Two lines

Just to be clear, the status quo you're complaining about is that people should be vaccinated during a global health crisis.

That's not right. The status quo I'm "complaining about" is that which claims that an official narrative, as determined by people in power, is the only permissible narrative to be widely shared in public, and opposing viewpoints should be shut down or even censored.

So let me flip this around now and frame your position within a negative light. Are you complaining about my meme because you oppose the free exchange of ideas?

The official narrative you're complaining about is that people should be vaccinated during a global health crisis.

No, it's actually not. I don't believe that Joe Rogan actually told anyone to not get vaccinated. Joe Rogan's "crime" was that he dared to discuss ideas other than the official narrative on his show.

Please just admit to me and to the rest of the world that you oppose the free expression of ideas. Please, do it and be done with it. Will you do that?

You're either lying intentionally OR YOU JUST DIDN'T KNOW and either way you just should not be saying what you're saying.

So it turns out that he did tell a hypothetical 21-year-old not to get vaccinated back in April of 2021, and he'd be quite reasonable giving out such advice.

Do you honestly think that that is a) why they're trying to shut him down, or b) that that merits being banned from a service?

Come on. That is absolutely pathetic. I told you before, just admit that you oppose the free expression of ideas.

Please, just stop pretending already. ADMIT IT so we can stop the charade that you believe in free speech for those with whom you disagree.

... do I need to prove that 21 year olds actually exist? Has it come to this??

Let's just say that you're defending the status quo, which wants to censor/ban a person's speech, because he gave a recommendation to a hypothetical person.

In other words, you're supporting stripping away the basic social rights of a person because you think the ideas he gave to an imaginary person are somehow harmful. Mind you, his "harmful" ideas were not violent, nor were they obscene. They were merely that he didn't think a person who has about 0.05% chance of dying (that's point-zero-five percent, not five percent) from a virus should get injected with a vaccine that has only been on the market for less than a year-and-a-half.

Just to be clear, the status quo you're complaining about is that people should be vaccinated during a global health crisis.

Just to be clear, you're wrong.

OK. But people should be vaccinated during a global health crisis.