Conversation

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

Replying to

I haven't been following super closely, and I can see how reasonable people would disagree with me here, but my position is that *mandating* what someone should do with their body is a dangerous precedent to set; justifying with "public health" isn't consistently infallible

6:11 PM · Dec 15, 2021

Replying to

and

Every law is a mandate on what you must (or must not) do with your body. Every. Single. Law. Refusing to vaccinate is puts others at risk. Vaccine refusal therefore is doing something to other's bodies. Mandate protects people from you choosing to do that harm to other's bodies.

Replying to

and

I hold both of your views and see no contradiction.

Replying to

and

The bodily autonomy argument seems very weak, petty and childish to me.

This Tweet is from an account that no longer exists. Learn more

Replying to

I have similar issues against that in itself, though I don't mind private schools setting requirements to attend. I think it's less mandated in US. I do agree there exists lots of offending mandates against bodily autonomy that people aren't holding to the same standard.

Show replies

Replying to

and

You are free to not be vaccinated. Your right to “bodily autonomy” does not entitle you to put others at risk by forcing your choice on them. We prohibit smoking in public spaces. We limit speeds in school zones. And we can require vaccinations for highly communicable diseases.

Replying to

and

The blindside of this argument is that what you do with your own body (vaccines) affects other people (the spread of transmisible diseaes). Your body does not involve only yourself nor only your health, the rest is ideology.