dialamah

Consequences. And notice that you'll hire people that aren't vaccinated. The decision of the minority should not dictate the behavior of the majority. In a democracy, the majority gets to make the decisions. Only in a fascist country does the minority have that power - which they enforce through much worse means than limits on dining out and gym attendance.

Many companies are not requiring proof of vaccination. Those that are have that right, just as you have the right to not get vaccinated. Your rights are not any more important than the rights of others. No, it's not fine. I'm not in favor of people dying. Anyway, if you are willing to accept dying on this hill, what's the big deal of a little loss of socialization and income - especially as there's a demand for workers - vaxed or not - in many places. My unvaxed grandchildren have found jobs, despite being old enough to be vaccinated and deciding not to. You have freedom. You are free to not get vaxed. You are free to accept the consequences of that decision. Only in authoritarian States would vaccination be absolutely required, without any freedom to choose and accept consequences of that choice. Vaccinated have more freedom now than at any time since Covid began.

Hyperbole much? China disappeared people who secretly documented the situation in Wuhan, before China admitted there was a virus, at the start of Covid. In Canada, there are full out demonstrations, those demonstrators can still be found in their homes. You are ridiculous in your claims.

Pseudoscience is what informs people that Jews and Blacks are intellectually inferior to Whites, vaccines cause autism, and that that the Covid vaccine is ineffective at best and deadly at worst. You have personal discretion, and also consequences. That's life, get used to it I'd say the results prove that these policies reduce spread, since those regions who disregard them have consistently more cases and deaths than those who don't. If you'd been paying attention you'd have noticed:. Case counts/hospitalizations go down, restrictions ease. Case counts/hospitalizations go up, restrictions go up. You have the freedom not to wear a mask or vaccinate. Freedom also means personal responsibility for your actions, and personal responsibility includes accepting the consequences of those choices.

Jews could not stop being Jews. Unvaxed people can stop being unvaxed. Jews faced incarceration, camps and death. Unvaxed can't go to restaurants. How apt the comparison. /s

Yes, nobody loves this, even those who think vaccines are a good idea. More people than not accept that sacrifices sometimes need to be made for the greater good. That's not fascism. Unvaxed are more vulnerable than vaxed people. They should take extra precautions to avoid getting sick, such as staying home.

The point is that unvaxed Covid people are now taking up all the slack they had. If they've stressed before, they're even more stressed now.

Not at all what the situation is: NB is going into Level 1 restrictions, which requires groceries stores (among others) to enforce physical distancing OR MAY require proof of vaccination. No ban from government. CHOICE given to businesses. Even your link said that this is an OPTION given to businesses and NOT a ban universally imposed. This OP is simply fearmongering.

1. Yes, sometimes people experiment with both sexes; if they stay with it, they are called "bisexual". Yes, experimentation is part of growing up, and it's through experimentation that people find out what really works for them. For some people it's boys, for others it's girls and for some it's either/or. Having been one that experimented with both boys and girls, I can tell you that the experimentation didn't remove or change my basic interest. Still, it was fun and interesting to play around like that. 2. Perhaps the gay population was always there, but with the increased acceptance they don't have to remain in the closet. One of the saddest stories I ever read was about a minister who was homosexual - but he refused to succumb to his urges. He was married, with two kids and he prayed daily for God to take away his "unnatural" urges. But he'd dream about men, and he'd feel attraction to men. Eventually, he wasn't able to have sex with his wife. He got to the point that he'd sleep with a Bible strapped round his genitals in an attempt to cure himself. None of that worked, and he had to admit that he was attracted to men. Of course, he lost his marriage, his position in life, his friends; it doesn't make sense that someone would "choose" that for themselves. 3. Virtually everything we do is explained by hormones: they control our moods, appetites, bodily functions etc. For example, the hormone TSH is in short supply in my body; consequently, I am prone to gain weight, be depressed, have low energy, be constipated, feel cold, have dry skin, lose hair. That's the effect of just one hormone. Several hormones dictate sexual behavior and desire, so to think that they can be overcome by wishful thinking, experimentation or even conversion therapy is naïve at best.

Covid has already proven itself.

I never said there was no natural immunity, and I never said there are no adverse affects. In my opinion, the question of whether or not vaccine cause death is still unresolved. Anyway, I asked a polite question and if you can't answer it that just adds to your lack of credibility.

Where did you get your information about VAERS deaths? Was it directly from VAERS or a source that crunched the numbers for you?

Were you ever confused about what was between your legs? I sure wasn't. The hormones that define your sexuality are pretty effective, especially once puberty hits. The most confused people are those who are told that what's between their legs defines attraction, when they actually feel very differently. Some people are actually born intersex - that is with evidence of both male and female genitalia so clearly there is more going on that 'boy or girl and nothing else'. When these people hit adolescence, their hormones (usually) tell them who they find attractive - males or females. This has presented serious problems for boys who were deemed girls at birth because their gender was not clearly defined by their genitalia and and girls are easier to make than boys. Homosexual behavior has been observed in animals.

Not liars. Mistaken. X gets a vaccine. Weeks or months later, they get very sick or die. Family/friends attribute that to the vaccine, even if there is no evidence that it was the vaccine. The side effects of any vaccine almost always show up with a couple of weeks, not several weeks or months later. It's the same line of thought that leads people to think that the MMR vaccine causes autism. Child didn't have autism, gets the vaccine, and some time later is diagnosed with autism. That's proof enough for them, despite lack of any scientific evidence.

I avoid this problem by not driving on the first snow day.

Nah, I wouldn't give myself that much credit. But I know enough to laugh at people who think that a vaccine is a guarantee that a variant won't make people sick.

Its like you don't understand vaccines or science.

Out of a total population of about 8.5 million, roughly one in 753 Quebecers have lost their lives after contracting the virus. Highest death rate in the country. Now I see why.

My "type of thinking" is based on evidence and common sense.

Yes, it sucks being vulnerable. Let's put it this way: by not getting vaccinated, you are more vulnerable than I to getting sick, getting hospitalized and dying. Consequently, I should work because I'm at less risk and you should stay home to protect yourself.

If you conflate 'unvaxed' with 'healthier' then I can see how you'd think that. But most healthy people are happy to get vaccinated , If you take thouse out of your equation, then it's just the the unvaxed/anti-vax who make up the group you think is so large. And they are no where near the majority. The healther group can work; they only need to get vaccinated in some cases, if their employer requires it - and many don't. Most people do if required or because they want to; the only people who's employment opportunities *might* be affected are the unvaxed. Can you prove that group is larger than the group we're calling "vulnerable"?

Then, in my opinion, you shouldn't talk about "protecting the vulnerable" by having them stay home so you can be out and about. You make the choice, don't expect others to accommodate that choice.

I work with several people who are vulnerable - cancer survivors, auto-immune disorders, heart issues. They all like to get out and about, not be stuck at home. Yes, at least two of them haven't been out for over a year and the others allow themselves very limited attendance at the office. If you had researched masks, you'd know they don't protect the wearers, they protect others around them. Their families, and they themselves already exercise caution. For these people, and their families, vaccination is a godsend as they and their families have gone to extraordinary length to protect themselves. Perhaps it's time we let them out of their, eh? I'm not engaging in the hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin debate. You have your experts, and I have mine - and never the twain shall meet. I'm also not going to entertain conspiracy theories about Big Pharma and governments conspiring against the citizens of the Western world. I know you are a believer, and if you turn out to be right I guess I'll have egg on my face. And vice versa, of course. With upwards of 80% of Canadians vaxed, they certainly are in Canada. More than half the world's population has already been vaccinated; in Western countries, that figure is higher - 70% and above. I'd say that anti-vaccers are the minority, especially in Canada.

Fair enough, but that doesn't mean the other people with vulnerabilities shouldn't be protected, does it?. I agree about vaccinations. So sholdn't everyone get vaccinated to "protect the vulnerable", it that's really a serious goal? After all, its still old people/vulnerable and unvaccinated who are most likely to die if they contract Covid. And a couple of other things - 1. Masks don't protect the mask wearer, they protect the people around them so to protect the vulnerable, everyone else should wear masks. 2. If it's not ok to have the unvaccinated disallowed avoid indoor crowds, why is it ok to have the vulnerable avoid indoor crowds? I'd bet that there are more vulnerable than unvaccinated in Canada, so why should the smaller larger group be inconvenienced by the smaller group? It seems to me that those who are most anti-mask and anti-vaccine/vaccine-hesitant are also the ones who keep saying "Protect the vulnerable", although they don't seem to think they should do anything to 'protect the vulnerable'.

I agree. Sure, let us know it's out there, but quit focusing on it on every news show - when we know nothing about it so far. Once they've determined how dangerous it is, or isn't, respond accordingly. IMO, etc.