Serowbot wrote on 12/28/21 at 09:39:51:

Isn’t that the one where,
bunch of people ,
do NOT believe,
   that banning a model of gun,
will stop mass shootings ?      

 As for Omicron variant response I am waiting for 4 clinical assessments to be reviewed to double-check my math and some Iranian medical records to come in before I create an assessment.

What is PSA in regard to vaccine’s ?
PSA to me is Prostate-Specific Antigen.
And why, because they are PSA, are they Not Required to disclose all information ?


 Public Service Announcement.  There are a number of reasons that I am not going to go into as to why PSA is not equal to paying for advertising on a Network.  Given our last discussion regarding Networks or Broadcast Channels it would be futile to even try.


"People getting the c-19 vaccine, do not, get info BEFORE, only, ‘sometimes’,
AFTER they get the shot,
then, they get the paperwork/notification’s of side affects, etc !
        I can see it now,   ‘Oh BTY,
if you get a third ear growing out of your forehead,
        never mind"

 I have seen no evidence that anywhere is violating the informed consent laws, but if they are they should be held accountable.  It would be very easy to do, just record it happening.  Every location I have seen administers paperwork prior to any medical procedure of any kind.

 I notice claiming things without proof only works one way.  It's bad if gun-control does it, but its fine if anti-vaccine does it.  So where are people being vaccinated and not receiving the required consent paperwork BEFORE they receive the shot?



"Glad you believe, that telling someone,
they can, NOT HAVE, a certain job,
(or enter a certain building, or be in a certain place)
unless they get a shot,  is not, ‘force’."

 It's not "force", it is coercion.  If an employer ties you down, sedated you, gives you a vaccine, then says you can work there - it is forced.



You must also be in favor of someone saying,
‘you can not have this job, go in this building, be in this place,
if your skin color/heritage/religion is …’


 When their color/heritage/religion in exclusivity can infect me with a potentially deadly disease I would be in favor of limiting access based on those parameters.

Rather sure that, 'color/heritage/religion in exclusivity can infect me with a potentially deadly disease ' was, and perhaps still is, a reason.

Kinna like some people believing the vaccine will harm them ?


 No that's not the same.  A "reason" is not universal or equal.  You stated I "must" be in favor of restricting access to a location based off of "color/heritage/religion" not any other "reason".  

 I state that contagion is the "reason" and if "color/heritage/religion" become a method for spreading disease, in exclusivity, then I would be ok with restricting access.

 So "reason" Number 1 = Yours: color/heritage/religion

 Reason 2 = Mine is: Contagion.

 Those are not the same.  They are "reasons" but not the same or even "Kinna like" each other.


 
 

"So if you believe, or fear that someone, is, or could spread a disease,
(that someone, certainly has, a color of skin,
a heritage, and most likely a religion)
it is perfectly OK to, '... restrict their access...', to something."


 No.  If evidence exists that fits within the parameters of US law regarding the mitigation of infection or disease due to transmission from human to human.  The "fear" and "believe" are things You stated.



"The whole point is,
People are being, 'Forced' to take the vaccine.
Not by being tied down,
but by many, Many, MANY, other ways."


 I guess the difference is physical force specifically.

If the option is
Losing your ability to pay your bills
Or
Get the jab
Mmm,that is FORCING someone.

But, if someone feels the need to pretend that anything less than tackling someone and jamming the needle in them ISN'T forcing them, then parse those words and pretend that coercion is not force.

The difference is being honest. Force has more than one aspect. Putting someone in an untenable position in order to get them to do something is FORCING them. Pretending that Force is only physically attacking someone is dishonest.