In fact the covid 19 vaccines give far more immunity than most other vaccines.
I need some fact-checking for this one.
Also, "immune to something" means "completely impervious to something" in any dictionary.
Vaccination does not always provide immunity, but it does provide some form of protection against a disease.
Some people equate vaccination to immunization, and this is not always true, but it's not their fault since everyone I know have been taught from their early childhood that getting a shot against a disease = being immune to it for at least 10 years (Hep. C, Tetanus) or for life (all others I've taken - polio, measles, whooping cough, rubella etc.).
I've never bothered with flu shots because they are useless to me at this point, since they are not full immunity and I'm not at risk. Though people do die from flu, I've never known nor heard about someone who did over here.
Coincidentally, it's the first case of a vaccine that does not provide full immunity that I've heard about, some 15+ years ago.
The CoViD-19 vaccines are similar, though way more effective: they provide no immunity, just partial protection.
Assuming they are safe (and here's the catch), there would be no reason to not take one.
Despite Lacius loving to cite safety data from them, all I've read and seen indicate they are dangerous things to take, especially the mRNA ones.
The whole point of the thread is that it should be up to oneself to measure their own cost/benefit ratio and decide to take the vaccine or not. Mandates are an abuse, as is barring unvaxxed from basic public services.
There should be some form of light coercion, like we have over here, banning unvaccinated from restaurants, bars, closed spaces overall.
Outright forcing people to vaccinate though, if you can't see how this opens a precedent for further abuse you're
all in for a rude awakening.