Why should people be forced to get the vaccine in order to protect others who choose not to get it?

Yup

 

I hope you appreciate the irony of your comment as much as I do.

 

don't know, as the flu vaccine only targets known variants, it's kinda a gamble, if they could target all the variants, that would be a game changer

 

yep, which is why everyone should know this, it's always been that way

 

nope, some just have mild symptoms, they would be sent home

 

Why don't you explain just exactly how it is ironic.

 

Do you think there is a difference between a 'COVID emergency' hospital admission and a 'COVID ICU' admission?

 

And yet vaccine mandates have never before been discussed.

 

Because the right is also for bodily autonomy when it suits them.

 

Abortion is NOT bodily autonomy.

 

I suspect we need to audit the number of teacher's union employees who chose not to get the vaccine to understand why.....

 

Cite the study.

 

What do you mean "audit the number?"

 

just as soon as you answer chris (above) about what you mean by an "audit" of teacher union employees, and why would such an audit be needed.

 

How is a woman being able to decide what she wants to do with what is in her own BODY, not bodily autonomy?

 

For the same reason that a man choosing to use his body to commit rape is NOT bodily autonomy. Crimes are not determined based on the choice of what the potential assailant chooses to do with their body.

 

Wait...you're comparing rape to a woman choosing to have an abortion? SMFH...

 

In terms of bodily autonomy, yes I am.

My right to swing my left arm ends at your nose. In other words, people have a right to do as they please until that right infringes upon the rights of another. With a rapist, the infringement upon another's rights is obvious. With abortion, the only true debate is whether or not a fetus has rights, in which case you could not legally terminate it. When it is conferred with personhood is the ONLY true debate regarding abortion. The" right to choose" was never anything other than a marketing slogan. If a fetus is a person with rights, then the woman has no more right to choose than does a rapist. If a fetus is not a person with rights, then the woman can do as she pleases. Her choice does not come into play in determining its legality.

FWIW...I happen to be pro abortion, because I believe that when a fetus is a person is sufficiently debatable that it should not be made illegal. Choice of the potential assailant, like when determining all crimes, is irrelevant.

 

of course

 

A woman has a right to choose to have an abortion. You don't have a right to rape someone.

 

why do you think it should be mandated?

 

LOL....yeah, I think that everyone is aware of the current law.

Be that as it may, when debating the subject and whether it should or should not be legal, the choice argument is nonsensical.

 

Except the original debate was regarding bodily autonomy, not whether or not abortion should or shouldn't be legal.

 

Thats actually not exactly true. Roe v Wade was about the right to privacy. You can say after the fact that medical privacy supports autonomy, but a womans right to choose is not what was debated. What was debated was the governments right to infringe upon the privacy between a doctor and patient.

While I do not want to turn this into an all out Roe v Wade debate, there are an awful lot of people that believe that Roe v Wade is flawed, myself included. I am 100% pro abortion but against Roe V Wade. To call it judicial overreach is an understatement. In my opinion, Roe v Wade should be overturned, and the legality of abortion should be a state by state issue, with undoubtedly the overwhelming majority of states keeping it legal, and a few making it illegal. Getting an abortion in that scenario for a person in an illegal state would be as simple as crossing the state line.

The debate that I am talking about is what would take place on the state level. That debate is when is a fetus conferred with personhood. That is the true crux of this debate. Roe v Wade was just silly. It decided that a fetus is not conferred with personhood, without even bothering to debate the central question of when does life begin.

 

I was talking about bodily autonomy. No disrespect but if you want to talk about overturning RvW maybe find someone interested in that. Thank you.