEIR OWN CORE BELIEF STATEMENT:

"In the inalienable rights and freedoms of all peoples; and we work towards a lean government that minimises interference in our daily lives; and maximises individual and private sector initiative

In government that nurtures and encourages its citizens through incentive, rather than putting limits on people through the punishing disincentives"

Once again I personally am pro vaccination that actually provides immunity, I am anti mandatory vaccination and Passport/ID Cards. Not that the Australian public is capable of standing up anymore but I still believe being genuine in the beliefs you claim and having some integrity is important. Every single Liberal party member should be similar if they have any integrity.
Click to expand...

How would you propose they do it federally when they have no legal basis to do so? The closest they have is corporations act. Only the states can issue health orders limiting the activities on health grounds. Each state abs territory has had to pass laws in order to force mandates on particular workforce’s such as aged care. They want it, we all need it but only the states can issue health orders of this nature. NSW mandating vax for police, hospitals and aged care is bloody good start. Be good if Dan could mandate hospital workers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Goosecat said:
Fair enough, I don't have an issue discussing things with honest people and considered opinions. As a small business owner myself (very small with 3 staff, well 2 if you don't count the other half) I actually get your position and have heard similar often. However as I said I believe there is a difference between demanding what employees can or cant do at work versus mandating they inject their bodies with permanent substances they can never remove even having left your employ, no longer working for you etc. It is a permanent bodily injection you are mandating for the rest of their lives. It is not just your workplace you are presiding over, but their entire body composition for the rest of their lives. That shouldn't in my opinion wash with anyone of a democracy bent, big or little L.
Click to expand...

Permanent bodily injection is a little over the top, all the vaccine does is train your natural immune system to recognise a pathogen. It doesn't even travel around your body, just to the local lymph nodes where it's presented to your immune cells and is broken down and excreted in hours to days...

If you're worried about your body being permanently altered by this, well I've got bad news for you. This process has been occurring all the time, every day of your life.

You know when you were a kid and your mum forced you eat brussel sprouts for the first time? Your immune cells got trained to recognise them as food, forever altering the way your body deals with brussel sprouts. So using your argument, she altered your entire body composition for the rest of your life right?

Maybe you should have a word with her...
 
flyingblind said:
Permanent bodily injection is a little over the top, all the vaccine does is train your natural immune system to recognise a pathogen. It doesn't even travel around your body, just to the local lymph nodes where it's presented to your immune cells and is broken down and excreted in hours to days...

If you're worried about your body being permanently altered by this, well I've got bad news for you. This process has been occurring all the time, every day of your life.

You know when you were a kid and your mum forced you eat brussel sprouts for the first time? Your immune cells got trained to recognise them as food, forever altering the way your body deals with brussel sprouts. So using your argument, she altered your entire body composition for the rest of your life right?

Maybe you should have a word with her...
Click to expand...
Get back to me when you've actually read this and genuinely know the details of current vaccines. To repeat I am not anti vax, I am anti mandatory and Vaccines that really aren't working. That aside, anyone who doesn't admit there are substances being injected for the rest of your life is disingenuous or simply has a hidden agenda of their own or perhaps a sponsor and wants to try and get others to overlook that fact. That's fine, your choice. The question was; should an employer have the right to mandate what circulates in your body for the rest of your life, forever, even when you have nothing to do with working for them?
And no despite your little Brussel sprouts distraction attempt, they are absolutely not in any way comparable. That's quite a little simplification effort to minimise the reality. You do realise people read you comparing man made pharmaceuticals to Brussel Sprouts and instantly think; **** off idiot. It really doesn't help the cause.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this ad.

Goosecat said:
Get back to me when you've actually read this
Click to expand...
I read it.

I also did a quick google of Geert Vanden Bossche and found this.

medika.life

Fact-Checking Geert Vanden Bossche. Cashing in on Covid Misinformation - Medika Life

Geert Vanden Boscche debunked. Vanden Boscche has made outlandish claims about the Covid vaccines and suggested they will end humanity. We debunk his claims
medika.life medika.life
.

and this

respectfulinsolence.com

Geert Vanden Bossche is to COVID-19 vaccines as Andrew Wakefield is to MMR

Geert Vanden Bossche warns of global catastrophe due to mass COVID-19 vaccination. His argument sounds like Andrew Wakefield's for MMR.
respectfulinsolence.com respectfulinsolence.com

and this

www.deplatformdisease.com

Addressing Geert Vanden Bossche’s Claims — Deplatform Disease

The short version : Geert Vanden Bossche has recently published a letter in which he argues that the vaccination campaign against COVID-19 is going to precipitate a public health disaster because the vaccines will select for viral variants that can escape their protection and drive them towards high
www.deplatformdisease.com www.deplatformdisease.com

and this

vaxopedia.org

Geert Vanden Bossche is wrong

The concerns of Geert Vanden Bossche have been described as baseless.
vaxopedia.org vaxopedia.org

and this

This brings us to our topic, a misinformation-filled “open letter” by a scientist named Geert Vanden Bossche that went viral over the weekend. It’s been accompanied by a video interview posted to—where else?—antivaxxer Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense website.
Click to expand...

and

someone who is board certified in Veterinary Virology, Microbiology and Animal Hygiene and hasn’t published a research paper since 1995
Click to expand...


So, someone whose only qualification is in Veterinary Science, who apparently hasn't published in the standard mainstream scientific literature since 1995, and publishes interviews and vides to notorious and unapologetically anti-vax websites.

Really is quite an odd source indeed from a poster who is not an anti-vaxxer.
 
Last edited:
Goosecat said:
Get back to me when you've actually read this and genuinely know the details of current vaccines. To repeat I am not anti vax, I am anti mandatory and Vaccines that really aren't working. That aside, anyone who doesn't admit there are substances being injected for the rest of your life is disingenuous or simply has a hidden agenda of their own or perhaps a sponsor and wants to try and get others to overlook that fact. That's fine, your choice. The question was; should an employer have the right to mandate what circulates in your body for the rest of your life, forever, even when you have nothing to do with working for them?
And no despite your little Brussel sprouts distraction attempt, they are absolutely not in any way comparable. That's quite a little simplification effort to minimise the reality. You do realise people read you comparing man made pharmaceuticals to Brussel Sprouts and instantly think; fu** off idiot. It really doesn't help the cause.
Click to expand...

What does DVM (in your mate's title) stand for Goosecat?
 
Isn't it funny how the Corona viruses and their abilities originated in animals crossing to humans. If only the world had an expert in such, someone also with an extra PHD in Virology. Preferably someone with world experience running research and Vaccine programs for the world, including the Bill Gates foundation and the WHO themselves. Someine really pro vaccine as well. Oh that's right we do. Of course even then if this acknowledged world leader in the field happens to have concerns with the particular vaccines circulating then all that goes out the window. Lol. It'd be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
 
Last edited:
Goosecat said:
Isn't it funny how the Corona viruses and their abilities originated in animals crossing to humans. If only the world had an expert in such, someone also with an extra PHD in Virology. Preferably someone with world experience running research and Vaccine programs for the world, including the Bill Gates foundation and the WHO themselves. Someine really pro vaccine as well. Oh that's right we do. Of course even then if this acknowledged world leader in the field happens to have concerns with the particular vaccines circulating then all that goes out the window. Lol. It'd be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
Click to expand...

It is funny how much like groupies you all are for people you have never heard of before the pandemic - this person has a degree, let's do what they say!

Opinions of the rest of the world also with degrees "nah science schmience"
 
Goosecat said:
Isn't it funny how the Corona viruses and their abilities originated in animals crossing to humans. If only the world had an expert in such, someone also with an extra PHD in Virology. Preferably someone with world experience running research and Vaccine programs for the world, including the Bill Gates foundation and the WHO themselves. Someine really pro vaccine as well. Oh that's right we do. Of course even then if this acknowledged world leader in the field happens to have concerns with the particular vaccines circulating then all that goes out the window. Lol. It'd be laughable if it wasn't so tragic.
Click to expand...
If only our independent, unbiased, pro vaccine expert didn’t literally publish interviews and videos to the website of one of the most notorious and unapologetic “I’m anti vaccination and proud of it!!” antivaxers in America….

Oh well.
 
The 747 said:
It is funny how much like groupies you all are for people you have never heard of before the pandemic - this person has a degree, let's do what they say!

Opinions of the rest of the world also with degrees "nah science schmience"
Click to expand...
Lol oh that is such a funny post. Pot, Kettle, Black.
You are right about something though. Scientific integrity is at its lowest point possibly in human history IMHO and the public developing a real skepticism and mistrust is frankly most likely a very good survival instinct. There's even entire fields dedicated to scientists studying each other to determine how compromised or biased they are themselves. Much like all the scientists and studies that tried so long to tell the world there was no links between smoking and negative health outcomes, the field has become disgustingly compromised. Honestly scientific fields, particular medicine based, are in total disarray as far as integrity goes.
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Goosecat said:
Lol oh that is such a funny post. Pot, Kettle, Black.
You are right about something though. Scientific integrity is at its lowest point possibly in human history IMHO and the public developing a real skepticism and mistrust is frankly most likely a very good survival instinct. There's even entire fields dedicated to scientists studying each other to determine how compromised or biased they are themselves. Much like all the scientists and studies that tried so long to tell the world there was no links between smoking and negative health outcomes, the field has become disgustingly compromised. Honestly scientific fields, particular medicine based, are in total disarray as far as integrity goes.
Click to expand...

Not really. For people who don't understand how science works, sure.
 
Goosecat said:
Lol oh that is such a funny post. Pot, Kettle, Black.
You are right about something though. Scientific integrity is at its lowest point possibly in human history IMHO and the public developing a real skepticism and mistrust is frankly most likely a very good survival instinct.
Click to expand...

??

People are more gullible and easily led now, than they've probably ever been.

I mean at least when people have been sucked in by religion over the years, it's because science wasn't available to provide answers. But now it is, and people still get sucked in by shit they read on anonymous forums and websites!!!

Skepticism and mistrust?? Please. People out there literally believe QAnon FFS!


We've never been more aware of how to manipulate people. We now have the technology to collect the data and to analyse it. We know exactly how to suck people in, and have the tools to do it.

Just ask Trump.
 
Seriously, this furphy about science and podcasts is such a juvenile crock, it should be beneath those claiming a level of intelligence.
It completely depends on the content, intellect and ability. You have to be able to sort it out and analyse information from all sources, even Einstein knew that. It's like the increasingly lower IQ throughout the world (yes go look it up) has made even half intelligent people so easy to fool. Even the current University critical analysis curriculum has become so base level as to practically list trusted sources, including government sources as opposed to real analysis of actual content and possible underlying agenda. It's like they've found such simple sources to train it's become easier than it ever has been.

Here is a list of scientists who value Joe Rogans input and output.

#1683 – Andrew Huberman

#1670 – David Sinclair

#1665 – Carole Hooven

#1658 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1638 – Dr. Shanna Swan

#1631 – Brian Greene

#1615 – Hamilton Morris

#1600 – Lex Fridman

#1593 – Dr. Carl Hart

#1574 – Jacques Vallée & James Fox

#1566 – Nicholas Christakis

#1540 – Frank von Hippel

#1537 – Lex Fridman

#1513 – Andrew Huberman

#1474 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1455 – Lex Fridman

#1453 – Eric Weinstein

#1451 – Dr. Peter Hotez

#1439 – Michael Osterholm

#1432 – Aubrey de Grey

#1428 – Brian Greene

#1425 – Garrett Reisman

#1422 – Lex Fridman

#1385 – Paul Stamets

#1366 – Richard Dawkins

#1352 – Sean Carroll

#1349 – David Sinclair

#1347 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1344 – Joseph LeDoux

#1320 – Eric Weinstein

#1315 – Bob Lazar & Jeremy Corbell

#1292 – Lex Fridman

#1274 – Nicholas Christakis

#1267 – Gary Taubes & Stephan Guyenet

#1261 – Peter Hotez

#1234 – David Sinclair

#1233 – Brian Cox

#1216 – Sir Roger Penrose

#1211 – Dr. Ben Goertzel

#1203 – Eric Weinstein

#1188 – Lex Fridman

#1178 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1176 – Dom D’Agostino & Dr. Layne Norton

#1159 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1151 – Sean Carroll

#1136 – Hamilton Morris

#1133 – Dennis McKenna

#1130 – Adam Frank

#1124 – Robert Schoch

#1109 – Matthew Walker

#1073 – Steven Pinker

#1035 – Paul Stamets

#1022 – Eric Weinstein

#1003 – Sean Carroll

#996 – Dr. Andy Galpin

#994 – Dom D’Agostino

#984 – Yvette d’Entremont

#946 – Dennis McKenna

#938 – Lawrence Krauss

#919 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#901 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#862 – Trevor Valle
 
Goosecat said:
Seriously, this furphy about science and podcasts is such a juvenile crock, it should be beneath those claiming a level of intelligence.
It completely depends on the content, intellect and ability. You have to be able to sort it out and analyse information from all sources, even Einstein knew that. It's like the increasingly lower IQ throughout the world (yes go look it up) has made even half intelligent people so easy to fool. Even the current University critical analysis curriculum has become so base level as to practically list trusted sources, including government sources as opposed to real analysis of actual content and possible underlying agenda. It's like they've found such simple sources to train it's become easier than it ever has been.

Here is a list of scientists who value Joe Rogans input and output.

#1683 – Andrew Huberman

#1670 – David Sinclair

#1665 – Carole Hooven

#1658 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1638 – Dr. Shanna Swan

#1631 – Brian Greene

#1615 – Hamilton Morris

#1600 – Lex Fridman

#1593 – Dr. Carl Hart

#1574 – Jacques Vallée & James Fox

#1566 – Nicholas Christakis

#1540 – Frank von Hippel

#1537 – Lex Fridman

#1513 – Andrew Huberman

#1474 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1455 – Lex Fridman

#1453 – Eric Weinstein

#1451 – Dr. Peter Hotez

#1439 – Michael Osterholm

#1432 – Aubrey de Grey

#1428 – Brian Greene

#1425 – Garrett Reisman

#1422 – Lex Fridman

#1385 – Paul Stamets

#1366 – Richard Dawkins

#1352 – Sean Carroll

#1349 – David Sinclair

#1347 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1344 – Joseph LeDoux

#1320 – Eric Weinstein

#1315 – Bob Lazar & Jeremy Corbell

#1292 – Lex Fridman

#1274 – Nicholas Christakis

#1267 – Gary Taubes & Stephan Guyenet

#1261 – Peter Hotez

#1234 – David Sinclair

#1233 – Brian Cox

#1216 – Sir Roger Penrose

#1211 – Dr. Ben Goertzel

#1203 – Eric Weinstein

#1188 – Lex Fridman

#1178 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1176 – Dom D’Agostino & Dr. Layne Norton

#1159 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1151 – Sean Carroll

#1136 – Hamilton Morris

#1133 – Dennis McKenna

#1130 – Adam Frank

#1124 – Robert Schoch

#1109 – Matthew Walker

#1073 – Steven Pinker

#1035 – Paul Stamets

#1022 – Eric Weinstein

#1003 – Sean Carroll

#996 – Dr. Andy Galpin

#994 – Dom D’Agostino

#984 – Yvette d’Entremont

#946 – Dennis McKenna

#938 – Lawrence Krauss

#919 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#901 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#862 – Trevor Valle
Click to expand...
So we’ve given up on Geert Vanden Bossche then?
 
Goosecat said:
Seriously, this furphy about science and podcasts is such a juvenile crock, it should be beneath those claiming a level of intelligence.
It completely depends on the content, intellect and ability. You have to be able to sort it out and analyse information from all sources, even Einstein knew that. It's like the increasingly lower IQ throughout the world (yes go look it up) has made even half intelligent people so easy to fool. Even the current University critical analysis curriculum has become so base level as to practically list trusted sources, including government sources as opposed to real analysis of actual content and possible underlying agenda. It's like they've found such simple sources to train it's become easier than it ever has been.

Here is a list of scientists who value Joe Rogans input and output.

#1683 – Andrew Huberman

#1670 – David Sinclair

#1665 – Carole Hooven

#1658 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1638 – Dr. Shanna Swan

#1631 – Brian Greene

#1615 – Hamilton Morris

#1600 – Lex Fridman

#1593 – Dr. Carl Hart

#1574 – Jacques Vallée & James Fox

#1566 – Nicholas Christakis

#1540 – Frank von Hippel

#1537 – Lex Fridman

#1513 – Andrew Huberman

#1474 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1455 – Lex Fridman

#1453 – Eric Weinstein

#1451 – Dr. Peter Hotez

#1439 – Michael Osterholm

#1432 – Aubrey de Grey

#1428 – Brian Greene

#1425 – Garrett Reisman

#1422 – Lex Fridman

#1385 – Paul Stamets

#1366 – Richard Dawkins

#1352 – Sean Carroll

#1349 – David Sinclair

#1347 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1344 – Joseph LeDoux

#1320 – Eric Weinstein

#1315 – Bob Lazar & Jeremy Corbell

#1292 – Lex Fridman

#1274 – Nicholas Christakis

#1267 – Gary Taubes & Stephan Guyenet

#1261 – Peter Hotez

#1234 – David Sinclair

#1233 – Brian Cox

#1216 – Sir Roger Penrose

#1211 – Dr. Ben Goertzel

#1203 – Eric Weinstein

#1188 – Lex Fridman

#1178 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#1176 – Dom D’Agostino & Dr. Layne Norton

#1159 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#1151 – Sean Carroll

#1136 – Hamilton Morris

#1133 – Dennis McKenna

#1130 – Adam Frank

#1124 – Robert Schoch

#1109 – Matthew Walker

#1073 – Steven Pinker

#1035 – Paul Stamets

#1022 – Eric Weinstein

#1003 – Sean Carroll

#996 – Dr. Andy Galpin

#994 – Dom D’Agostino

#984 – Yvette d’Entremont

#946 – Dennis McKenna

#938 – Lawrence Krauss

#919 – Neil deGrasse Tyson

#901 – Dr. Rhonda Patrick

#862 – Trevor Valle
Click to expand...

They value Joe Rogan's input and output??

Sorry, but what does that mean?
 
Goosecat said:
Seriously, this furphy about science and podcasts is such a juvenile crock, it should be beneath those claiming a level of intelligence.
It completely depends on the content, intellect and ability. You have to be able to sort it out and analyse information from all sources, even Einstein knew that. It's like the increasingly lower IQ throughout the world (yes go look it up) has made even half intelligent people so easy to fool. Even the current University critical analysis curriculum has become so base level as to practically list trusted sources, including government sources as opposed to real analysis of actual content and possible underlying agenda. It's like they've found such simple sources to train it's become easier than it ever has been.

Here is a list of scientists who value Joe Rogans input and output.
Click to expand...
A random list of names and numbers?? A link to the source would be handy.....
 
Goosecat said:
Even the current University critical analysis curriculum has become so base level as to practically list trusted sources, including government sources as opposed to real analysis of actual content and possible underlying agenda.
Click to expand...
Is it? How so?

That's very from what I managed to see relatively recently when involved in some academic work.

In fact, it's so far from what I saw that that it isn't even funny.

And what do you mean by this part?
Goosecat said:
current University critical analysis curriculum
Click to expand...

What "current University critical analysis curriculum" are you referring to?
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
They value Joe Rogan's input and output??

Sorry, but what does that mean?
Click to expand...
It’s a strange argument anyway.

Part of JRs appeal is the extreme diversity of his guests. He has everyone from mainstream experts to crackpot “aliens! NWO!” nutters on there.

The fact he has the former doesn’t give credibility to the latter
 
MisterMarcus said:
It’s a strange argument anyway.

Part of JRs appeal is the extreme diversity of his guests. He has everyone from mainstream experts to crackpot “aliens! NWO!” nutters on there.

The fact he has the former doesn’t give credibility to the latter
Click to expand...

I like Joe Rogan.

But I don't understand why scientists would value his input and output (whatever that means)?

And I don't know what his opinion has to do with science either?
 
Lavender Bushranger said:
??

People are more gullible and easily led now, than they've probably ever been.

I mean at least when people have been sucked in by religion over the years, it's because science wasn't available to provide answers. But now it is, and people still get sucked in by sh*t they read on anonymous forums and websites!!!

Skepticism and mistrust?? Please. People out there literally believe QAnon FFS!


We've never been more aware of how to manipulate people. We now have the technology to collect the data and to analyse it. We know exactly how to suck people in, and have the tools to do it.

Just ask Trump.
Click to expand...

Trump? Pretty sure it really took off back in the 1940s. And has been used ever since by politicians and marketers.
 
HairyO said:
Trump? Pretty sure it really took off back in the 1940s. And has been used ever since by politicians and marketers.
Click to expand...

The concept has been around forever. Manipulating people isn't a new thing.

Big Data has made it far more effective, and far easier. The tools are available, and all big business, media and government does it.

Trump is just a perfect example of how you can now use people's data to manipulate people to get what you want, if you have the resources at your disposal. His team's use of these techniques were extreme during his campaign. Incredibly effective too. Managed to get a bloke that didn't have a hope in hell of ever being a president (with good reason) into power by manipulating people's fears, and appealing to their inner feelings. The issue of course is that they aren't inner feelings - they're digitally recorded and for sale to anyone with the cash.

The NRA have some classic manipulation methods to push their agenda through social media also.

As I said, it's not a new thing to try to manipulate people and bullshit to them to get what you want. The difference now however is that they know exactly what you like, what you don't like, what you're scared if, what you value. Big Data analytics means the guesswork is gone, and with social media the message can be targeted to the individual.

It's brilliant really. Grossly unethical some would say though. Really Dangerous too.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Mandatory Vaccinations And Medical Exemptions

Similar threads

G
AstraZeneca vaccine withdrawn globally after fatal blood clot revelation 08/05/2024
Replies
2
Views
634
juss
juss
Back
Top