4 ms·

I don't know what it's like in Canada, but in the US vaccine mandates are generally on strong legal ground

by throwaway6734 5y ago

cdot2 5y ago
civil rights can't be violated on strong legal grounds?
- throwaway6734 5y ago
  How do you define a violation of rights?
  - effingwewt 5y ago
    I will assume good faith, here[1] is the definition. [1] https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-civil-rights-violation/ https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-civil-rights-viol...
    - throwaway6734 5y ago
      Which is decided by courts
effingwewt 5y ago
Oh you mean the mandates the Supreme Court just struck down?[1] I am vaccinated but I stand with my brothers and sisters who demand a choice. Had it been mandated and had I known then what I know now, I would have not taken it. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/us/politics/supreme-court-biden-vaccine-mandate.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/us/politics/supreme-court...
- throwaway6734 5y ago
  The supreme court struck down part of the mandate and were open to the idea of it being employment/situationally specific (e.g., nurses). There's also no pushback against vaccination requirements for school and universities, but I'm sure that will be coming soon
  - effingwewt 5y ago
    Now you are moving goalposts. 'strong legal ground' yet the Supreme Court disagreed with you. You can posit about the future all you want, it won't change the reality of the present. Now I no longer believe you are commenting in good faith, you are simply pushing an agenda.
    - throwaway6734 5y ago
      https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/ State level mandates are considered to be constitutional, it's the broad federal mandate without employment specialization that wasn't considered constitutional. This isn't moving goal posts but providing context.
- EForEndeavour 5y ago
  Genuinely curious about "had I known then what I know now." What recent information tipped your decision from getting the vaccine to refusing it?

I don't know what it's like in Canada, but in the US vaccine mandates are generally on strong legal ground

cdot2 5y ago

civil rights can't be violated on strong legal grounds?

throwaway6734 5y ago
How do you define a violation of rights?
- effingwewt 5y ago
  I will assume good faith, here[1] is the definition. [1] https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-civil-rights-violation/ https://definitions.uslegal.com/c/criminal-civil-rights-viol...
  - throwaway6734 5y ago
    Which is decided by courts

effingwewt 5y ago

Oh you mean the mandates the Supreme Court just struck down?[1] I am vaccinated but I stand with my brothers and sisters who demand a choice. Had it been mandated and had I known then what I know now, I would have not taken it. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/us/politics/supreme-court-biden-vaccine-mandate.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/13/us/politics/supreme-court...

throwaway6734 5y ago
The supreme court struck down part of the mandate and were open to the idea of it being employment/situationally specific (e.g., nurses). There's also no pushback against vaccination requirements for school and universities, but I'm sure that will be coming soon
- effingwewt 5y ago
  Now you are moving goalposts. 'strong legal ground' yet the Supreme Court disagreed with you. You can posit about the future all you want, it won't change the reality of the present. Now I no longer believe you are commenting in good faith, you are simply pushing an agenda.
  - throwaway6734 5y ago
    https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/197/11/ State level mandates are considered to be constitutional, it's the broad federal mandate without employment specialization that wasn't considered constitutional. This isn't moving goal posts but providing context.
EForEndeavour 5y ago
Genuinely curious about "had I known then what I know now." What recent information tipped your decision from getting the vaccine to refusing it?