Will you cruise if vaccination is mandatory in order to board?

[Toofarfromthesea]

3 hours ago, navybankerteacher said:

Absolutely -- but certainly if the "science" can be wrong, it can also be right.

 

And an individual who chooses to go with his gut rather than with what the "science" overwhelmingly recommends has a right to his choice -- but he does not then retain the right to claim he is not an anti-vaxxer --- even a selective anti-vaxxer in that context is an anti-vaxxer.

 

I don't understand what folks get out of name-calling.  Does it release endorphins or something?

[Toofarfromthesea]

14 minutes ago, navybankerteacher said:

In this context (as in virtually all other discussions regarding the application of science) validity trumps truth, which (almost universally) rests on the unprovable; so let’s stick to validity.

 

Sure, just don't make believe they are facts.

[Hlitner]

3 hours ago, 2wheelin said:

Just to be clear. I did not read in the previous post that Hawaii is requiring vaccination to visit. Just that it will exempt you from testing and possible quarantine or whatever other restrictions they continue.

So, if they do offer a choice of you needing to quarantine for 14 days (at your own expense) or produce a negative COVID test which would you prefer?  

 

Hank

[navybankerteacher]

46 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

I don't understand what folks get out of name-calling.  Does it release endorphins or something?

Identifying someone who assumes an anti-vaxxing stance as an anit-vaxxer is simply a matter of identifying his stance, it is not "name-calling".    Would you prefer a paragraph to the appropriate one word term?  

[navybankerteacher]

55 minutes ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

Sure, just don't make believe they are facts.

I would not try that -- when discussing things with someone who apparently does not believe that facts can even exist with any meaning.

[wowzz]

5 hours ago, tpwolfe said:

Go ahead.  The science can also be wrong.  

You'll be saying that gravity doesn't exist at this rate!

[JRG]

8 minutes ago, Hlitner said:

So, if they do offer a choice of you needing to quarantine for 14 days (at your own expense) or produce a negative COVID test which would you prefer?  

 

Our backup plan would be to use our un-usable two weeks from our Princeville Timeshare and another that have been stacking up...

 

On the mandatory-vaxx pre-board requirement topic:

 

Enthusiastic cruisers who are vaccinated and don't want to wait for the general population to get vaxxed might be interested in the  'test' cruise candidate program if they are ready, willing and able.

 

I'm joking of course because there is no test cruise candidate program (that I know of) but if these things really happen then people are going to need to volunteer.

 

 

 

 

 

[Daniel A]

2 minutes ago, JRG said:

Enthusiastic cruisers who are vaccinated and don't want to wait for the general population to get vaxxed might be interested in the  'test' cruise candidate program if they are ready, willing and able.

I'm joking of course because there is no test cruise candidate program (that I know of) but if these things really happen then people are going to need to volunteer.

If such a program were announced, I suspect it would appear pretty quickly on CC and fill up faster getting any vaccine appointments.  🙂

[wowzz]

1 hour ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

Sure, just don't make believe they are facts.

Have you ever heard of  Schrodinger's Cat. Probably not, given your recent replies.  - I'll give you a few hours to Google it and to try and come up with a rational response!

Edited February 19, 2021 by wowzz

[clo]

1 hour ago, Toofarfromthesea said:

 

I don't understand what folks get out of name-calling.  Does it release endorphins or something?

Color me confused. If you're against vaccinations, doesn't that make you an "anti-vaxxer"? How is that name calling?

 

Also what the big deal about waiting til 2022 to travel? To me it seems rather juvenile to (figuratively) stamp ones feet and whine. There are countless thing more important than taking a vacation. We've made it a year; we can make it another year.

[wowzz]

10 minutes ago, clo said:

Color me confused. If you're against vaccinations, doesn't that make you an "anti-vaxxer"? How is that name calling?

Colour (note the spelling!) me confused as well. Nothing to do with name calling. You are either pro or anti  - in the same way as you cannot be a little bit pregnant!

[Von & John]

5 hours ago, broberts said:

 

Certainly people should be able to choose whether or not they receive a vaccine. But surely others have a right to know the risk posed to them by the unvaccinated? How could that be done without classification?

 

As a person who does not like to label others.

I'm not sure when the world decided labeling some individuals - but not others is acceptable.
However, as a matter of simple basic respect for other human beings, I try not to use any labels that may have negative connotations...

 

I believe you have provided (in my opinion) an acceptable alternative: 

Unvaccinated carries a much different connotation than "anti-vaxxer".

 

To me, an individual who is not vaccinated today is not necessarily an "anti-vaxxer".
They may simply for health reasons, known only by them & their medical team, or for personal concerns be waiting just a little longer, prior to getting the vaccine.

These individuals are not currently vaccinated - but most likely will do so in the future, when the correct vaccine is available for them.

These individuals are not saying they will never vaccinate - they say they are not ready today...

Which in reality is truly OK - there are so many people anxious to get the vaccine today...

 

If Cruise-lines, Countries, States, Territories &/or local Municipalities want to require vaccination prior to travel/arrival - then the unvaccinated individuals will need to determine if traveling to that location is necessary for them & if so, they will need to abide by the requirements.
 

Edited February 19, 2021 by Von & John

[JRG]

2 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

If such a program were announced, I suspect it would appear pretty quickly on CC and fill up faster getting any vaccine appointments.  🙂

 

We could wake up tomorrow and find out CVS has vaccinations on sale to members due to some over-supply-chain elasticity and has to get them pronto and problem solved.

 

I'm just joking CVS really doesn't have them on sale but this is how rapidly things have changed and lets face it;  they are used to giving out flu shots every season.

 

[Von & John]

5 hours ago, Hlitner said:

So nothing surprising about Hawaii taking a pro vaccine stance as their island status makes that easily enforceable.  I wonder if we will soon see a similar policy from Alaska.

 

Hank

 

@Hlitner

Hank - at this time I would not anticipate this as a requirement for entry to Alaska - this may change in the future.  However, as of Valentine's Day, the state of Alaska has allowed our C-19 Emergency Declaration to expire.  This means C-19 testing is recommended, but no longer required to enter our state.

 

https://www.alaskasnewssource.com/2021/02/15/travel-restrictions-lifted-in-alaska-as-covid-19-emergency-declaration-expires/

 

[wowzz]

15 minutes ago, Von & John said:

To me, an individual who is not vaccinated today is not necessarily an "anti-vaxxer".
They may simply for health reasons, known only by them & their medical team, or for personal concerns be waiting just a little longer, prior to getting the vaccine.

Sorry, that's just semantics.  If you cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons , then of course you are not an anti-vaxxer.

But, if you take a deliberate decision not to have a vaccine, even if you think you might change your mind in 5 years time, then of course you are an anti- vaxxer. How can you be anything else? 

 

[Von & John]

10 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Sorry, that's just semantics.  If you cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons , then of course you are not an anti-vaxxer.

But, if you take a deliberate decision not to have a vaccine, even if you think you might change your mind in 5 years time, then of course you are an anti- vaxxer. How can you be anything else? 

 

 

If you do not understand the differentiation, then I suggest we agree to disagree...
Also - my belief is many of those  who are waiting will vaccinate w/in the year...

 

Edited February 19, 2021 by Von & John

[wowzz]

Just now, Von & John said:

 

We  will have to agree to disagree...

If you wish, but why do you disagree? 

[Von & John]

Just now, wowzz said:

If you wish, but why do you disagree? 

 

Good Afternoon  --

I see I was editing while you were responding...
I see a clear difference between individuals who are temporarily placing the vaccine on hold & those who are adamant vaccination is wrong.

[wowzz]

3 minutes ago, Von & John said:

 

Good Afternoon  --

I see I was editing while you were responding...
I see a clear difference between individuals who are temporarily placing the vaccine on hold & those who are adamant vaccination is wrong.

So, semi anti-vaxxers and permanent anti-vaxxers. That is just prognostication, because the facts available today are the same as the facts that will be available in 12 months time. 

Sorry, why do people need to wait? Without a vaccine, they could possibly die. With a vaccine they will not die. What is the benefit of waiting ? Just sheer nincompoopery! 

[Von & John]

5 minutes ago, wowzz said:

So, semi anti-vaxxers and permanent anti-vaxxers. That is just prognostication, because the facts available today are the same as the facts that will be available in 12 months time. 

Sorry, why do people need to wait? Without a vaccine, they could possibly die. With a vaccine they will not die. What is the benefit of waiting ? Just sheer nincompoopery! 

 

Wow - again I suggest we agree to disagree.

 

[wowzz]

9 minutes ago, Von & John said:

 

Wow - again I suggest we agree to disagree.

 

Not sure why you disagree - you still haven't given any rationale to your stance. 

Anyway, stay safe. Obviously you have had your vaccination,  assuming you are eligible. 

[Daniel A]

1 hour ago, wowzz said:

Colour (note the spelling!) me confused as well. Nothing to do with name calling. You are either pro or anti  - in the same way as you cannot be a little bit pregnant!

 

46 minutes ago, wowzz said:

Sorry, that's just semantics.  If you cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons , then of course you are not an anti-vaxxer.

But, if you take a deliberate decision not to have a vaccine, even if you think you might change your mind in 5 years time, then of course you are an anti- vaxxer. How can you be anything else? 

I am very much in favor of taking the Covid vaccine (just not the Russian or Chinese products) but if a person refuses to take a prescribed opioid pain killer and still takes other medications for other conditions does that make that person an 'anti-medicator?'  It works the same way with vaccinations.  If somebody is wary of the safety of a specific vaccine but takes other vaccinations, they would not be an 'anti-vaxxer' would they?

 

There are people out there who will not accept any vaccine at any time and there are others who are wary of taking what they consider to be a new, untested over time prophylaxis until they are personally satisfied as to the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.

 

If all people thought the same way on every topic, it would be a dull world indeed, as well as a stunted world.

Edited February 20, 2021 by Daniel A

[wowzz]

2 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

they are personally satisfied 

I guess the answer to that is that while they wait to be satisfied, they can contract the disease, spread the disease to others, and not only possibly die themselves, but also cause the death of other people.

I'm not sure how an individual, with no medical or epidimiological knowledge can suddenly decide that they are "personally satisfied " that a vaccine is safe . Have they been studying medical peer reviews, attending medical seminars, spending hours examining genome sequencing,  or have they gone down to  the local pub, had a few beers with the locals and decided that the vaccine seems OK? 

What more evidence do people need that CV19 can kill you, and that being vaccinated virtually ensures that you will  not die of the  virus? 

[navybankerteacher]

1 hour ago, clo said:

Color me confused. If you're against vaccinations, doesn't that make you an "anti-vaxxer"? How is that name calling?

 

Also what the big deal about waiting til 2022 to travel? To me it seems rather juvenile to (figuratively) stamp ones feet and whine. There are countless thing more important than taking a vacation. We've made it a year; we can make it another year.

It’s the “want to have it all” syndrome.  Someone wants to do what he wants to do - but does not want to be recognized for either wanting it or doing it.

[navybankerteacher]

19 minutes ago, Daniel A said:

 

I am very much in favor of taking the Covid vaccine (just not the Russian or Chinese products) but if a person refuses to take a prescribed opioid pain killer and still takes other medications for other conditions does that make that person an 'anti-medicator?'  It works the same way with vaccinations.  If somebody is wary of the safety of a specific vaccine but takes other vaccinations, they would not be an 'anti-vaxxer' would they?

 

There are people out there who will not accept any vaccine at any time and there are others who are wary of taking what they consider to be a new, untested over time prophylaxis until they are personally satisfied as to the safety and efficacy of the vaccine.

 

If all people thought the same way on every topic, it would be a dull world indeed, as well as a stunted world.

No one is suggesting that preferring one vaccine over another is being anti-vaxxing - it is obvious that taking ANY vaccine for the purpose in question settles the matter.  There are, however, times when intelligent people agreeing on obvious and necessary actions cannot be seeing as contributing to a “stunted world” by thinking alike on a vital topic.