Thing is that many Republicans are becoming anti-vaccine and anti-mask thanks to that kind of mentality. In other news I see that there is a lot of federal help going to the tornado disasters in Kentucky, even if that will benefit many of the ones that claim to be against the government helping in other issues, I agree with our taxpayer money going to help people that usually oppose what their own government asks for.
Nobody is opposing vaccines. Not sure what your point is in a thread about outlawing smoking.
The “nanny state” as seen by the right wing in the USA is the rabbit hole I was pointing out. Your post is like if there were no reports or news about who are the legislators in power that are opposing vaccines nowadays.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-07-14/republicans-are-playing-anti-vaxx-politics
On the aid due for disasters, the rabbit hole is like when one tries to make sense of Rand Paul asking for aid to Kentucky when he opposed many other emergency relief bills for other states and disasters.
Thanks for the slippery slope fallacy.
For some, the definition of “nanny state” is “particular societal rules that I don’t personally want.”
Really? REALLY? Nobody?
You have no clue what the word nanny state means.
Yes really. I’ve never heard anyone opposed to the vaccine. That is not the same as being coerced into taking it.
For the quantitative types who both value data and have a keen facility for interpreting and applying it, pretty much every single one of the “nanny state” nations beats the US on pretty much every single metric by which nations are generally evaluated, and that actually matters.
It gives one pause.
So you personally have never heard of anyone opposed to the vaccine. Therefore, this means that NOBODY is opposed to the vaccine. Period.
This really does sum up the thinking of some folks. It really does explain a lot. “My personal individual experience is the only correct one.”
“When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
It’s hard to have a conversation if you’re not going to respond to what I said. there is a difference between opposing the vaccine and apposing being coerced into taking it. Nobody is opposed to the vaccine. You want to take it, great. If you don’t then enjoy your final days on a ventilator.
Getting the vaccine does not prevent getting it again or spreading it.
It is difficult to be in this conversation because … it isn’t simply a mandate that is so problematic to so many “anti-vaxxers.”
They think it “breaks your DNA,” that microchips are injected with it, that it induces side effects that can be transmitted to other people, that it’s a mind control plot, that it kills people, that its adverse effects are being hidden from us, are far more common, and far more serious than we’re being told, that it is “unproven and untested…”
Shall I go on ?
The concept of a mandate is but a player in a large ensemble cast of things that many have against it.
There’s even a school in Florida (discussed elsewhere on this site) that banned vaccinated teachers. Hard to frame that as being anti-mandate.
Maybe it’s just not a meaningful thing to say “nobody is opposed to the vaccine.” The people I’m describing – and they aren’t so frightfully few in number – sure aren’t in favor of it.
Yes, in fact many anti-vaxxer idiots are opposed to the vaccine. The are against ANYone getting it. They protest in front of clinics. They glue clinic doors shut.
Your personal experience does not translate into reality for the entire world.
Yes I do, what is it clear is that you are ignoring how meaningless that term is when used by many on the right in the US. Just in the examples presented, it is clear that many on the right do think that things that they point as the “nanny state” as being “bad” include many items that they themselves depend on in times of need.
It’s similar to how some on the right want the government to keep their hands off their medicare.
Or how some on the right decry “socialism”, without the vaguest idea of what the term means.
I’ll stick with my original definition above. “Nanny State” is a system that has rules that I don’t like.
I think I should be able to go into Best Buy and just take whatever I want. Freaking Nanny State’s rules won’t let me do that.
Yeah, it’s basically an arbitrary meaningless term. If Magiver wants to offer a precise definition of “nanny state” which meaningfully differentiates between, say, the government banning cigarette smoking in private and the government banning cocaine use in private, I’d be happy to read and discuss it.
Absent such precision, though, the term “nanny state” essentially just means “I personally don’t think the government ought to do that because I don’t like it”.
You must pine for a very liberal society.
Over here the another Freaking Nanny State you’ll be charged with stealing/larceny and you could do up to 5 years in chokey.
Yes, that’s rather my point.
I don’t think 1 person gluing a door shut translates into the reality of the entire world but YMMV.
OK how many do you need before you’ll concede that this,
“Nobody is opposed to the vaccine.”
is not a sentence that comports with reality?