NY judge grants injunction against COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers

I didn't say it was a theory, au contrair I was equating it to Typhoid Mary who was asymptomatic but infected dozens of others, some of who died. The Covid infected but asymptomatic are killing other people by spreading the disease, even some who have been vaccinated. Why risk being a killer?

 

The vaccinated can still spread covid. You ask them that?

 

Yes, and the difference between the infection/transmission rates for vaccinated and unvaccinated might not be as great as most people seem to assume.

The difference is low enough that it might even be due entirely to the vaccinated being statistically more likely to take other precautions or not going out, rather than a result of the vaccine itself.

 

Making them unknown carriers and spreaders of a deadly disease for weeks.

 

Vaccinated and unvaccinated alike... and given that the vaccine was designed to reduce experienced symptoms... well, you know where I'm going here?

 

They can only spread what they breathed in from others. Their bodies kill any virus that gets into their blood streams so it is a short term, very short term indeed, problem for them. Put masks on the long term carriers and that problem becomes nearly non-existent.

 

You'll need to provide a source for that, as its entirely contradictory to how this vaccine is reported to work. Remember, this is not a standard vaccine, its not an attenuated virus. The covid vaccine is an mRNA vaccine that reprograms your cells to produce a portion of the covid virus (the spike protein) to reduce the immune response required for you to kill the vaccine and in effect make it easier on your body while it fights it. It doesn't necessarily make you kill the virus any faster or reduce your viral load (and thus infectiousness) while you do so.

 

Horse hockey. I can't compete with someone that makes up horse hockey that people believe. The vaccine causes the body to create anti-bodies that will attack the virus as it enters the bloodstream. The anti-bodies are not in your lungs but the bloodstreams carrying oxygen from the lungs so the virus can exist there for a limited time. It wouldn't be there in the first place had you not breathed in air, most likely breathed on you by a carrier who is most likely a breeder like Typhoid Mary was.

 

They have corrupted the language in describing this as a vaccine. What follows naturally is that thought processes then become corrupted also. Orwell was right again.

Otherwise, I agree with your point.

 

No problem, I actually enjoy being able to clarify my position without necessarily attaching the "far-right" label to myself because it's the only thing my fellow American compatriots understand. So, Fascism as an ideology rejects the principals of both classical Libertarianism and Liberalism(as well as conservative) for many reasons but if we were to sum all of them up together, it would be this: We humans live in this society collectively, yet individually. The socio-economic struggle has been to coexist with these two seemingly contradictory facts of human life. In Fascism's view, a pure focus on individual rights itself(without the recognition of the collective) means that eventually, the State would collapse.

This however has been contorted(especially due to the war effort which demanded concentrations of materials and the work force) to be defined as an absolute rule, which isn't necessarily so. The Fascist does not ignore the individual, nor necessarily to curtail it but rather to ensure its synergy with the State.

The above is simply an outline of the actual political history of Fascism and now we can get to my personal interpretation:

Times change, and with them come changes in philosophy. A militarized State cannot sustain itself over the long run. There is no such thing as a State that doesn't have the people as its backbone. We can yes, create a new 'blackboots' and oppress the people garnering obedience for a time, but that's all it is, "for a time". I don't glorify the military, in the same view as those who originated the philosophy before me. Instead, I view the military as what it is: An arm of defense, and perhaps, if necessary offense(I don't necessarily reject offensive warfare out of hand, because no other unified country has done so either. In fact, I think preemptive defensive warfare, done right, can eliminate a future antagonistic state before it becomes antagonistic to begin with.)

I absolutely believe in the power of the diplomatic peace corps. In fact, I believe that were I to come to power I believe in the power of the peace corps more than any POTUS in history, save for perhaps Jefferson. I'm not above deal making and in fact I prefer deals. Treaties certified by our Congress and law-binding by the parties in question have the benefit of not being broken and thus a prolonged peace and dialogue between the two parties.

If it were up to me, I'd split the funds between our military and our peace corps(which would VASTLY inject funds into the peace corps), and that would mean educating Americans on more languages, it would mean being able to properly vet student visas and tourist visas, being more open while at the same time having a more robust effective security measures.

There are two main factors of Fascism that i do adhere to: The organic nature of the State(Without us with the State, and vice versa the State doesn't exist. Without people to run it, congress is an empty hollow building with a bunch of meaningless papers stacked on a desk.) as well as the political Head of State, whose importance is absolutely significant to the existence of and the development of the State.

Why is the Head of State important(or rather its political symbolism?) I believe the answer is defined in our current affairs today. Biden inspires no confidence, neither does Trump nor in fact any American politician in the last 50 years. This is because of their lack of standing within the State. We have no national unity in large part due to nothing to unify around.

We cannot claim freedom as a calling card, not only because of our inconsistency surrounding freedom but because the revolutionary war and subsequent wars with Britain were won. We no longer have a struggle for freedom as the basis for our existence, so it cannot be the bane of the State.

So the star-spangled banner as a national anthem for example, is so outdated as to be disdained by the Republic. Perhaps not openly, but privately and not due to the revolutionary forces of youth but due to the decaying power of this anthem. We simply have to discard it, if we are to enjoy a national rebirth.

Imagine if instead it were replaced with 'Tis of Thee:



No mention of a war that we at best tied in, no mention of "our flag's still there"(which again actually sounds pathetic. "Well, at least it's there.")

Or America the Beautiful:



There has to be something that ties the people to the State. The reason these counter revolutionary ideas exist is that for the last 50 years, the State endured a political-social decline with absolutely no one filling in the void. When a large subset of American minorities no longer view themselves as American, the democracy died its inevitable death.

Under an American Empire, the Head of State is the symbolism of the State, the people are the symbolism of their communities and their personal pride. With both individual and collective under a unison, an agreement, we move together in singular purpose to fulfill our destiny: Excellence.

 

There are two factors here, infection rates and transmission rates. (For someone who has been vaccinated, what are the chances they can get infected, and what are the chances they can spread it to others if they do become infected, and then compare that to the unvaccinated)

Transmission rates are not very well studied.
The studies for infection rates also have a big inherent flaw, since most of the time people are only tested if they were showing strong symptoms.


With a traditional vaccine, if you are exposed to the disease you have a less than 1% chance of being infected (I'm generalizing here). That is far from the case with this new Covid vaccine.

And there's some good reason why a cure or vaccine for coronaviruses (like the common cold) have never been found before. Coronaviruses are much harder to fight against. Though fortunately they usually do not kill or cause long-term harm.

Some doctors even say they are reluctant to call this a "vaccine". Instead they think it should be called a "therapeutic".