Those who engage in your "crimes against society" are also a part of society. So, in truth, what is being proposed here is a far more ruinous crime, namely, a form of slavery: some members of society get to rule over the other members of society.

SO we have one principle: Limit the exposure of the population to those who are infected or likely to be infected

This gives us two policies:
Isolate the infected and those who are likely to be infected
Spare the population from exposure to the unvaccinated
That's sensible, no stupid.

In the hands of a stupid government the principle gives us a stupid policy. When a fully vaccinated but infected man shows up at a establishment with a vaccine passport, he gets let in, increasing the likelihood of spread and illness. A vaccine passport does not indicate health or antibodies, and it is terribly discriminatory.

My point is the vaccine mandates are stupid if the vaccinated can spread the disease. The point of the mandates is to segregate the vaccinated and unvaccinated, not the infected and the uninfected.

One must isolate if they have covid-19 or are expected to have it. Except not everyone knows they have it, or they don’t want to abide by the rules. Those people can enter establishments and congregate with others, spreading the disease.

In many countries, states, provinces, there are mandates that require businesses to prohibit unvaccinated people from certain establishments.

The federal and state vaccine mandates prohibit the unvaccinated from working or entering certain establishments. Is there such a mandate for the infected?

No, they don't.

In many places the requirement to enter an establishment is a vaccination pass, not a covid test. So how do the rules prohibit the infected from entering?

If the consequence of congregating is a cold, then there is little need to slow the spread. Any rules still standing are only there to protect the unvaccinated.

Yes, by not getting vaccinated those folk are making it harder for everyone.

It’s not a cold, though, it’s SARS-CoV-2. Even the asymptomatic can spread the disease. The rules permit that a person infected with this disease can congregate with the uninfected, so long as he has his vaccination. This is because the rules are stupid.

How does a government “slow the spread” if those with colds are given a pass to congregate?

I know. It was sarcasm.

None of what he says contradicts the Reuters article, that "most of the 43 COVID-19 cases caused by the Omicron variant identified in the United States so far were in people who were fully vaccinated, and a third of them had received a booster dose, according to a U.S. report published on Friday."

I wonder if they’ll segregate the vaccinated, just to keep us safe. We need to slow the spread.

Most reported U.S. Omicron cases have hit the fully vaccinated -CDC

Most of the 43 COVID-19 cases caused by the Omicron variant identified in the United States so far were in people who were fully vaccinated, and a third of them had received a booster dose, according to a U.S. report published on Friday.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said that of the 43 cases attributed to Omicron variant, 34 people had been fully vaccinated. Fourteen of them had also received a booster, although five of those cases occurred less than 14 days after the additional shot before full protection kicks in.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-reported-us-omicron-cases-have-hit-fully-vaccinated-cdc-2021-12-10/

The basis of the entire pandemic response.

Inverted or turnkey totalitarianism in a nutshell.

I reserve my right to speak in dysphemism, especially when it comes to matters of injustice and tyranny. These kids didn’t go to the internment camp on their own free will.

And the protocols are not sensible, but stupid; they treat healthy people as threats to public safety, in potentia. They are literally premised on fear and ignorance.

Humans should colonize mars. Until such a landscape is explored and studied we can never know either way, and colonization will be the first step to performing that task.

They tested negative. They contained exactly zero SARS-CoV-2. What they did contain were innocent, healthy children.

(None of this is to say you're necessarily wrong on the facts, of course. It just seems fair to mess with you sometimes.)

Hey, I can take it. So fair enough. But since it only applies to me you must forgive me for disregarding the remarks about my consistency.

I don’t think it’s very useful.

To me it has a confusing grammar. “Quale” is a noun, so it becomes a subject and we apply predicates to it, without it being worthy of such. One can search forever for what we are talking about and never find it, while the person, place, or thing we should be talking about is thrown out with the bath water.

I already mentioned why they were interred, and none of it mentioned any gas chambers.

Consistent fallacy doesn’t do much to convince me, unfortunately. Perhaps a better tactic is in order.

Were they interned in order to send them to the gas chamber?

I wrote:

“The authorities had initially rounded them up and interned them, it appears, for the non-crime of being in contact with covid-positive people, not because they carried any virus or posed any sort of threat.”

ur skewed verbiage betrays an ideological ulterior motive.
SARS-CoV-2 doesn't care.

Ur disapproval of my verbiage betrays yours.

Trump and an appeal to hypocrisy… I’m not surprised.

White House quietly tries to reshape economic coverage

The White House, not happy with the news media's coverage of the supply chain and economy, has been working behind the scenes trying to reshape coverage in its favor. Senior White House and admin officials — including NEC Deputy Directors David Kamin and Bharat Ramamurti, along with Ports Envoy John Porcari — have been briefing major newsrooms over the past week, a source tells me.

The officials have been discussing with newsrooms trends pertaining to job creation, economic growth, supply chains, and more. The basic argument that has been made: That the country's economy is in much better shape than it was last year. I'm told the conversations have been productive, with anchors and reporters and producers getting to talk with the officials...

https://t.co/s3tNP28Lae

That’s hilarious. If you’ve seen this administration’s propaganda, you know they’ll stoop to any level to paint themselves in a certain light, even though it is comes off as phoney as a three dollar bill. Remember this one?

“Berlin: Homeless people without 3G (fully vaccinated, tested, or recovered) proof are no longer allowed to seek refuge from the cold on platforms. The Senate regrets the decision, but remains tough.”

https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/3g-in-berlin-senat-verbannt-obdachlose-von-bahnsteigen-l

It’s not surprising how cruel the Covid authoritarian is, but they do it under the guise of protecting others. We should start asking for proof of how many people they’ve protected. Get them to point to one.

That’s true about Americans, as far as I can see.

I would go on and on about collectivism mostly because it is immoral. It is premised on compulsory cooperation, and if that doesn’t work, force, coercion and violence. All one needs do is evoke the common good to justify immoral behavior towards one’s fellows.

Note the collectivist reasoning. “Sometimes you have to do things that are unpopular” (not moral or immoral) for reasons that “clearly supersede individual choices” and are “directed at the common good”. So many rights have been sacrificed on the alter of similar reasoning.

I just don't wanna be vaxed. That's all.

That’s the only excuse one should need to provide, as far as self-ownership is concerned. Anything else presupposes a slavish relationship between individual and “public health”.

We’re limping into year three of Covid fascism and Germany is now working to ghettoize the unvaccinated as cases and deaths rise in the country. Far from being immune, though, from both government overreach and the virus, the vaccinated may soon lose their vaccinated status 9 months after the last shot, so those who have complied will just have to comply again and again and again, lest they lose what’s left of their piddly state-sanctioned freedoms.

No matter. Vaccination will soon be mandatory in Germany, anyways.

What a job they’ve done already. Their systems failed at each and every step, yet they still present themselves as the solution. We’re coming up on year three of their tinkering and it’s been a racket.

It would have taken less time to say why it is right. Once again you’ve taught me nothing.

It looks like zen and stoicism taught you a lot.

There is no point in bringing up speed zones and other false analogies, nor quibbling about terms, unless this is an exercise in casuistry. I am saying why it is wrong to threaten people with fines if they don’t comply with what I consider a stupid mandate, so maybe you can tell me why it is right. Until then…

The government is forcing businesses with the threat of fine. The edict is the imposition. There is no “allowing” involved here.

That’s not the case. Where I live, if the business doesn’t enforce the government edicts, it is subject to fine. No individual gets to decide on any of this. This is just another example of the government skirting its duties, working around human rights, and forcing the burden on citizens.

The problems aren’t the radical or extremist views, but the acts committed in their name. So it isn’t clear to me why we would mitigate the view and not the act.

I would argue the concept mind is not equivalent to the brain but to the entire body. No other entity, least of all parts of that entity, engage in any act of minding. Besides, what is a brain absent the blood or oxygen or energy or support from the rest of the organism?

It seems to me that we were promised something that they are unable to deliver. Given the denial of rights and other sacrifices the tax-payer has to make, we are also left to pay for these shortcomings, sometimes with our lives and livelihoods. Even the mask mandates and vaccine passports are left to the tax-payer to enforce at their own expense.

It’s a good cheap shot, in my opinion. But the Dunning-Kruger effect applies as much to the competent as it does to the incompetent.

I like Kant’s idea of enlightenment:

Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment.

http://www.columbia.edu/acis/ets/CCREAD/etscc/kant.html

Though it's more applicable to his time, in some sense it pertains to the old sage, too.

I’m talking about what one should or should not do.

Indirect democracy can do no better than to legitimize authority and give a man or party the right to control us and steal the fruits of our labour. Representative democracy is democratic in name only.