The language around the vaccine passport debate has been really shocking - dehumanising, completely unnuanced and very dangerous indeed. It seems like the majority of posters on MN would support vaccine passports for everyday activities and the posters who admit to not being keen on getting the vaccine are called selfish, a danger to others and told that they ought to live as hermits.
I remember when there were a lot of threads about mask exemptions and the overall consensus was that people who felt unable to wear masks for various reasons should be allowed to go about their business without challenge, despite the fact that they posed an additional risk to the health of the people around them. This is in spite of the fact that an unmasked person posed more of a risk to others in the time before anyone had the protection of a vaccine than an unvaccinated person would pose to a person who had been vaccinated. The view that many held was that a mask exempt person should not be questioned about their reasons for not wearing a mask. And that it would be discriminatory to not allow them into indoor public spaces.
I would like to hear from people who make a distinction between people who are mask exempt and people who are unvaccinated for various reasons and why the two should be treated differently.