If lemmy.world finds this, please tell my starving children that I love them.

  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    “My body, my choice” was not a right-wing stance. It was instead an anti-science movement. If you just listen to the words, its easy to think it might be leftist, but the intent behind it was absolutely far-right. A good comparison is “All Lives Matter” or even “White Lives Matter” as a response to “Black Lives Matter.”

    Diplomacy with Putin to end the war can be right or left. Opposing Imperialism is left wing, what matters is the way you wish to conduct diplomacy, and to what outcome.

    So yea, good chance you could be right wing.

    • mydude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      Here are the rules in Norway from our FHI.

      https://www.fhi.no/va/vaksinasjonsveilederen-for-helsepersonell/vaksinasjon/lover-og-regler-ved-vaksinasjon/?term=#vaksinasjon-er-frivillig

      Vaksinasjon er frivillig All vaksinasjon i Norge er frivillig. Personer som anbefales eller ber om vaksine må få tilstrekkelig informasjon om fordeler og ulemper ved vaksinering til å kunne ta et informert valg. Det skal også være åpenhet om usikkerhet og kunnskap som mangler.

      Translate it and see for yourself.

      If you are to the left of someone, and they are not informed, they will call you right-wing.

        • mydude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          I thought I would be nicer to you than I was to the previous guy I answered. I wrote; “Translate it and weep”. Here is the translation;

          Vaccination is voluntary. All vaccination in Norway is voluntary. People who are recommended or ask for a vaccine must be given sufficient information about the advantages and disadvantages of vaccination to be able to make an informed choice. There must also be openness about uncertainty and possible lack of knowledge.

            • mydude@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              5 months ago

              “its easy to think it might be leftist, but the intent behind it was absolutely far-right.”

              I provided an example of a far-left, very articulate answer to refute this. If i were you, I would stop and reflect on this.

              I cannot make you care, only you can do that.

              • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                5 months ago

                You gave an example of people saying a thing. That doesn’t make it leftist or not.

                • mydude@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  5 months ago

                  “You gave an example of people saying a thing. That doesn’t make it leftist or not.”

                  I gave you a quote from Norways FHI (equivalent to USA HHS), citing the rules of, “My body, my choice”, proving that the most leftist stance is to have FULL bodily autonomy without any vaccine cut-outs. Norway is to the left of USA, certainly regarding these rules.

                  There are no if’s or but’s about this, I don’t think you can get this any clearer than these words: “Vaccination is voluntary. All vaccination in Norway is voluntary. People who are recommended or ask for a vaccine must be given sufficient information about the advantages and disadvantages of vaccination to be able to make an informed choice. There must also be openness about uncertainty and possible lack of knowledge.”

                  It’s directly from their fhi.no official government webpage.

                  Those are my arguments that “My body, my choice” is as far left as you come.

                  I can add that we have a cut-out for this rule. The only way a doctor can over step the wishes of his patient is if the patient actively pursues actions that will result in intentionally self harm. And no, this does not include a person not taking vaccinations.

                  • Cowbee@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    5 months ago

                    No, lol. Leftism is about worker ownership of the Means of production and a general rejection of unjust hierarchy. A leftist group saying something does not mean that thing is leftist.

    • mydude@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      “Believe in science”, that’s anti-science. “My body, my choice” has always been in context of abortion, and viewed as left wing. Here it’s the exact same words, the exact same meaning in context of taking an experimental redefined definition of a vaccine. It’s in this setting that characters make or breaks. If you cannot uphold your values when they matter, you don’t have values, you have hobbies.

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        It sounds like you’re a moral absolutist, and that is absolutely right-wing. Context is key. You can say “It’s wrong to kill”, but what if the person you killed was trying to kill you, and you acted in self defense? What if killing them was the only choice you had to prevent them from killing you or somebody you love?

        Similarly, you can say “My body, my choice”, but the situation is different when you’re talking about getting an abortion vs. getting a vaccine.

        • mydude@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          5 months ago

          You can call me whatever you like. Here is a text about the differences between ethics and laws, taken from a dentist journal, but the same laws apply here.

          https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jopr.13493

          In general, the courts have determined how ethical principles translate into the requirements for how healthcare providers obtain a patient’s consent for treatment. Consent from a legal perspective involves respecting the “bodily integrity of the individual.” This dimension emanates from the philosophy of personal autonomy, defined as “an individual’s capacity for self-determination or self-governance” or “the capacity to decide for oneself and pursue a course of action in one’s life.” The courts view the informed consent requirement for a healthcare provider as a requirement to disclose sufficient information for the patient to make a “controlled decision before undergoing irreversible treatment.”, A patient’s consent must be voluntary, meaning “no coercion or unfair persuasion and inducements” and can be withdrawn at any time.

          There is no special cut-out for vaccination within the law. In this context a vaccine would be defined as “irreversible [medical] treatment”.