mydude @ mydude @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

314

Joined

2 yr. ago

Here are the rules in Norway from our FHI.

https://www.fhi.no/va/vaksinasjonsveilederen-for-helsepersonell/vaksinasjon/lover-og-regler-ved-vaksinasjon/?term=#vaksinasjon-er-frivillig

Vaksinasjon er frivillig All vaksinasjon i Norge er frivillig. Personer som anbefales eller ber om vaksine må få tilstrekkelig informasjon om fordeler og ulemper ved vaksinering til å kunne ta et informert valg. Det skal også være åpenhet om usikkerhet og kunnskap som mangler.

Translate it and see for yourself.

If you are to the left of someone, and they are not informed, they will call you right-wing.

Here are the rules in Norway from our FHI. The same rules apply in other countries, just more wishy-washy worded...

https://www.fhi.no/va/vaksinasjonsveilederen-for-helsepersonell/vaksinasjon/lover-og-regler-ved-vaksinasjon/?term=#vaksinasjon-er-frivillig

Vaksinasjon er frivillig All vaksinasjon i Norge er frivillig. Personer som anbefales eller ber om vaksine må få tilstrekkelig informasjon om fordeler og ulemper ved vaksinering til å kunne ta et informert valg. Det skal også være åpenhet om usikkerhet og kunnskap som mangler.

Translate it and weep.

You can call me whatever you like. Here is a text about the differences between ethics and laws, taken from a dentist journal, but the same laws apply here.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jopr.13493

In general, the courts have determined how ethical principles translate into the requirements for how healthcare providers obtain a patient's consent for treatment. Consent from a legal perspective involves respecting the “bodily integrity of the individual.” This dimension emanates from the philosophy of personal autonomy, defined as “an individual's capacity for self-determination or self-governance” or “the capacity to decide for oneself and pursue a course of action in one's life.” The courts view the informed consent requirement for a healthcare provider as a requirement to disclose sufficient information for the patient to make a “controlled decision before undergoing irreversible treatment.”, A patient's consent must be voluntary, meaning “no coercion or unfair persuasion and inducements” and can be withdrawn at any time.

There is no special cut-out for vaccination within the law. In this context a vaccine would be defined as "irreversible [medical] treatment".

"Believe in science", that's anti-science. "My body, my choice" has always been in context of abortion, and viewed as left wing. Here it's the exact same words, the exact same meaning in context of taking an experimental redefined definition of a vaccine. It's in this setting that characters make or breaks. If you cannot uphold your values when they matter, you don't have values, you have hobbies.

I would absolutely agree with you on your first paragraph.

But please answer this honestly, "my body, my choice" during covid was labeled "right-wing", you agree?

Doing diplomacy with Putin to end Ukraine war was also labeled "right-wing" putin puppet talking points, no?

Both these are traditional left-wing values.

I think the down-votes illustrates my point exactly.

I'm pro expression of freedom, full bodily automony (my body, my choice), anti censorship, reign in corporate power, higher top marginal tax, ending foreign wars (inc Ukraine), diplomacy with every government (inc the ones labeled terrorists. Remember; Nelson Mandela was also labeled a terrorist), tax included high education, tax included healthcare, more money to public transport.

Well thats some of it, and most of the first points are traditional left-wing issues, but in todays society, you get "right-wing" label immediately.

When you are to the left of someone, they always call you right-wing... Never fails...

rUsSiA!

Just checked, 7,5kg for about 120$. I have no idea about cocaine price, though... https://www.finn.no/bap/forsale/ad.html?finnkode=337960167

Does this mean they don't need to "bring democracy" to other countries anymore? That would be nice.

-Any clothing/toys for children can be bought second hand, we have a very good site for that in Norway. For example, we bought 8kg of Legos, very reasonable price. Re-use is very popular in Norway.

-If you change food you eat often, it's very important to do some reaserch on the nutrition and sugar.

-Any locally grown food should be supported by bying, if possible.

-Much electronics can also be bought second hand in Norway, since we have strong consumer protection laws. Breakdown on electronic can be repaired within 5 years, usually. But, only if the seller has the receipt.

-Jewelry and stuff isn't nessesary, but buying cheap can be a nagging feeling and perhaps just buy something else for the person you love. Like an experience, trip to the massage/restaurant/etc. Spending time together is much more romantic anyways.

-Don't cheap out on the bed/mattress, you spend about 1/3 of you life there.

Google "Don't be evil" RIP 2001 - 2018

When someone tells you who they are, you believe them: https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4846580/user-clip-joe-biden-cut-ss-4-times

"believe"... Even 'positive' articles sneaks in some doubt in the headline. At least dobt your lyin' eyes, you pleb.

I've read a bit about pinkwashing, I might mash the corporations and people too much together. I will try my best to keep them separate, when I'm talking about them.

"But I don’t like when people forcefully spread their belief system and their values to others."

My quote here, is probably better to use corporations, not people. Sorry.

"The similarities between sexual freedom and religious freedom is striking..." Your answer being: "This is a false equivalence. My existence as a trans woman is not a belief or a value."

I'm not saying they are equal, but the similarities are striking, and might run deeper than at first glance. My quotes from different sub threads:

"I cannot help but make the comparison to religion, yet again. Even though I'm an atheist or agnostic, not really sure. Religion is different because they are on both the giving and the recieving end of persecution.They use religion as a base for their persecution of other people of a different religion (or sexual identification, sexual attraction, even something as trivial as dress code). Expressions that are clearly protected within the law. Whenever freedom of expression is challenged, there should be huge crowds to support the FoE"

"I'm not sure how to be more organic than asserting I exist in an internet post."

Also from previous, same, sub-thread. "Corporations hammer the message for the same reason they hammer any ad, it works. If ads didn't work, it wouldn't be a billion dollar industry. My point is, every corporation hammering the "we are inclusive" message feels inorganic. I might confuse this feeling with it just being "in" or trendy atm."

I'm not holding any answers, I just like the discusdion, and it's even more fun when people have other life experiences than me. Echo chaimers are boring.

"To me the comparison was kinda fair, if not for the underlying conspiracy theory that “the ownerclass” is trying to turn people gay for some reason."

I might be a poor word smith, I don't believe that this is a conspiracy to turn people gay, I feel like it's more of an over-arching agenda to amplify a divisive issue.

It is a very important message, but since legacy media is so enveloped in this, makes me suspicious, and by extension suspisious about legacy media owners' agenda. Hence my suspicion of the owner class, or even better, the exploitation class.

Please read other parts of this thread (at least my posts). I try to argue in good faith and better understand this complex issue close to the heart of so many.

We started on opposing sides and reached a kinda agreement and hopefully, we both grew as a result of it. I like you.

"This is virtue signalling, but I'm fine with it, because when good values get virtue signalled in public, the opposite values are less likely to transmit. They don't have good intentions, but good results come out of it."

US Supreme Court has upheld the ban on religious ads, and my initial comparison between religion and sexual freedom runs deeper. They are very comparable. Both have been persecuted heavily up in history. A big difference is what I posted in a different sub-thread

"Even though I'm an atheist or agnostic, not really sure. Religion is different because they are on both the giving and the recieving end of persecution.They use religion as a base for their persecution of other people of a different religion (or sexual identification, sexual attraction, even something as trivial as dress code). Expressions that are clearly protected within the law."

Religion within ads are not protected by freedom of expression (acc. to US SC), and a sexual expression as an ad has not, to my knowledge, been challenged in the courts (yet). Correct me if I'm wrong.

"There are also less common cases where they purposefully make over the top stunts because it will make far right nutjobs angry, which they count as free advertisement."

It's like burning books or flags, it's a protected form of expression. Even though these actions are very divisive. I will fight for even these, and the ones you put as examples' right to express themselves. It's very much like Noam Chomsky says: "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."