3 ms·

Honest question: do you believe that a contract someone signs with a gun to their head is legitimate? If not, why not? At what point does compelled consent bec

by seneca 5y ago

Honest question: do you believe that a contract someone signs with a gun to their head is legitimate? If not, why not? At what point does compelled consent become illegitimate? I think most people agree a person with a gun to their head is under duress. After that it's just a matter of figuring out where the line is. I personally believe the government threatening peoples' livelihood in order to compell them to be vaccinated is placing those people under duress, and can not be considered legitimate consent. For what it's worth, I also think most healthy people ought to vaccinate themselves just as a matter of being good member of society.

ukj 5y ago
Honest question: do you think any of the relationships and contracts in Canada were signed with actual guns to anyone’s head? Because your metaphor is emotionally loaded and screams “libertarian bias”. Do you see all interactions/negotiations with government as having a gun to your head? From where I am looking it seems wee bit exaggerated and lacking nuance to equate mandates/economic sanctions and contract law to actual violence. It is precisely because you don’t have to (nor want to) sign the contract which requires you to be vaccinated is why you don’t have to work there any longer. You get what you want (remain unvaccinated). Employer get what they want (no unvaccinated employees). It seems like a win-win negotiation between consenting parties to me?