Being pro free speech has nothing to do with willingness to change your opinion. Rhetoric and philosophy are both contained within the free speech bubble. Also there are no ideologies that are free from the potential of stifling others free speech, which is why it needs to be vigorously protected by everyone, all the time.

Did you read the article? It’s not quite that simple.

If they have full fda approval, you can generally trust that they are more beneficial than otherwise. With vaccines that have been available and widely used for decades and even generations, there is basically no risk at all. But I understand hesitation with new vaccines, even if I am not worried about them myself. Most people can’t grasp the level of effort and proof it requires to get approval.

I worked in pharma for ten years. Vaccines work, but some work better than others. There have been many vaccines that were pulled after emergency use approval or because the side effects were not worth the disease that they were trying to prevent. Or like the flu vaccine used to make you mildly sick for a few days, but then you still got the flu because they guessed the wrong strain. You can’t just scream that vaccines work to people who have first hand experience with them not working. Otherwise you risk losing their trust in ALL vaccines. This is a big part of why we have a resurgence in the anti vaccine movement. Anyone who has actually researched knows that the topic of vaccines is more complicated than “vaccines good”.

Vaccines are good as long as they are proven to work, and as long as they are effective enough to be worth the side effects and risks. Big pharma needs to be held accountable and kept honest, because they would definitely try to sell you vaccines that are not necessary or not effective if they could get away with it. It shouldn’t be an all or nothing question.

Lol. Surely THIS time…

It’s pretty hard to take you seriously tbh.

You got a lot of anger bud.

What are you even talking about.

That only applies if you are the objective truth. If you are wrong, then it’s just another tool for bigotry, an excuse to ignore other opinions.

Yeah you are right. There have been a couple others, but quite a few attempts to ban various parties. I don’t quite understand the system and it’s possible that banning a party there isn’t near as big of a deal as it seems to me. If a party were banned in the united states, it would be very alarming. I think the only party ever banned was the communist party in 1950s, but even that is no longer really in effect.

No the court labeled afd as “confirmed right wing extremist” and someone else decided that that meant they couldn’t participate.

Who gets to decide who is a fascist and therefore doesn’t deserve to participate in democracy? What is the criteria for not deserving a voice? How do you define fascist? Maybe I’m cynical, but if you can eliminate popular political opposition by branding them as something, that’s a lot of motivation to brand them.

Advertising, marketing, and the stock market are the worst aspects of capitalism, and the system could be improved dramatically with heavy restrictions on all of those. Yeah it would shrink the economy, but the new steady state would be much better. Less waste, better stuff.

There’s only one political party in German history who banned other political parties. Just because you call a different party a fascist, doesn’t mean you get a pass to act like a fascist.

Lol is vaccine like a general term for any treatment now?

I can’t tell if people believe he is serious about being pope.

Well why didn’t she try that?

Any time you have a group of people who can’t be criticized because of their protected status, members of that group will abuse it.

Utter nonsense. There isn’t a single doctor anywhere who wouldn’t treat a completely nonviable and dangerous ectopic pregnancy.