Non-Vaccinated Banned From Theme Parks

[joz]

Out of interest what do you think we should do about the virus?

[Guest 239]

6 minutes ago, joz said:

Out of interest what do you think we should do about the virus?

[New display name]

1 hour ago, joz said:

Out of interest what do you think we should do about the virus?

Nothing.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

5 hours ago, Brad2912 said:

It’s not my job to convince or coerce anyone.

This for me is the crux of the issue many (including myself) are taking with your unfounded statements - and they are “unfounded” - because you continue to avoid any suggestion of supporting your statements with verifiable fact.

 

you claim that the government have shunned and gagged critics, and refused to invest in alternative treatments and cures because of some deep conspiracy with big pharma, yet you won’t even name what this cure is, or who these doctors are, so people have a starting point for their own research.

if MSM is obfuscating the facts - tell us what we’re missing so we can be enlightened!

 

 

 

[New display name]

@DaptoFunlandGuyWhy are you trying so hard to change @Brad2912position?

[Gazza]

Yeah, whenever I hear "Big _______" I kind of switch off at that point.

If there was a quick and easy solution, governments would gravitate towards it because they're cheapos.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

1 hour ago, New display name said:

@DaptoFunlandGuyWhy are you trying so hard to change @Brad2912position?

I’m not trying to change it, I’m trying to reconcile it in my own mind.

I’m a ‘why’ personality - I need to understand the why if things. I’m happy to go off and do my own reading - I’m not asking for it to be explained to me, but to read “there’s a cure the government won’t tell you about” - I want to know what it is so I can explore the veracity of the claim and test it (theoretically,  not literally) for myself.

if I came in here and said “dreamworld is building a b&m in 2022!” Countless people would respond with “source?” And a few @New display name would respond with “bullshit”…

…so why is it such an issue for me to ask for a source, or call bullshit now?

[Park Addict 93]

On 18/11/2021 at 8:31 AM, Park Addict 93 said:

On 09/11/2021 at 12:34 PM, Park Addict 93 said:

Originally it seemed the messaging was could happen earlier if we hit 80%, now the FAQ says

Quote

These restrictions will start on 17 December 2021, even if we reach 80% double dose before that date. This is so that businesses and individuals can plan for the change.

The FAQ was updated a few days ago to state they may now be brought in earlier.

Quote

These restrictions are scheduled to start on 17 December 2021. However, they may commence earlier if 80% of our population is fully vaccinated prior to that date.

We are now back to will start on the 17th regardless of hitting 80% earlier
 

Quote

These restrictions are scheduled to start on 17 December 2021 regardless of how early Queensland may hit the 80% double dose vaccination rate. This provides important certainty so businesses and staff can plan accordingly.

 

[New display name]

15 hours ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

I’m not trying to change it, I’m trying to reconcile it in my own mind.

Impossible, unless you have walked a lifetime in somebodies’ shoes, you will never think the same or understand why they have made a decision.  Most things aren’t black & white and you’re ruling out the human factor.

I’m over people who live in glass houses judging people.  The vaccinated/unvaccinated debate is dumb.   

How many vaccinated people after getting the Covid jab get the flu jab, so they don’t pass the flu onto vulnerable people? 

How many vaccinated people after getting the Covid jab update the MMR, Tdap, shingles & pneumonia vaccine so they couldn’t pass sicknesses onto young children?

 

A Covid vaccinated person will come up with every excuse under the sun why they haven’t got the Flu jab or updated other important vaccines yet they have no problem throwing rocks at the unvaccinated.

 

(Sidenote:  I’m not saying this is you or anybody, I’m saying this is why the debate is dumb)  

[joz]

I mean I'm vaccinated against those things you just mentioned for the reasons you mentioned and I don't think that is uncommon. Lots of parents make it a condition of seeing their kids that you're up to date on your jabs.

[New display name]

That's great @jozthat you have all the vaccines but as I said, I'm not targeting anybody.

Half the people who have had the Covid Vax haven't had the Influenza jab.

 

 

 

[Slick]

30 minutes ago, New display name said:

That's great @jozthat you have all the vaccines but as I said, I'm not targeting anybody.

Half the people who have had the Covid Vax haven't had the Influenza jab.

 

 

 

Probably because seasonal flu viruses aren't as infectious, don't cause as much death, don't overwhelm the health-care system and don't cause the same long-term symptoms that long-COVID does.

I feel like at this point if anyone wants to offer an anti-vaccine opinion you really need to back it up with substantial, credible research. Otherwise it's not a debate principally lead on ideas but merely identity, which is no real debate at all.

Edited November 24, 2021 by Slick

[New display name]

1 minute ago, Slick said:

Probably because seasonal flu viruses aren't as infectious, don't cause as much death, don't overwhelm the health-care system and don't cause the same long-term symptoms that long-COVID does.

What is your number on how may people can die before it becomes your problem?

[Slick]

1 minute ago, New display name said:

What is your number on how may people can die before it becomes your problem?

Reductive questions like this shift COVID-19 debate away from being the nuanced, evidence-lead discussion that it is into identity politics.

 

[joz]

I don't know the exact number where I start viewing it as a problem, but 3 in 100 people dying is well and truly in problem territory.

[Slick]

4 minutes ago, joz said:

I don't know the exact number where I start viewing it as a problem, but 3 in 100 people dying is well and truly in problem territory.

Adding to this

9 minutes ago, New display name said:

becomes your problem?

This is the issue. It's everyone's problem, and thinking even for a second that it's not is ignoring irrefutable evidence at this point, tangental to believing that the earth is flat. I don't want to live in a community where my family's access to life-saving healthcare is at risk because our hospitals are overwhelmed because folks choose to listen to Joe Rogan instead of the thousands of epidemiologists, scientists, doctors, researchers, trusted GPs etc. etc.

[New display name]

36 minutes ago, Slick said:

Adding to this

This is the issue. It's everyone's problem, and thinking even for a second that it's not is ignoring irrefutable evidence at this point, tangental to believing that the earth is flat. I don't want to live in a community where my family's access to life-saving healthcare is at risk because our hospitals are overwhelmed because folks choose to listen to Joe Rogan instead of the thousands of epidemiologists, scientists, doctors, researchers, trusted GPs etc. etc.

I wish my Grandma listened to "a" Joe Rogan and didn't take the hormone replacement tablets that killed her that all the scientists, doctors, researchers, trusted GPs etc. etc told her it was safe.

[LORD_Noodle]

They are forecasting to hit 80% double vaxxed on the 8th December….. I will be patiently waiting on the border on the 9th with my negative pcr test ready to enter 😁😁😁

[Guest 239]

One thing I find interesting about this whole debate is the overhyped value of the individual in what is fundamentally a community issue. I completely understand the stance of individuality and pondering the slippery slope of authoritarianism, but I know people personally who take the stance that they will never get vaccinated because they feel it devalues them as an individual. 

Modern society and culture is a communication through multiple avenues which determines what is best for the community. Almost all levels from government, health care works, business owners, workers, and consumers have decided through that communication that being vaccinated is the best option moving forward. It allows businesses to remain open, consumers the option to shop freely, workers the option to return to their office or place of work that may usually be unsafe, governments the option to relieve restrictions and control over its people, and our hospitals have the opportunity to relax their guard to the looming threat that is COVID. 

As a whole I value the concept of individualism, but its more nuanced than I feel most people understand when they decide to embrace it. Accepting the community stance does not devalue the individual, just as going against does not bolster it. Individualism is an expression of uniqueness, but there is nothing unique about the refusal of the community stance merely to embrace ones self. you're just taking the opposing community's stance, not your own individual one.

The true individuals are the ones that did more than conform. They questioned the necessity of the vaccine, discovered it's benefits or problems and, perhaps despite personal fears, embraced the outcome that it's overall the best option for the community. You can be angry at the situation, you can despise the discourse, you can hate what the government has done during this time, but you can also come to the conclusion that the option presented is the best to get us back to a point where it's fair for the community. Questioning and curiosity are healthy and encouraged, but the outright denial or acceptance of any stance under the grounds of individualism is unhealthy. 

[Slick]

3 minutes ago, New display name said:

I wish my Grandma listened to "a" Joe Rogan and didn't take the hormone replacement tablets that killed her that all the scientists, doctors, researchers, trusted GPs etc. etc told her it was safe.

I’m sorry to hear about your grandma, but that logic is akin to saying “I can’t trust anything related to NASA because they caused the space shuttle to explode, and therefore any satellite related to NASA or unrelated is not safe and that’s why I don’t trust my GPS.”

Again, the real failure here is that it’s a debate of ideas, not of identity. 

[New display name]

12 minutes ago, Slick said:

“I can’t trust anything related to NASA because they caused the space shuttle to explode, and therefore any satellite related to NASA or unrelated is not safe and that’s why I don’t trust my GPS.”

 

That's human nature.  People still have distrust for Dreamworld because trust is a hard thing to get back.  DW now claim they deliver the "world best safety standards" and people still don't trust them.  

33 minutes ago, Dom said:

One thing I find interesting about this whole debate is the overhyped value of the individual in what is fundamentally a community issue.

That's a simple one to answer.  The Governments care more about being elected then they care for the community.  If the Governments wanted to do the right thing they would make the vaccine compulsory instead of the watered down version.

[Guest 239]

16 minutes ago, New display name said:

That's human nature.  People still have distrust for Dreamworld because trust is a hard thing to get back.  DW now claim they deliver the "world best safety standards" and people still don't trust them.

I'm really sorry hear what happened to your Grandma Skeeta, I really am, but what you mentioned is a wary conclusion compared to an unnecessary exaggeration. You mention that you distrust science and medicine because of what happened to your Grandma, but the equivalent comparison for Dreamworld would be distrusting all theme parks and rides forever no matter what because of what happened there. We all know that isn't case for industry, and it's the same for medicine.

All medicine involves risk, but correlation is not causation. People survive cancer despite being told they're going to die, whilst others pass away from simple dental operations. We can calculate chance, but we can't calculate outcomes, and for the individual it's a roll of the dice. Just because something tragic happened to somebody close to you does not mean that it will happen to you ad nauseam into the future and the proven benefits of medicine and science should not be given disregard because of rare complications. 

When the Dreamworld incident occurred we didn't close down every theme park in country, just as we don't take every car off the road when there is a car accident. Risk and tragedy are unfortunately part of life, but thankfully they are rarer than the benefits. 

All of us here had a choice after the Dreamworld incident to never get on another theme park attraction again, but many of us decided against it because we figured the rare tragic event was not enough to stop us from enjoying the thrill and joy of theme parks. 

I won't try persuade you into anything, but this is your Dreamworld tragedy moment. Do you stay outside and observe from a distance with your perceived safety, or take the risk and re-enter the gates?

20 minutes ago, New display name said:

That's a simple one to answer.  The Governments care more about being elected then they care for the community.  If the Governments wanted to do the right thing they would make the vaccine compulsory instead of the watered down version.

I don't think it's that simple. Firstly you can only minimally influence the community if you're unelected so there is that to consider. Also making the vaccines compulsory would not be the right thing to do. People should still have a choice, just as you can't be forced to have a medical procedure without your consent, but people should be able to use the resources available to them to decide whether the procedure is right for them. Browsing credible sources shows that the risk with the vaccine is insanely low, but the medical officials and the government can't control those sources unfortunately. If somebody decides to explore non-credible sources, misinformation or agenda-based skepticism, then it is up to the person to decide whether that information is right for them and this gets muddled when merged with emotions and personal agenda.

[New display name]

4 minutes ago, Dom said:

but this is your Dreamworld tragedy moment. Do you stay outside and observe from a distance with your perceived safety, or take the risk and re-enter the gates?

Dom, I'm fully vaccinated.(before it was cool😂)    I just believe I don't have the right to tell you what to put into your body.

[Gazza]

Yeah I don't think anyone should be forced but you can definitely dab on people who dont.

[New display name]

16 minutes ago, Gazza said:

but you can definitely dab on people who dont.

I have enough problems keeping my lawn tidy to worry about looking over the neighbours fence to see how they're going.🙂