Consenting to believe or not believe that a suggestion (vaccine) is true or false; causes a conflict of reason (true versus false). This represents division by suggestion. To sustain the division (conflict of reason); those who made the suggestion (vaccine) are keep suggesting contradictions to both sites of reason (believers of true or false and non-believers of true or false). This is called talmudic reasoning aka control of reason through suggestion of contradiction.
Consent to believe by free will of choice represents ignorance of having a free will of choice, and that ignorance is what the few are exploiting to control the ignorant many through suggestion.
“Want to reject expert opinion and the established facts about COVID and put yourself and others at risk? Then you should pay, if your choice harms others.”
Arthur Caplan and Dorit Reiss
checks wikipedia, but already fucking knows
Arthur Caplan: " He has described his family as "Workmen's Circle, Zionist, and secular." He credits his background of Judaism with stimulating his interest in methods of inquiry and argument. "
Dorit Reiss: " Dorit Rubinstein Reiss is a Professor of Law at UC Hastings College of Law. She has also worked for the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israeli Ministry of Justice's Department of Public Law.
Reiss has become known for her work on legal issues regarding vaccination policies, and she has called for examination of whether parents who don't vaccinate their children, including those who obtain legal exemptions, should face legal liability. She is also noted for her support of California Senate Bill 277, which cut back on exemptions to vaccination requirements for enrollment in California schools and daycare centers. "
Consenting to believe or not believe that a suggestion (vaccine) is true or false; causes a conflict of reason (true versus false). This represents division by suggestion. To sustain the division (conflict of reason); those who made the suggestion (vaccine) are keep suggesting contradictions to both sites of reason (believers of true or false and non-believers of true or false). This is called talmudic reasoning aka control of reason through suggestion of contradiction.
Consent to believe by free will of choice represents ignorance of having a free will of choice, and that ignorance is what the few are exploiting to control the ignorant many through suggestion.
“Want to reject expert opinion and the established facts about COVID and put yourself and others at risk? Then you should pay, if your choice harms others.”
checks wikipedia, but already fucking knows
Arthur Caplan: " He has described his family as "Workmen's Circle, Zionist, and secular." He credits his background of Judaism with stimulating his interest in methods of inquiry and argument. "
Dorit Reiss: " Dorit Rubinstein Reiss is a Professor of Law at UC Hastings College of Law. She has also worked for the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israeli Ministry of Justice's Department of Public Law.
Reiss has become known for her work on legal issues regarding vaccination policies, and she has called for examination of whether parents who don't vaccinate their children, including those who obtain legal exemptions, should face legal liability. She is also noted for her support of California Senate Bill 277, which cut back on exemptions to vaccination requirements for enrollment in California schools and daycare centers. "
Every.
Single.
Time.
If so, I'm suing the shit out of the vaccinated person who gave me the china cough
Fortunately for you, it was someone rich ;)
Great, so they take the settlement instead of duking it out in court. Lamborghini here I come!
Can’t you sue the drug companies. Maybe they should concern themselves with that.
I don't understand. Does the same goes the other way around?
What if a vaccinated person gives you covid. Can you sue then?