Discussion about this post

User's avatar
carolyn kostopoulos's avatar

this is an interesting question you pose. the reflexive answer is that censorship "allowed" the mandates to happen but that's a bit too simplistic. i was able to find alternative information; it's out there even if it takes a bit of digging.

i'm reminded of something my friend said recently. she and her husband were subjects in the moderna trials but she called me for help getting her mother IVM when she had covid. she was telling me that she intended to get the bivalent booster as soon as it was approved and my dismay was obvious. "you read different things than i read," she answered.

i wanted to say "but you don't read at all." of course i see all the stuff about how great the vaccines are; you'd have to be blind and deaf to miss it. but i also see what's going on around me even if i didn't have access to malone, berenson (they disagree), mcCollough, RFK jr and Del Bigtree. in fact i never listened to or even heard of most of those people UNTIL i became suspicious of the vaccine. then i sought them out.

sure you give a child a cartoon bandage when they're afraid of needles, but donuts and lottery tickets for adults? and when the carrots failed to work- the sticks. i lost my job, my passion of 40 years over my refusal to take a shot. but in the previous 39 years, no one had ever checked my medical records. they might have guessed what i would do based on my prior insistence that the tetanus shot requirement boilerplate language be stricken from my contract.

my Moderna friend had a bad bout of Delta followed by a bout of Omicron and she called me to ask for advice and, like i said before, for help getting IVM to her unvaccinated best friend and later her mother. surely she saw how the wonders attributed to the vaccines kept being downgraded. the back pedaling, the shifting goal posts.

for her to say that i read different stuff (i.e., fringe, alternate, conspiracy theory) while she reads mainstream based on "Science" and "Truth" is kind of a lazy man's excuse.

but the reality is this: EVEN IF COVID HAD BEEN AS DEADLY AS THEY SAID IT WAS AND THE VACCINES AS EFFECTIVE AND SAFE AS ADVERTISED, the mandates still would not have been justified. they are unconstitutional, they violate bodily autonomy. what rights do we have if we can't decide what to do with our own bodies?

then to see the My Body My Choice crowd advocate forced vaccination, the people you might expect to be most sympathetic to a refuseniks cause!!! "you have no right to spread your germs to me!" i might answer "Well, you have no right to deprive me of the future worker, cannon fodder and tax payer who is going to support me in my old age."

formerly intelligent people lost the ability to think, to reason, to see what was obvious to anyone with eyes and a few brain cells.

so i guess, yes. censorship violates the first amendment but the mandates violated something even more sacred

Expand full comment
Rascal Nick Of's avatar

Lockdowns and mandates were assaults on the body. Censorship is an assault on both the truth and your mind. I think maybe there isn’t a “correct” answer. Each individual has to decide for themselves which was worse.

Expand full comment
18 more comments...

No posts