What grinds my gears...

[FoxyPV]

Homosexuality is present across multiple species yet homophobia only in one.

[Jon the Hat]

8 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

"all opinions are equal and valid"

All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.
— Douglas Adams

[shade]

8 hours ago, FoxyPV said:

Homosexuality is present across multiple species yet homophobia only in one.

In other news, only one species is capable of truly critical thinking.

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, shade said:

In other news, only one species is capable of truly critical thinking.

What definition would "critical thinking" take in this case?

[shade]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

What definition would "critical thinking" take in this case?

it's a nonsensical statement, implying that because humans are the only species supposedly capable of homophobia that it must be wrong. we're also the only species capable of long division, what does that tell you.

[leicsmac]

21 minutes ago, shade said:

it's a nonsensical statement, implying that because humans are the only species supposedly capable of homophobia that it must be wrong. we're also the only species capable of long division, what does that tell you.

Fair point.

 

There are numerous very good arguments as to why homophobia is wrong without relying on that one.

 

Though, I'll be honest, I'm not entirely sure why this much supposed "Devils Advocate" arguing on the behalf of homophobes is required. Isn't it enough to just say that their arguments have no moral merit and have done with it?

 

[Carl the Llama]

12 hours ago, Jon the Hat said:

All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others.
— Douglas Adams

Yep, now take that and apply it to the comment I was summarising.

[FoxyPV]

8 hours ago, shade said:

In other news, only one species is capable of truly critical thinking.

I don't get your argument here

[SpacedX]

On 18/12/2021 at 08:17, shade said:

I mean, I could put up a straw man argument just for the sake of debate that homosexual men are far more likely to engage in dangerous sexual activity and spread a (until recently) deadly disease through the population, and so morally you could say there was something wrong with it. I don't believe that, I'm just pointing out that talking in absolutes is difficult.

 

[shade]

9 hours ago, leicsmac said:

Fair point.

 

There are numerous very good arguments as to why homophobia is wrong without relying on that one.

 

Though, I'll be honest, I'm not entirely sure why this much supposed "Devils Advocate" arguing on the behalf of homophobes is required. Isn't it enough to just say that their arguments have no moral merit and have done with it?

 

It's not devil's advocate, I think denying opinion on the grounds of moral absolutism is a plague in modern society.

[shade]

Just wait until you guys find out that I'm unvaccinated and also feel that "taking the knee" is insidious as it advances victim culture and actively disempowers people, the scenes will be chaotic.

[Buce]

22 minutes ago, shade said:

Just wait until you guys find out that I'm unvaccinated and also feel that "taking the knee" is insidious as it advances victim culture and actively disempowers people, the scenes will be chaotic.

 

Well, knock me down with a feather.

 

Who would have guessed?

[leicsmac]

3 hours ago, shade said:

It's not devil's advocate, I think denying opinion on the grounds of moral absolutism is a plague in modern society.

...who said anything about denial of opinion?

 

I'm referring to (very) short consideration followed by dismissal of opinion, which isn't the same - as much as those who have those opinions would like to think they're being silenced and play the victim themselves would like it to be.

 

All opinions should be allowed to be heard and considered - just some don't need to be considered for particularly long.

[Sol thewall Bamba]

The phrase "have a good rest of your day".

 

Shut up. 

[Izzy]

Just now, Sol thewall Bamba said:

The phrase "have a good rest of your day".

 

Shut up. 

I prefer it to "stay safe" tbh

[Beliall]

Have a good one! 

[Unabomber]

3 hours ago, shade said:

Just wait until you guys find out that I'm unvaccinated and also feel that "taking the knee" is insidious as it advances victim culture and actively disempowers people, the scenes will be chaotic.

You haven’t been vaccinated? 

[shade]

2 minutes ago, Unabomber said:

You haven’t been vaccinated? 

no, I also have covid currently. that being said, so does my wife who has been vaccinated.

[StanSP]

2 hours ago, shade said:

no, I also have covid currently. that being said, so does my wife who has been vaccinated.

The vaccine isn't designed to prevent you getting COVID. It's to prevent you getting serious illness from it...

[shade]

8 hours ago, StanSP said:

The vaccine isn't designed to prevent you getting COVID. It's to prevent you getting serious illness from it...

Yeah true, although I'm old enough to remember when they sold the covid vaccine as prevention from infection.

[Strokes]

9 hours ago, StanSP said:

The vaccine isn't designed to prevent you getting COVID. It's to prevent you getting serious illness from it...

I’m double vaccinated, I’m currently isolating until tomorrow.

Haven't had a single symptom, apart from maybe fatigue but I think that could also be that I needed a rest.

The vaccine does work.

[StanSP]

58 minutes ago, shade said:

Yeah true, although I'm old enough to remember when they sold the covid vaccine as prevention from infection.

Who did?

[shade]

20 minutes ago, StanSP said:

Who did?

pretty much everyone, until the narrative slowly changed.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n888

[StanSP]

1 minute ago, shade said:

pretty much everyone, until the narrative slowly changed.

 

https://www.bmj.com/content/373/bmj.n888

Did you only read the headline?

 

If you read the first line...

 

Vaccination with the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine reduces infections by 90%, while a single dose confers 80% protection, shows a study led by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that followed essential workers through the worst months of the pandemic.

 

and

 

 

Of 172 infections detected, 161 occurred in the unvaccinated arm of the trial, which saw a rate of 1.38 infections per 1000 person days. Among participants who had received only one shot at least 14 days previously, the rate was 0.19 infections per 1000 person days. Among those who had received a second shot at least 14 days previously, it was 0.04 per 1000 person days. 

This translated to an adjusted vaccine effectiveness of 90% with full immunisation (95% confidence interval 68% to 97%) and of 80% with partial immunisation (59% to 90%). Adjustment for age, sex, race, or study location barely changed these results.

 

 

While it's a small sample size (as is acknowledged in the article), it quite clearly shows the correlation between vaccination and reduction of infection...

[shade]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

Did you only read the headline?

 

If you read the first line...

 

Vaccination with the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine reduces infections by 90%, while a single dose confers 80% protection, shows a study led by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) that followed essential workers through the worst months of the pandemic.

 

and

 

 

Of 172 infections detected, 161 occurred in the unvaccinated arm of the trial, which saw a rate of 1.38 infections per 1000 person days. Among participants who had received only one shot at least 14 days previously, the rate was 0.19 infections per 1000 person days. Among those who had received a second shot at least 14 days previously, it was 0.04 per 1000 person days. 

This translated to an adjusted vaccine effectiveness of 90% with full immunisation (95% confidence interval 68% to 97%) and of 80% with partial immunisation (59% to 90%). Adjustment for age, sex, race, or study location barely changed these results.

 

 

While it's a small sample size (as is acknowledged in the article), it quite clearly shows the correlation between vaccination and reduction of infection...

That's my point, the narrative was "do your bit for society, prevent the spread" which we know isn't true from real world data. The government's own figures show you're twice as likely to contract covid if you're vaccinated in the 40-49 age bracket.