Comments by "" (@shaunstark4263) on "NowThis Impact" channel.

  1. Rebecca Johnson many commenters are actually Ai controlled bots meant to push social and political agendas as well as silence dissenters. The argument shouldn’t be whether or not vaccines are good for you. It should be whether or not the government can forcefully inject you against your will for the claimed benefit of another. You do not have the right to live in a disease free world, but I have the right not to be forcefully injected against my will regardless of justification.
    5
  2. Rebecca Johnson since it can not be reasonably expected that one can live in a disease free world, these attempts to do so are used purely as an excuse to infringe upon your rights. This is a classic manipulation. Using the “rights” of one to infringe upon the rights of another under a false premise or logical fallacy. By saying “antivaxxers are putting us at risk”, they are effectively using their right to their body as an excuse to infringe upon yours.
    4
  3. Rebecca Johnson agreed, I initiate the conversation with the premise I stated, and usually follow up with many proofs of vaccine injury. Mandatory injections are the main point here, while the safety and effectiveness of vaccines is a Hegelian dialectic of sorts. They can use their paid studies to attempt to “debunk” our perspectives on vaccine safety as well as use lack of scientific credibility to discredit our arguments claiming “uneducated science deniers” are putting people at “risk”. There is no way to argue the perspective that “you do not have the right to live in a disease free world” therefore you cannot use “safety” as an excuse to push mandatory injections. The term “safe and effective” is purposefully vague for legal reasons. They know the wordplay game.
    1