It's very clumsy.A person can choose to not get vaccinated, but that person will experience personal consequences as governments, employers, society protect the healthcare system, workforce, general population.
I am arguing some of those risks include hassles at the border (i.e. quarantine until negative test). Or, employers mandating masks or working from home, or otherwise altering working environments.
There will always be a discussion about balancing the individual rights vs social responsibility.
That's all I'm attempting to express. Perhaps clumsily.
Maybe we should make them smoke outside. And refrain from smoking in the workplace. And airports.It's very clumsy.
And a slippery slope.
I personally detest smokers.
I do not appreciate cancer sticks.
People who smoke are a net drain on society and a burden on our health care system.
Should we as a society be talking about balancing individuals rights versus collective good in the case of smokers?
Forced medical procedures are not part of being in any free society.
Enacting limitations deemed appropriate for the health of all citizens does not cause the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to explode…1. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
The Charter protects those basic rights and freedoms of all Canadians that are considered essential to preserving Canada as a free and democratic country. It applies to all governments – federal, provincial and territorial – and includes protection of the following:
The rights and freedoms in the Charter are not absolute. They can be limited to protect other rights or important national values. For example, freedom of expression may be limited by laws against hate propaganda or child pornography.
- fundamental freedoms, democratic rights
- the right to live and seek employment anywhere in Canada
- legal rights (life, liberty and personal security)
- equality rights for all
- the official languages of Canada
- minority language education rights
- Canada's multicultural heritage
- Indigenous peoples’ rights
Yes, why stop there?Maybe we should make them smoke outside. And refrain from smoking in the workplace. And airports.
Slippery slope indeed.
Uhhh...we did stop there.Yes, why stop there?
Smokers cannot work certain jobs?
Smokers are banned from certain establishments?
Sounds odd, does it not?
I'm never for letting businesses or governments legislate rights away from people.
Probably because can remember stories about certain people needing to sit at the back of the bus, or drink from the colored fountains, based on the popular opinion at the time.
Isn't the whole point of a society a collection of people who work together for the common good?
Is it reasonable that some members of the group do not work towards the common good, yet reap the rewards?
Shouldn't action, or inaction have consequences?
Good Lord, already. The Charter is clear, and no one (above 12 for now) is being forced to get vaccinated. You insinuation that Canada is forcing vaccinations directly like some sterilization program is ludicrous.
You know what, that's fair.Uhhh...we did stop there.
You could make the same hysterical argument about any single restriction in society. Go nuts.
Especially since there are other easy ways to keep people safe at this point.I recall getting a seasonal flu vaccine, once, only because it was offered free at work.
Every two or three years I've gotten a flu. It's possible I've been part of a chain of contagion that eventually killed someone.
So this isn't an on/off question, and the risks of COVID are insufficient to justify discrimination.
Nope. Merely saying that decisions have consequences.You know what, that's fair.
Currently 2 provinces are doing vaccine passports, and one of those, Quebec, has said they won't be a used as a requirement for employment.
The Feds (Trudeau) have come out against it.( in a domestic sense)
So the only ones making inane arguments for some sort of societal restrictions based on vaccine status are people like you.
Currently the unvaccinated cannot travel internationally to certain places.Nope. Merely saying that decisions have consequences.
Well…at least you didn’t invoke Godwin’s Law…
I'm sure you are kidding - I think? But, from reading this discussion, I was wondering the same thing.
I believe I cited travel explicitly.Currently the unvaccinated cannot travel internationally to certain places.
Domestically the unvaccinated are facing restrictions in only Manitoba and Quebec, and in Quebec it is only if cases rise, and not to be used in cases of employment.
So yes, decisions have consequences, but a great deal less than what you seemed to be suggesting.
You didn'tI believe I cited travel explicitly.
And unvaccinated people can most certainly travel, but they will be required to quarantine upon return. For now.
A person can choose to not get vaccinated, but that person will experience personal consequences as governments, employers, society protect the healthcare system, workforce, general population.
I am arguing some of those risks include hassles at the border (i.e. quarantine until negative test). Or, employers mandating masks or working from home, or otherwise altering working environments
No I wasn’t kidding, actually. There was already a specious link being formed between vaccination and a return segregation…no knowing how ludicrously things might devolve…I'm sure you are kidding - I think? But, from reading this discussion, I was wondering the same thing.