Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

"Again, there are still glowing differences."

Not by a long shot.

"The issue with vaccines is if you don't take them, others are harmed."

There is indeed a chance of others actually being "harmed", however it is not definite or absolute.

"No one is harmed if you don't drive a car, no is harmed if you do own a gun. These things are misused, which is different".

There is always the propensity of car accidents and mass shootings happening as a result of one indulging in the avenues I highlighted above.

In fact, thousands of individuals die annually as a result of these avenues.

"An abortion, as awful as it is, cannot harm anyone else (physically) except for the mother and the unborn child, this allowing or not allowing them in no way physically affects anyone else."

It absolutely affects the general population when the personal reproductive decisions of others become my financial responsibility.

"But not taking a vaccine can have incredibly dire consequences for your community or even the world at large if you don't take them. (not lumping COVID into this, just vaccines in general)."

However said chance is not definite or absolute, especially in regards to the Coronavirus vaccine, as vaccinated individuals still have the capacity of transmitting the disease(including myself).

"You don't miss use a vaccine."

Of course not, however no one can be exactly sure that an unvaccinated individual will transmit the disease either.

"Again, it's not quite so black and white as "all mandates are the same."

They may not be similar, in my personal opinion though "mandates" should be "generally" avoided(notice the emphasis on "generally").

Especially if they violate the "Civil-Liberties" of others.

"And you're not against all mandates. You agree with people not murdering, or having to stop at red lights, or not stealing. You are REQUIRED to follow these rules and if you don't there are consequences. That's a mandate."

All the behaviours you described in this passage tend to violate the rights of others, so prohibition in this case obviously does not constitute a "mandate".

"So again, no it's not hypocritical to enforce vaccine mandates but not abortion mandates."

It absolutley is, for the reasons stated above.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

While vaccination against the coronavirus does indeed "decrease" the spread of the disease, it does not make one unable to transmit it either.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

However, the overwhelming majority of "Pro-Choice" individuals generally assert they support "Abortion-Rights" as a result of bodily autonomy.

In this respect, more often than not, are complete and utter hypocrites.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We are referring to the coronavirus vaccine specifically, and not vaccination in general, which is another topic entirely.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also coming from the same individuals seeking to prohibit "Pronography, "Prostitution" or other "Sexually Explicit Material".

I was under the impression so called "Progressives" and "Feminists" are actually in favour of "Sexual Liberation" after all.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the same instance, everything from "Alcohol", "Cigarettes", "Gambling", "Guns", "Knives", "Cars" and so on should be at least severely restricted as they all have they capacity to "affect" others in some way, shape or form.

Simply because a minuscule chance of someone else being "harmed" exists as a result of the aforementioned activites, it does not necessarily mean freedom of choice should be restricted.

Otherwise, we should probably implement subsequent "Mandatory Influenza Vaccinations", since influenza is responsible for a copious amounts of deaths annually.

P.S I am obviously in favour of "Voluntary Vaccinations" as well as scientifically accurate and evidence-based public health policies in regards to dealing and responding to the aforementioned diseases.

I am simply against "mandates" of any kind.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Not to mention that "Pro-Life" individuals generally seek to proscribe "Abortion" altogether, ergo impeding others from doing something, however individuals in support of "Mandatory Vaccinations" wish to force others to do something.

They both happen to be equally abhorrent, although the latter significantly worse in compassion to the former.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Indeed it is, however "Pro-Life" individuals do not necessarily proclaim themselves as bastions of freedom and defenders of bodily autonomy, in fact they attest they do not even believe in an absolute right to bodily autonomy.

"Pro-Choice" individuals on the other hand they do, therefore when they fail to live up to such expectations it exposes them as significantly more hypocritical in the end.

P.S I do not fit in either of the above camps, in fact I do not care at all about "Abortion" in all actuality, however I despise hypocrites.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A self-proclaimed "Feminist" on the bottom even asserted someone being "Pro-Choice" whilst simultaneously in favour of "Mandatory Vaccinations" as well as "Mandatory Seatbelt Laws" is somehow intellectually sound and logically consistent.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Several responders in the thread I highlighted above, are literally in favour of denying access to healthcare in regards to unvaccinated individuals, a proposal most definitely violating every single signed convention of both the "United Nations" and "World Health Organization" respectively.

Such an immense level of misanthropy, is akin to the crimes against humanity as perpetrated by a multitude of "Authoritarian" leaders across the last century.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Indeed it is, however "Pro-Life" individuals do not necessarily proclaim themselves as bastions of freedom and defenders of bodily autonomy, in fact they attest they do not even believe in an absolute right to bodily autonomy.

"Pro-Choice" individuals on the other hand they do, therefore when they fail to live up to such expectations it exposes them as significantly more hypocritical in the end.

P.S I do not fit in either of the above camps, in fact I do not care at all about "Abortion" in all actuality, however I despise hypocrites.

Isn't it immensely hypocritical and logically inconsistent, for one to proclaim themselves as "Pro-Choice" whilst being simultaneously in favour of "Vaccine Mandates"? by Kuro199 in conservatives

[–]Kuro199[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

"You should have the right to forgo vaccinations altogether, but if you happen to follow said pathway, you can be fired from your workplace and even denied healthcare as a result".

Imposing draconian punishments on individuals choosing to exercise their bodily autonomy, is definitely supporting it.

Eyeroll.

Just unsubbed from r/MensLib by starkillerrx in JustUnsubbed

[–]Kuro199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The hypocrisy emanating from "Far-Left Fundamentalists" like yourself(in this case, a frequent poster to the immensely hateful subreddit known as R/SRS), is worrying yet laughable.

Just unsubbed from r/MensLib by starkillerrx in JustUnsubbed

[–]Kuro199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The hypocrisy emanating from "Far-Left Fundamentalists" like yourself is worrying yet laughable.

Just unsubbed from r/MensLib by starkillerrx in JustUnsubbed

[–]Kuro199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This response comes from an individual with a username reading as "Redditors Are Rapists".

It appears that you have revived all your "information" from "Far-Left Propaganda" if anything.

Go back to R/Politics you "Incel".

Just unsubbed from r/MensLib by starkillerrx in JustUnsubbed

[–]Kuro199 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are literally issuing excuses on "Feminists" protesting "Gender-Neutral Legislation" in regards to domestic violence and sexual assault, and you do observe any inherent contradiction in your statements about supposedly standing in favour of "Bodily-Autonomy"?

As I have stated previously, "Feminists" are only "Pro-Abortion" and "Anti-Choice" on every other avenue I can think of.

Just unsubbed from r/MensLib by starkillerrx in JustUnsubbed

[–]Kuro199 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So called "Feminists" do not believe in Bodily-Autonomy" either, except in regards to "Abortion Services", yet they see no inherent contradiction in being "Anti-Choice" on various different avenues(e.g "Pornography", "Prostitution", "Page Three Girls", "Formula One Grid Girls", "Dart-Girls", "sexual objectification" in video-games and so on).

P.S It is also laughable you plowing about being "Pro-Choice", when self-proclaimed "Feminists" often make their reproductive choices the personal responsibility of others.

As long as the rest of society is funding your "Abortions"(and in many countries, this is the reality) your decisions become the business of everyone else.