[smoldesu]

> The problem with “I’m entitled to my opinion” is that, all too often, it’s used to shelter beliefs that should have been abandoned. It becomes shorthand for “I can say or think whatever I like” – and by extension, continuing to argue is somehow disrespectful.

These people have every right to think whatever stupid stuff they want. We built an entirely country around protecting people's rights to believe whatever ass-backwards stuff they want to believe, because ultimately it is their right to express themselves (even if the expression borders on insanity). The beauty is that we can have scientific discussion separate from these "entitled opinions". Our medical research is not predicated on the New Testament. Our Bible study is not bound by the understandings of modern medicine. Similarly, I think people will always believe vaccines are dangerous, just as we thought that barcodes were the devil and Beanie Babies are worth their weight in gold. Personally, I think that discussion is fine as long as we recognize it as totally distinct from factual, scientific research being done. Maybe that research doesn't refute what other people feel, but it does give a factual basis for future generations to base their opinions on.

[jfengel]

The vaccine case is notable. The people who are now prominently decrying vaccines are not the ones who "always believe vaccines are dangerous.

It is a new position, driven by ideological conflict but not based in ideology. There is nothing about their previous beliefs that makes them doubt vaccines in general or this vaccine in particular. It is solely about defending an ego-driven position that those who take COVID seriously are wrong, and everything else about it is post hoc rationalization.

They are entitled to that opinion only in the trivial sense that you cannot compel thought. In every other way it is an absurd position of no merit, not even in defending their own genuine beliefs and values.