you use that word alot but i dont think you know what it means.jpeg

dont worry about what i know, you do you man and let me do me

but this is a fact
authoritarianism = ccp

Just answering your question! I'm here to help!

And I don't see a problem with updating a definition to fit with current times. The english language is constantly evolving and the outdated definition was very limiting on what it entailed especially as science evolves over time. Regardless any measure similar to vaccines has precedent to be used as it does not infringe on rights

This post was edited by MrSK on Oct 1 2021 05:11pm

So what's stopping people from changing the definition of vaccine to include intramuscular cocaine injections? I mean, the English language is evolving all the time, right?

The exaggerated example given above is to show you that it is very bad to change the definition of something casually. And we all know the reason you are changing the definition is due to political reason, anyway. You are doing it to force covid jabs on us. It has nothing to do with changing science or changing language needs.

If you changed the definition to fit with "intramuscular cocaine injections" then you would be fundamentally changing the word. Adding an additional example to clarify isn't doing that. The new mRNA definitions still fit under the definitions before, which is still in use and which is something to the effect of "a substance used to stimulate immunity to disease without contracting the disease".

intramuscular what now, dont we sniff that stuff

it wouldnt change the word if they gave a "valid" reason to include intramuscular cocaine injections to fit in the definition


his point still stands if i got it correctly, altering words to fit narratives is destructive to the language

Flu shots do that too but we don't consider them true vaccines.

yeah but as proven multiple times in this thread you dont get things correctly

lol w/e you say sheep