Coronavirus (COVID-19) Discussion Thread

[JWeinCom]

DroidKnight said:

JWeinCom said:

The slippery slope argument is the argument that we shouldn't make a smart choice today out of fear we may have to make one tomorrow.

The fact of the matter is that the door has been open for a long time. When there is a scarcity of a medical resource it may be rationed based on certain factors. For instance, if you are a smoker you are very unlikely to receive an organ transplant over a similarly situated non-smoker.

What would stop people from being denied for personal beliefs, religious beliefs, political affiliations, race, intellect, or income level (lulz income doesn't matter for healthcare), is that none of those have anything to do with assumption of risk. I'm not suggesting that we deny antivaxxers treatment because I dislike them. It's because if two people both need a hospital bed, one purely (or primarily) due to their own actions and one because of something they had no control over, then clearly our priority should be the person who had no hand in their misfortune.

None of us had a hand in this misfortune except for the people responsible for the origins of this virus.  No one innocent of its origins should be punished.  The actions or inactions of the vaccinated or the unvaccinated did not lead to this.  More beds, more volunteers, more medicine, more people working with one another, instead of against one another is whats needed.

If an unvaccinated and a vaccinated person showed up at the same exact time for a bed, equally ill, then coin flip that shit.  

How quickly your argument changes.

That's like saying if a person is in a motorcycle crash, is wearing a helmet, and crashes and dies from cranial trauma, they bear no responsibility because they didn't invent motorcycles.

If there is something you can easily do to prevent a particular negative result from befalling you, and you chose not to do that, it is (generally) your responsibility at least in part. 

If both people had taken the vaccine there is a strong likelihood there would have been a bed available. The person who was vaccinated should not die due to someone else's stupidity.

But hey, let's put this theory to the test. Two people need a lung transplant, and there ain't that many lungs to go around.  A person who has smoked four packs of cigarettes a day for the last 20 years, and a person who works out, eats right, and doesn't smoke. All of their other factors are the same.

Currently, our system would in almost all circumstances give the lung to the non-smoker. Are you suggesting we should flip a coin instead ? After all, neither of them are responsible for the origin of lung cancer are they?