Fear Is Deadlier Than Viruses

[Donald_Kirchner]

And I am not the smartest guy in the room… obviously you are. And the most ethical. Compassionate. And least condescending.

If only I could be so virtuous.

Yup, when all else fails, go to the (dishonestly veiled) personal attack.

Too bad. I was enjoying reading the discussion.

[Dana Lockhart]

I don't think anything has failed… not really. The mandates are working. The number of people who are actually willing to risk being dismissed from their jobs, versus bellyaching about it, has turned out to be far fewer than many claimed.

A panel of 5th Circuit, three GOP appointed judges, made a ruling. Some applauded it. Others decried it. I guess some here see it as vindication. I wouldn't be so certain: there's a lot of litigation at play. We'll see how things turn out.

Mandates work. They are not uncommon, despite unsubstantiated claims to the opposite. Particularly for healthcare related fields, those in government, education, jobs involving foreign travel, etc. they are pretty standard. That some have decided to make an issue of THIS vaccine, versus all the others, is just another unfortunate chapter in our culture wars. Meanwhile, again, 1000+ deaths a day.

What makes me sad is that in an alternate timeline, everything would be the opposite. Had the vaccines been approved before the last presidential election, and had Trump (rightfully) taken full credit for them, and had that factored into his re-election… well, we'd be through the looking glass, wouldn't we? The arguments would be all the same, but many of the people making them would be on opposite sides.

We have (semi-miraculously) the means to avoid hundreds of thousands of needless deaths. And we're treating it like any other political football. We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest. Heaven help us if we ever need to implement a draft again. Or actually pay the national debt. It's all sovereign citizens from here on out…

Glad you enjoyed the conversation.

[peter_speckhard]

I’m not sure that political lens is accurate. Mandates would go against the grain of Trump’s base and would be amenable to the progressive mindset regardless of the election results.

I don’t doubt mandates work. If that is the only consideration, we should have a lot more mandates than we have. But whether it increases the number of vaccinated isn’t the only consideration. You really have to objectify people to think it a success story that so many of them are vaccinated against their own will.

[Dana Lockhart]

I’m not sure that political lens is accurate. Mandates would go against the grain of Trump’s base and would be amenable to the progressive mindset regardless of the election results.

I don’t doubt mandates work. If that is the only consideration, we should have a lot more mandates than we have. But whether it increases the number of vaccinated isn’t the only consideration. You really have to objectify people to think it a success story that so many of them are vaccinated against their own will.

I have no doubt that it is accurate. If it was Kamala Harris out there telling people "Don't take a Trump Vaccine" it wouldn't take long before we saw Red State mandates… and Trump's base had about a dozen cows over players kneeling at football games and seeks new and innovative ways to restrict reproductive health options… so it's not like personal autonomy is sacrosanct. The decision to put all our chips on the vaccines was made in the Trump White House. I think many on the left would have preferred Australian style lock-downs. And previously, anti-vaccine activism was largely driven by the political left.

As to objectifying people: the same arguments were made when smoking became heavily restricted. And when helmet and seatbelt laws are implemented. Making people do things against their will (like say: pay taxes or obey the speed limit) is pretty much a natural function of government. I think it's far more objectifying to say: we are ok with countless people dying as a consequence of other people's desire not to be inconvenienced. From second hand smoke to second hand covid (and its all second hand), regulating the common air we all breathe is part of living in community.

[peter_speckhard]

I voted against Wisconsin’s smoking ban even though I enjoyed the results of it. I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there. And I’ve never smoked a single cigarette and hate the smell even at several removes. I often shower immediately after visiting a shut in who smokes because the smell of their furniture gets  on my clothes. But I still think smoking bans are a bad idea. And I still think vaccine mandates are a bad idea, and I hope they get thrown out in court, though I don’t know enough about the law to know on what grounds they would stand or fall other than that they weren’t enacted by Congress.

[Charles Austin]

Peter writes:
I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there.
I comment:
I have seen ads for "Cigar bars," where those seeking that kind of ugliness can find it.
But your view is short-sighted. Many would choose to go to the smoke-filled bars or restaurants, put up with the smell, and - ta da! - be made sick by the second-hand smoke. Workers, too, might make the hard choice - like working in a coal mine - and be made sick. The result is a public health problem. Again, the smoke affects not only the smoker, but in public places, it affects others.

[David Garner]

I could also share anecdotes. A man I know also has a chronic disease. His immune system is compromised. He was one of the first to get the vaccine. He volunteered to be in a study group to see how the vaccines might affect his immune system. He recently had his young children vaccinated as soon as they were eligible. He mostly works at home. He believes in the science (since he has a Ph.D. in one of the sciences) that the vaccines are safe and effective - even for someone like him.

So you ask for examples of people who love God and neighbor but don't want to get the vaccine, and I provide one.  You reduce it to an anecdote and provide a counter-example of your friend, in Hallmark Christmas Special form (local man has chronic disease, but instead of giving into fear, he volunteers to be a group study and decides to bravely get the vaccine anyway) (fade out to image of him kissing the local drug store operator under a snow-covered live oak tree).

It's almost as if I was right when I said:

It would honestly be a waste of time.  You've made your judgment.

[David Garner]

I don't think anything has failed… not really. The mandates are working. The number of people who are actually willing to risk being dismissed from their jobs, versus bellyaching about it, has turned out to be far fewer than many claimed.

A panel of 5th Circuit, three GOP appointed judges, made a ruling. Some applauded it. Others decried it. I guess some here see it as vindication. I wouldn't be so certain: there's a lot of litigation at play. We'll see how things turn out.

Mandates work. They are not uncommon, despite unsubstantiated claims to the opposite. Particularly for healthcare related fields, those in government, education, jobs involving foreign travel, etc. they are pretty standard. That some have decided to make an issue of THIS vaccine, versus all the others, is just another unfortunate chapter in our culture wars. Meanwhile, again, 1000+ deaths a day.

What makes me sad is that in an alternate timeline, everything would be the opposite. Had the vaccines been approved before the last presidential election, and had Trump (rightfully) taken full credit for them, and had that factored into his re-election… well, we'd be through the looking glass, wouldn't we? The arguments would be all the same, but many of the people making them would be on opposite sides.

We have (semi-miraculously) the means to avoid hundreds of thousands of needless deaths. And we're treating it like any other political football. We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest. Heaven help us if we ever need to implement a draft again. Or actually pay the national debt. It's all sovereign citizens from here on out…

Glad you enjoyed the conversation.

"We lack the ability to even lay out any case for vaccination beyond self-interest."

The problem is, this just isn't true.  I gave reasons in the other thread why I am vaccinated, why I encouraged my reluctant wife and our kids to get vaccinated, how I've convinced others to get vaccinated, how my African American friend was convinced by his wife to get vaccinated, etc.  There are all sorts of cases to be made.

The case you are trying to make, along with your fellow nanny-staters here, is the best way to encourage Americans to get vaccinated is to force them on pain of financial ruin to get vaccinated.  And that is just not a good case.  You want to tell them to get vaccinated because you think it's best for them.  It's why I started my discussion with you by noting precisely that -- no one has to listen to you.  No one has to care.  This is a free country.

It's weird to me that you default to that position.  It's almost as if you're used to being able to tell people what to do, though I would find that even weirder given your occupation.  Maybe it's just your personality.  I don't know.  I do know it doesn't come across any better from you than it does Pastor Austin or Pastor Stoffregen, and normal people don't react well to it.  So you should stop, but as I said earlier, you won't, because you three have convinced yourselves you are on the side of the angels. 

You accused me upstream of "framing" the issue as one of personal liberty.  I think I see why you went there now, and it isn't because you're dishonest (which is what I assumed, because it's really not a legitimate argument).  It's because you simply don't care about personal liberty, because YOU have framed it through this lens of public health and your desire for people to do what's best for them as YOU see it.  You're the one whose lens is distorted.  Your examples, and Pastor Austin's extension of those examples, show that clearly.  It isn't that either of you thinks you are in any real danger.  You're both vaccinated, as I am.  And it isn't that either of you are concerned about some unvaccinated person harming someone other than themselves, because after all the unvaccinated for the most part choose to be so, and the vaccinated, as public health officials keep reminding us, are not the ones filling our hospitals to the brim.

It really boils down to this -- you both think that you know better than other people, and you want them to do what you think is best for them whether they want to or not.  With that mindset, personal liberty is an affront to you getting to lord your views over other people.  And I trust it comes from a place of Christian love and compassion.  I don't believe either of you would force someone to listen to the same music as you, or eat the same food, or whatever, in the privacy of their own homes (though I bet you would support limitations on portion size and fried foods and so forth in public spaces -- you're free to tell me I'm wrong about that).  I trust you really, really think you know what's best for them.  The problem is, you don't get to make that decision in a free country.  They aren't your children.  They aren't your parishioners.  They're your countrymen, and whether it hurts your soul to see them suffer or not, you have to persuade them.  Persuading them is what I've been doing, often over and against the efforts of people like you and Pastor Austin and Pastor Stoffregen and our president, who lied to them.  And as I've said many times before, I'd bet I've done more to get reluctant people to get the vaccine than any of you have.  Because I treat them as equals, not children or fools.

I also view them that way, and it would do you all well to do likewise.

[Charles Austin]

Can someone restate for us, perhaps again, the reason for these attempts to justify refusing vaccinations and to minimize the effects of the pandemic, and to cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines and the other efforts to mitigate the effects of the disease? Why is that being done?
Vaccines are indeed mandated for many many things in our country. Presumably those mandates have been tested in the courts.
What is different now?
What basic human rights are at stake? What about our experts makes them so subject to suspicion?
P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.

[peter_speckhard]

Peter writes:
I think a restaurant or bar should be allowed to allow smoking, and those who don’t want to breath second hand smoke don’t have to go there.
I comment:
I have seen ads for "Cigar bars," where those seeking that kind of ugliness can find it.
But your view is short-sighted. Many would choose to go to the smoke-filled bars or restaurants, put up with the smell, and - ta da! - be made sick by the second-hand smoke. Workers, too, might make the hard choice - like working in a coal mine - and be made sick. The result is a public health problem. Again, the smoke affects not only the smoker, but in public places, it affects others.

I don't think my view is short-sighted at all. Yes, lots of people make decisions that aren't good for them. This very moment there is probably an overweight person eating extra bacon for breakfast. As I speak someone practicing for a marathon runs past and might become one of those people whose joints wear out at an early age. Someone is flying around in a prop plane giving sightseeing tours who would probably be much safer on the ground. They are putting an unnecessary strain on our medical and first responder system. I just heard yesterday that some international snowboarding star was killed while snowboarding; hit his head on a snow-covered rock when he fell. You might think he doesn't hurt others, but he was filming something that glorifies snowboarding, and snowboarding is in the Olympics so now, because of daredevils like him, a whole generation of kids is going to risk their lives on the slopes just for the fun of it. I'd rather live in a world where people make their own (possibly) bad choices than have their (probably) safer choices made for them. I think it is short-sighted to think that mandates that result in greater safety necessarily lead to the greatest amount of happiness and well-being.

[David Garner]

P. S. I can understand why some minorities might be skeptical of the vaccines. They have reasons in their history.

Good.  That's a good start. 

As to the rest, I'll say again, you are the one casting doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines.  Because you pretend that the unvaccinated are a danger to you even though you are vaccinated.

I'm not afraid of the unvaccinated.  I believe my vaccines worked.  But it isn't about them being a threat to you, as I said just immediately upstream.  It's about you and your fellow travelers getting to tell other people what to do.  At its core, it's just naked elitism.

[Charles Austin]

Mr. Garner, you do understand that we are likely to speak differently when we are talking to an individual, trying to persuade him to accept the vaccination? I was so gentle with one distant relative who was refusing the vaccination that I hardly recognized myself in the conversation. What finally convinced this person? They planned a trip to Iceland, and proof of vaccination was required.
And Peter seems to make a great leap,, probably the great leap of all great leaps. He thinks that if there is a mandates to get vaccinated pretty soon that will be mandates on what to eat for breakfast. It’s the old domino theory again.
P.S. I have been an avid skier, in the French and Swiss Alps, on East Coast bullet-proof ice, and in the Rockies. Tens of thousands of us get hurt. I never did, despite my foolishness in trying to keep up with my European friends. Do our broken bones, torn ACL’s, and Occasional death constitute a public health crisis? I don’t think so.
But refusing vaccinations…

P.S. “The Naked Elitist” would be a good book title.

[David Garner]

Perhaps to return this to a theological basis:

"(Pride's) midpoint comes with the humiliation of our neighbor, the shameless parading of our achievements, complacency, and unwillingness to be found out.”   

-- Saint John Climacus, The Ladder of Divine Ascent, 207.

St. John shows us that pride is not satisfied with having eradicated humility in the self, but seeks to defend the self at the risk of humiliating our neighbor.  Pride, says St. John, “will take up the space of all the other eleven [passions].”   Pride is not merely the antithesis of humility, but in fact eschews humility for me and renders humiliation for thee.  It is not merely the love of one passion, but the inflaming of all passions.  It finds itself manifested in the rejection of criticism, rather than love of it as St. John taught is proper in the chapter dealing with obedience.  Pride, according to St. John, seeks the humiliation of our neighbor, but humblemindedness seeks his defense.  We are to judge our own sins and cover those of our neighbor.

I'm wondering how each of us would square his position on vaccine mandates with these thoughts from St. John?

[David Garner]

Mr. Garner, you do understand that we are likely to speak differently when we are talking to an individual, trying to persuade him to accept the vaccination? I was so gentle with one distant relative who was refusing the vaccination that I hardly recognized myself in the conversation. What finally convinced this person? They planned a trip to Iceland, and proof of vaccination was required.

Then what purpose do your haughty and judgmental words here serve?  To what end do you put them into the universe?

Do they just make you feel better?

[Coach-Rev]

The mandates are working.

Then you obviously don't live in the heartland of America, to utter such nonsense as that.

Either that, or if by "the mandates are working," you mean supply chain shortages, now looming hospital staff shortages, few willing to work for a living in most sectors, inflation through the roof, a divided America like no other time before in history, then I guess you would be right.