I don't have contempt, I am genuinely curious.

Is it this vaccine or all vaccines?

If just this one, why?

What about other "unnatural" medical procedures like transplants, joint replacement, chemo, etc?


I am completely against a government mandate but got the vaccine for myself.

Dilettante said:

---

That post wasn't meant to convince. It was meant to state the problem clearly. Most anti-vaxxers are overconfident morons. This was true before the pandemic and it's true now.

---

Projection much.... And after the exchange below you probably shouldn't be calling anybody a moron.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Dilettante said:
Vaccination often stops transmission.

---

Catag94 said:


It often doesn't even stop infection!

---

I guess technically vaccination doesn't stop transmission, but it does stop infection.

---

I'm not opposed to man made substances. I think it sinful to have a lack of faith in God. I believe God gives life and can/should be trusted in all things. I don't want to be guilty of verbalizing that I have faith or trust God, but then invest in an "insurance plan" just in case!

I happen to be and have always been a very healthy person, not by my doing but by the blessing of God. I will use some medications as and only when really needed, but I don't like to prop up my immune system for example, with antibiotics outside of serious need. I prefer to be exposed to things. I wash my hands but not like a germaphobe. I don't shy away for people or contact with surface.
I don't do thins in some sense of pride I just trust in God, my creator. I also know that this body is perishable and I do think that being concerned with preserving this life above being concerned with servicing our God is sinful. I think it foolish to believe that you can extend you life beyond His plan for you and wanting to do so is sinful. I think many are fearful of death I just am not one of them.

Hopefully this answers your question.

RAB91 said:

---

I'm pro vax also.... but only for the people who want it.

---

Agree.

Frok said:

---

I don't understand the contempt people have for those who don't want to get the vaccine. It's still new so it's pretty natural for people to be skeptical of it. Mandating it just emboldens that skepticism.

I guess I'm sympathetic as I was hesitant at first as well. Eventually got it after I saw nobody became zombies.......at least not yet.

But to the original question, yes a church should not withhold charity because of a decision to not get a vaccine. Just like how a church shouldn't hold back charity against certain people who partake in the sins we don't approve of.

---

BuT cOmPaNiEs ShOuLd Be AbLe To Do WhAt ThEy WaNt AnD iTs Ok To ExClUdE PeOpLe FrOm SoCiEtY! MaRgInAlIzAtIoN iS a ChRiStIaN vAlUe If A pErSoN I dOnT lIkE wIlLiNgLy ChOoSeS iT!

PacifistAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

Frok said:

---

I don't understand the contempt people have for those who don't want to get the vaccine. It's still new so it's pretty natural for people to be skeptical of it. Mandating it just emboldens that skepticism.

I guess I'm sympathetic as I was hesitant at first as well. Eventually got it after I saw nobody became zombies.......at least not yet.

But to the original question, yes a church should not withhold charity because of a decision to not get a vaccine. Just like how a church shouldn't hold back charity against certain people who partake in the sins we don't approve of.

---

BuT cOmPaNiEs ShOuLd Be AbLe To Do WhAt ThEy WaNt AnD iTs Ok To ExClUdE PeOpLe FrOm SoCiEtY! MaRgInAlIzAtIoN iS a ChRiStIaN vAlUe If A pErSoN I dOnT lIkE wIlLiNgLy ChOoSeS iT!

---

Holy freakin' strawman!

---

There's a concept floating around in your responses that there is always another place to work or you can start your own business. Between OSHA non-mandates providing cover for employers and overlapping jurisdictions with different rules for vaccination (some allowing religious exemptions and others not respecting them, requirements for restaurants) there's no coherent framework for that being tenable or viable for the average American. We're soon headed to vaxing school children. People may have to move to other parts of the country and leave support systems behind.

If you think the mandate is an overreach this is not the response that should be offered. It's not one of sympathy or empathy; there's no mourning with those who mourn. Would we personally help them or leave it to our church? That's the measure of following Christ, not administrative abdication but active participation.

AGC said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

AGC said:

---

Frok said:

---

I don't understand the contempt people have for those who don't want to get the vaccine. It's still new so it's pretty natural for people to be skeptical of it. Mandating it just emboldens that skepticism.

I guess I'm sympathetic as I was hesitant at first as well. Eventually got it after I saw nobody became zombies.......at least not yet.

But to the original question, yes a church should not withhold charity because of a decision to not get a vaccine. Just like how a church shouldn't hold back charity against certain people who partake in the sins we don't approve of.

---

BuT cOmPaNiEs ShOuLd Be AbLe To Do WhAt ThEy WaNt AnD iTs Ok To ExClUdE PeOpLe FrOm SoCiEtY! MaRgInAlIzAtIoN iS a ChRiStIaN vAlUe If A pErSoN I dOnT lIkE wIlLiNgLy ChOoSeS iT!

---

Holy freakin' strawman!

---

There's a concept floating around in your responses that there is always another place to work or you can start your own business. Between OSHA non-mandates providing cover for employers and overlapping jurisdictions with different rules for vaccination (some allowing religious exemptions and others not respecting them, requirements for restaurants) there's no coherent framework for that being tenable or viable for the average American. We're soon headed to vaxing school children. People may have to move to other parts of the country and leave support systems behind.

If you think the mandate is an overreach this is not the response that should be offered. It's not one of sympathy or empathy; there's no mourning with those who mourn. Would we personally help them or leave it to our church? That's the measure of following Christ, not administrative abdication but active participation.

---

I believe business owners, as the owners of a private business, have the right to set their policy as they see fit. It has nothing to do with whether or not I think they should, but they have the right to do so. The same applies to bakers. They should be free to set their policy as they see fit. It's their business. I don't support government mandates.

Your strawman response is not constructive. I have said church communities should help, just as they should help anyone in need.

Zobel said:

---

Vaccinating school children is nothing new.

---

This is the same tone deaf argument which is disappointing from you. I imagine we both view this as something that shouldn't split people yet here we are.

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

It doesn't address how this vaccine and disease is different. Who the disease affects, how the vaccine was developed, and the political way it was rolled out.

PacifistAg said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Vaccinating school children is nothing new.

---

Soldiers have long had mandatory vaccinations as well. I never heard anyone screech about "faith over fear", prior to their current hysteria, when soldiers or school children were required to vaccinate.

---

Anthrax vaccine?

Frok said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

That post wasn't meant to convince. It was meant to state the problem clearly. Most anti-vaxxers are overconfident morons. This was true before the pandemic and it's true now.

---

We are all overconfident morons. Come on now!

---

Seconded.

Frok said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

That post wasn't meant to convince. It was meant to state the problem clearly. Most anti-vaxxers are overconfident morons. This was true before the pandemic and it's true now.

---

We are all overconfident morons. Come on now!

---

QFT

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

Do you find people follow Jesus when you logic them to Him? Your lack of sympathy with that one off line was exactly what I was critiquing. It's like you missed the entire second paragraph because you found this one part that you could easily rebuke.

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

It doesn't address how this vaccine and disease is different. Who the disease affects, how the vaccine was developed, and the political way it was rolled out.

---

What do you mean by the 'political way it was rolled out'?

PacifistAg said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Vaccinating school children is nothing new.

---

Soldiers have long had mandatory vaccinations as well. I never heard anyone screech about "faith over fear", prior to their current hysteria, when soldiers or school children were required to vaccinate.

---

Anthrax vaccine?

---

The same anthrax vaccine I was required to get, and that I never heard anyone screech about "faith over fear"?

---

Yes that one. It went through many court battles.

Macarthur said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

It doesn't address how this vaccine and disease is different. Who the disease affects, how the vaccine was developed, and the political way it was rolled out.

---

What do you mean by the 'political way it was rolled out'?

---

Again, tone deaf.

Macarthur said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

It doesn't address how this vaccine and disease is different. Who the disease affects, how the vaccine was developed, and the political way it was rolled out.

---

What do you mean by the 'political way it was rolled out'?

---

Have you not turned on a TV this last 18 months?

RAB91 said:

---

Macarthur said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Why is it tone deaf? We collectively as a society decided this issue a long time ago. Why should it be reopened?

---

It doesn't address how this vaccine and disease is different. Who the disease affects, how the vaccine was developed, and the political way it was rolled out.

---

What do you mean by the 'political way it was rolled out'?

---

Have you not turned on a TV this last 18 months?

---

I'm genuinely wondering what one thinks is 'political' about how this was rolled out?

18 months? We've had a vaccine for about 10...

Frok said:

---

Dilettante said:

---

That post wasn't meant to convince. It was meant to state the problem clearly. Most anti-vaxxers are overconfident morons. This was true before the pandemic and it's true now.

---

We are all overconfident morons. Come on now!

---

On some things, yes. I don't think the people in question are stupid overall, they're just being stupid on this topic. For all I know they could be fine people.

Zobel said:

---

The reason I responded to it is because it's case in point.

You're talking about a hypothetical mandate (level, scope, consequences matter) and the ultimate punctuation you apply to your objection is that we're vaccinating school children.

If, however, vaccinating school children is established as a norm, shouldn't we work backward from that to examine the reasonableness of the rest of the objections?

Why is my statement something that splits people or lacks sympathy? Is it untrue? Is it unsympathetic? Is it divisive???

---

You're not even working backwards in an accurate manner. It's not something that's required, actually. One can homeschool or private school their child. It makes no distinction between the respective viruses and their risks to children or the risks of the vax to children (as other countries are making different decisions with the same information).

Are we talking about something that has actually happened? Or just a hypothetical?

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Martin Q. Blank said:

---

PacifistAg said:

---

Zobel said:

---

Vaccinating school children is nothing new.

---

Soldiers have long had mandatory vaccinations as well. I never heard anyone screech about "faith over fear", prior to their current hysteria, when soldiers or school children were required to vaccinate.

---

Anthrax vaccine?

---

The same anthrax vaccine I was required to get, and that I never heard anyone screech about "faith over fear"?

---

Yes that one. It went through many court battles.

---

Didn't the court battles involve 10 people suing? I remember getting it. Whether we would have to or not was up in the air, but no one complained or quit when it was finally mandated.