to be alarmed by vaccine passports

[Loustew12]

Am I the only person who find the proposed extension of this alarming, given what's happening in Austria, where police are out checking the unvaccinated are hiding among the vaccinated? Gibraltar has 100% vaccination rate and cases are through the roof. So clearly being vaccinated doesn't 'stop the spread'. Therefore, there is no logical or justification for segregating society. It's surely a slippery slope to go down?

You divide society into the "clean" and the "unclean". You blame the "unclean" for whatever has gone wrong and whip up fear over the danger they pose. You restrict their freedom or outright persecute them. And sometimes you say - well if they just convert from their belief system they wouldn't be subject to this treatment so it's their choice.

Let's change this just slightly:
"You divide society into the "sober drivers and the "drunk drivers". You blame the "drunk drivers" for whatever has gone wrong and whip up fear over the danger they pose. You restrict their freedom to drive or outright persecute them by arresting them And sometimes you say - well if they just stop driving when drunk they wouldn't be subject to this treatment so it's their choice"

Still sounds reasonable?

Yes the right to attend events should trump it by remaining an individual decision

I assume you mean the right to attend events without vaccination (and without masks or testing?) So long as you accept that you are thereby denying the vulnerable people the right to attend the same events!

Testing and masks I’d say are a bit different for me.

I’ve worn masks where required and I’m vaccinated so no test but can see it could be asked for

I was on the fence re Covid pass but I think that post / justification just put me off. Not having a go just something about the idea that one group trumps the other in that way

And you may be denying everyone the right, if you cause us to go back into lockdown! ('You' here means vaccine refusers, not you personally as an individual.)

Well sure not me as I’m vaccinated and will get booster

I do understand the frustration around vaccine decisions esp when I think of healthcare workers who are under strain, or restrictions which I fear, but it was the phrasing of someone trumping another so they must agree to vaccination. Not for their own risk but someone else’s put me off for some reason.

And you may be denying everyone the right, if you cause us to go back into lockdown!

It will happen. And it will be not just the unvaxxed, but unboosted to blame. Your initial compliance will mean nothing.

No I don’t think it will happen.

I’d prefer if all the SM noise was that we don’t want it to also.

We won’t comply etc

I'm double vaxxed. Not going to get boosted though.

I'm done for now.

Am I a drunk - or a semi drunk driver?

it was the phrasing of someone trumping another so they must agree to vaccination. Not for their own risk but someone else’s put me off for some reason.

'Trumping' is not actually an expression that I usually use - I was responding to another poster's argument that the rights of people to be safe from Covid don't trump other people's freedom.

I don't think that anyone MUST agree to vaccination. Rather that people who don't agree to vaccination (or proof of a negative test) should not attend extremely crowded events, or travel in circumstances where they may be in close contact with others for a long period. Or at least, if they do, they should accept that they are impinging on other people's freedom.

@CatsArePeople

And you may be denying everyone the right, if you cause us to go back into lockdown!

It will happen. And it will be not just the unvaxxed, but unboosted to blame. Your initial compliance will mean nothing.

You still haven’t defined who these ‘globalist handlers’ are yet.

Or at least, if they do, they should accept that they are impinging on other people's freedom

But they arent impinging on another persons freedom. If you are vaccinated you are well protected. Stepping out of the house comes with risks. You could catch all sorts of things. You could catch the flu. If you have been double vaccinated and are therefore fairly well protected, and you decide to go to a bar, that's your problem. Your risk assessment, your risk and your responsibility. You could argue that your paranoia is impinging on another's freedom. The question is: why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's? Why and who has decided that and what gives them the right to make that call?
[Note: I'm using "you" generally, not specifically aimed at you!]

@JollyJoon

Or at least, if they do, they should accept that they are impinging on other people's freedom

But they arent impinging on another persons freedom. If you are vaccinated you are well protected. Stepping out of the house comes with risks. You could catch all sorts of things. You could catch the flu. If you have been double vaccinated and are therefore fairly well protected, and you decide to go to a bar, that's your problem. Your risk assessment, your risk and your responsibility. You could argue that your paranoia is impinging on another's freedom. The question is: why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's? Why and who has decided that and what gives them the right to make that call?
[Note: I'm using "you" generally, not specifically aimed at you!]

Yes this is articulating how I feel on that too

You still haven’t defined who these ‘globalist handlers’ are yet.

China? Pfizer? Is it my job to define? Why is economy "global", technology "global", but corruption and shady dealings can be... only local?

I have had a vaccine "passport" for years and also needed to be vaccinated about certain things to work in the NHS

travelhealthpro.org.uk/news/521/updated-guide-on-the-international-certificate-of-vaccination-or-prophylaxis-icvp

. If you are vaccinated you are well protected. Not completely; though if most people are vaccinated, then there is good protection. You could argue that your paranoia is impinging on another's freedom. What paranoia? The question is: why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's? Why is theirs greater than mine? Why is either of ours greater than that of a chronically ill elderly person? The difference between me and (some) unvaccinated people is that I don't claim that I'm Refusing to Comply with the Evil Government out of an ideological belief in Absolute Freedom.

@CatsArePeople

You still haven’t defined who these ‘globalist handlers’ are yet.

China? Pfizer? Is it my job to define? Why is economy "global", technology "global", but corruption and shady dealings can be... only local?

If I’d brought up the global economy or global technology in an argument I was making, then yes, I would expect that it was my job to define what I meant if asked.

I'm Refusing to Comply with the Evil Government out of an ideological belief in Absolute Freedom

How about I'm not willing to risk my life in a medical experiment on a narrative of "protecting others"?
Its not essential for me to have a holiday or go to a gig, but where does it end? Lose a job, be refused benefits, have bank account suspended?

Why is theirs greater than mine
Sorry, you cant just deflect by throwing the question back at me. It's not up to me to justify the status quo. It's up to you to justify the change you want to see. Until now, the status quo has been that all people have equal access to society. You want to change that, so you explain why.

It's as if I decided that we should ban obese passengers from flying. It wouldn't be up to you to explain why they deserve to fly. It would be up to me to detail why I think they shouldn't.

So again:
"why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's? Why and who has decided that and what gives them the right to make that call?"

@ddl1

. If you are vaccinated you are well protected. Not completely; though if most people are vaccinated, then there is good protection. You could argue that your paranoia is impinging on another's freedom. What paranoia? The question is: why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's? Why is theirs greater than mine? Why is either of ours greater than that of a chronically ill elderly person? The difference between me and (some) unvaccinated people is that I don't claim that I'm Refusing to Comply with the Evil Government out of an ideological belief in Absolute Freedom.

I find it extremely hard to believe that chronically ill elderly people would willingly be cramming themselves into crowded venues even if all the other people there were double/triple vaccinated. I therefore don't accept your argument that it is the unvaccinated selfishly keeping them at home. It is a horrible and cruel side-effect of the virus itself. To stay safe I mitigate my risks as much as possible by avoiding crowds, staying outside as much as I can and keeping a safe-distance from others. I would imagine other vulnerable people are probably doing the same?

@SencosRshit brilliant post. That is exactly the point I was trying to make but I was instantly labelled a racist antisemite, anti-vaxxer so I didn’t get any further.

I therefore don't accept your argument that it is the unvaccinated selfishly keeping them at home. It is a horrible and cruel side-effect of the virus itself. To stay safe I mitigate my risks as much as possible by avoiding crowds, staying outside as much as I can and keeping a safe-distance from others. I would imagine other vulnerable people are probably doing the same?

OK, fair enough. I am really arguing with people who have some sort of ideological objection to vaccination conditions under any circumstances. Most vulnerable people won't be attending crowded events. But they may have no alternative to seeking medical care; and there are some people who object to expecting healthcare workers to be vaccinated, and that's my biggest concern.

The main reason for vaccine passports is to reduce the chances of 'superspreader events' causing massive spikes in transmission. I think that in itself is sufficient reason, but can see that some people may not.

why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's?

Why is my right to be safe from drunk or speeding drivers greater than theirs to drive at speed or when drunk? We restrict the rights of people to endanger others in many situations. How is vaccination different from all of the other situations?

How about I'm not willing to risk my life in a medical experiment on a narrative of "protecting others"?

Because it's not a medical experiment, that's why!

The main reason for vaccine passports is to reduce the chances of 'superspreader events' causing massive spikes in transmission. I think that in itself is sufficient reason, but can see that some people may not

Which is why I can accept them for large indoor events where you have several thousand people in a confined space. But not for a casual meal or coffee or swim or visit to a museum.

@ddl1

why is your right to impinge on others freedoms greater than an unvaccinated person's?

Why is my right to be safe from drunk or speeding drivers greater than theirs to drive at speed or when drunk? We restrict the rights of people to endanger others in many situations. How is vaccination different from all of the other situations?

You cannot compare driving while drunk with going out while unvaccinated. There is no downside to driving while sober.

Vaccines are not 100% safe. Therefore it is not reasonable to impose them on people. You hope that the risk assessment comes down on the side of vaccines, especially in this case with long covid, but you cannot force people to undergo something that could kill them, and covid vaccines HAVE killed people.