Vaccine Mandates, Abortion, and ‘Send More Cops’

 

I’ve been reliably informed by many thoughtful, “principled conservatives” that where employer prerogatives and individual rights are in conflict, the former should prevail. If an employer mandates employees to be vaccinated under penalty of termination, then the employer is exercising its prerogative, and the employee must choose between jab or job.

So, what happens when an employer orders an employee to have an abortion? This is not a hypothetical.

“When I was 18-years-old as a police cadet, I was told I had to have an abortion or be fired from the MPD cadet program,” Dickerson said. “Wow. My choice to have a baby was personal and it should’ve been mine alone and not for an employer ultimatum.”

Principled conservatives like David French have already weighed in on whether an employer can require an employee to be vaccinated with a firm “Yes.” Likewise, the Bulwark calls employer vaccine mandates “gutsy” and says “if there was ever a time to push the boundaries of federal authority and let the courts sort it out, it’s this pandemic.” (Shades of that honored conservative principle “Never let a crisis go to waste.”) Never Trumper Max Boot has effusively praised the Biden administration’s authoritarian vaccine mandates for employers. Just as Twitter and Facebook have the right to censor or ban you for not conforming to their political agenda.

Corporations, as Mitt Romney famously proclaimed, are people, with the exact same constitutional rights as individuals. It doesn’t matter to this case that the employer was a government bureaucracy. The principle that an employer ought to be able to order an employee to undergo a medical procedure as a condition of employment remains the same. So, to be intellectually consistent, those who espouse the principle that an employer has the right to order an employee to take a vaccine must also support an employer’s right to order an employee to have an abortion. (As a matter of legality, not morality.)

Right?

On a tangential note, since a third of Chicago police have not complied with the city’s demand that they vaccinate, the city is begging the suburbs to “send more cops” to pick up the slack. Oh, yeah, I can imagine how many suburban doughnut consumers from Kankakee and Elk Grove are eager to march into the urban warzone where the mayor and the city council have already painted targets on their backs, where gangs can shoot each other in broad daylight without consequences, where every interaction with a suspect is overshadowed by the knowledge that the mayor, the city council, the prosecutor’s office, and the governor are all on the side of the criminal.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 25 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    • #1
  2. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    How about the opposite, preventing women from having abortions?  The rationale for requiring the vax is that you must do it to protect others.  So, require women to undergo a medical condition in order to protect another, specifically the baby.

    • #2
  3. Nohaaj Coolidge
    Nohaaj
    @Nohaaj

    One thing does not seem to be the same as the other.

    Vaccine mandates are policy that all must follow or face the consequences.  These are reprehensible and need to be challanged and overturned.

    The covert demand that a cadet should get an abortion to maintain status as a cadet, is horrific, but is not a policy mandate. It is misogynistic and probably racist – it needs to be addressed, but it is a culture personal culture thing, not a government nor employer  mandate. 

    • #3
  4. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    From National Health Safety Network:

    FAQs About HIPAA Privacy Rule

    Provisions Relevant to Public Health Practice

    Introduction

    Public health officials in state and local health departments, as well as their partners in the health care system, have asked for clarification regarding the Privacy Rule and its impact on public health practice. The attached document, “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)– Privacy Rule: Provisions relevant to public health practice,” contains excerpts from the website of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR)- HIPAAExternal in the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Explanatory text from the OCR website is included, but the majority of the document consists of direct quotes from the Rule itself (with appropriate page references for the Federal Register). This compilation of excerpts highlights major provisions of the Rule that are relevant to public health practice.

    What information is protected?

    All medical records and other individually identifiable health information used or disclosed by a covered entity in any form, whether electronically, on paper, or orally, are covered by the final rule.

    For what disclosures and uses must consent be obtained by a provider?

    The Privacy Rule states that:

    In general, “[a] covered health care provider [with a direct treatment relationship] must obtain the individual’s consent,…prior to using or disclosing protected health information to carry out treatment, payment, or health care operations.” (See section [§] 164.506, 65 Federal Register [F.R.] p. 82810, for complete requirements.)

    IT WOULD SEEM THAT A EMPLOYER CANNOT UNDER HIPAA INQUIRE ABOUT A EMPLOYEES VACCINATION STATUS, AND TO DO SO IS A CRIME. 

    THEREFORE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO BE VACCINATED, BECAUSE TO DO SO REQURIES AN INQUIRY REGARDING THEIR  VACCINATION STATUS.  NO, IT IS NOT THE EMPLOYER’S CHOICE WHETHER TO IMPOSE VACCINATION UPON AN EMPLOYEE.  

    • #4
  5. Henry Racette Contributor
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Victor Tango Kilo: [T]o be intellectually consistent, those who espouse the principle that an employer has the right to order an employee to take a vaccine must also support an employer’s right to order an employee to have an abortion.

    I understand why one might believe this, but I don’t think it’s correct. There are all sorts of things that, while they may be similar in principle, are very different in degree and particulars and so are treated differently under the law. There are substantive differences between requiring employees to be vaccinated against a highly communicable disease, on the one hand, and insisting that employees have abortions, surgeries, etc., on the other.

     

    • #5
  6. Sandy Member
    Sandy
    @Sandy

    Unsk (View Comment):

    From National Health Safety Network:

    FAQs About HIPAA Privacy Rule

    Provisions Relevant to Public Health Practice

    Introduction

    Public health officials in state and local health departments, as well as their partners in the health care system, have asked for clarification regarding the Privacy Rule and its impact on public health practice. The attached document, “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)– Privacy Rule: Provisions relevant to public health practice,” contains excerpts from the website of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR)- HIPAAExternal in the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Explanatory text from the OCR website is included, but the majority of the document consists of direct quotes from the Rule itself (with appropriate page references for the Federal Register). This compilation of excerpts highlights major provisions of the Rule that are relevant to public health practice.

    What information is protected?

    All medical records and other individually identifiable health information used or disclosed by a covered entity in any form, whether electronically, on paper, or orally, are covered by the final rule.

    For what disclosures and uses must consent be obtained by a provider?

    The Privacy Rule states that:

    In general, “[a] covered health care provider [with a direct treatment relationship] must obtain the individual’s consent,…prior to using or disclosing protected health information to carry out treatment, payment, or health care operations.” (See section [§] 164.506, 65 Federal Register [F.R.] p. 82810, for complete requirements.)

    IT WOULD SEEM THAT A EMPLOYER CANNOT UNDER HIPAA INQUIRE ABOUT A EMPLOYEES VACCINATION STATUS, AND TO DO SO IS A CRIME.

    THEREFORE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO BE VACCINATED, BECAUSE TO DO SO REQURIES AN INQUIRY REGARDING THEIR VACCINATION STATUS. NO, IT IS NOT THE EMPLOYER’S CHOICE WHETHER TO IMPOSE VACCINATION UPON AN EMPLOYEE.

    The privacy rule quoted here does not seem to prevent an employer per se from asking an employee about his health status. It prevents a healthcare provider or health insurance provider from offering that information without the consent of the patient. However if the employer pays for health insurance, I believe they are covered by the rule and I think it’s an interesting question as to whether they can discriminate in such a way (as in a mandate) so that the unvaccinated would be publicly identifiable. I recall that this law came about out of privacy concerns around people with AIDS and I would think there would be some case law on it long before now.  

    • #6
  7. Kephalithos Member
    Kephalithos
    @Kephalithos

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment): I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    It’s worse than that. Here’s a letter to the editor the local newspaper just published:

    I spent a month in France and Italy to visit family. . . . In Toulouse, France, masks were required when walking in the streets. There were heavy fines for violations.

    I did not see acts of defiance except a few anti-vax daily protesters in one of Rome’s piazzas. I felt safe because everyone was vaccinated and wearing masks. We should follow suit. A vocal — and sometimes threatening minority — should not be allowed to impede the rights of the rest of us to move freely and safely. Many people are not partaking in optional activities where there are no COVID requirements to protect them. For young children and those with health issues, the lack of mandates for vaccines and masks robs them of a normal life. In France and Italy, you can choose to be vaccinated or not, but the unvaccinated cannot partake in optional activities. In the U.S., it’s the opposite.

    The unvaccinated and sometimes unmasked can go anywhere, get the virus, spread the virus and burden the health system while the majority who are vaccinated must restrict their activities to be safe. This is wrong.

    Americans want to be tyrannized.

    • #7
  8. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Victor Tango Kilo: I’ve been reliably informed by many thoughtful, “principled conservatives” that where employer prerogatives and individual rights are in conflict, the former should prevail.

    I guess these “principled conservatives” support the right of employers to not hire people of a certain race if their “perogative” is to cater to white supremacists.

    But seriously, there is a line where employers’ perogative trumps employees’ rights, and vice versa.  MacDonald’s is well within its rights not to hire – or fire – an employee who insists on wearing a “Meat is murder” button at work.  OTOH, religion is a powerful employee right, as well as an individual’s health care.  I can see some businesses with a defendable arguement for vaccine mandates – military is one that comes to mind, because our guys have to fight on a battlefield that may have bioweapons (like COVID) deployed.

    COVID vaccines for medical personnel is tricky.  I lean towards a requirement, but the heavy-handedness by which mandates are imposed leaves no room for alternatives.

    If I had to choose, I’d say no mandates – period . . .

    • #8
  9. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    Kephalithos (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment): I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    It’s worse than that. Here’s a letter to the editor the local newspaper just published:

    I spent a month in France and Italy to visit family. . . . In Toulouse, France, masks were required when walking in the streets. There were heavy fines for violations.

    I did not see acts of defiance except a few anti-vax daily protesters in one of Rome’s piazzas. I felt safe because everyone was vaccinated and wearing masks. We should follow suit. A vocal — and sometimes threatening minority — should not be allowed to impede the rights of the rest of us to move freely and safely. Many people are not partaking in optional activities where there are no COVID requirements to protect them. For young children and those with health issues, the lack of mandates for vaccines and masks robs them of a normal life. In France and Italy, you can choose to be vaccinated or not, but the unvaccinated cannot partake in optional activities. In the U.S., it’s the opposite.

    The unvaccinated and sometimes unmasked can go anywhere, get the virus, spread the virus and burden the health system while the majority who are vaccinated must restrict their activities to be safe. This is wrong.

    Americans want to be tyrannized.

    Ironically, it’s the vaxxed, spreading COVID unaware and without symptoms, who are our most serious public health threat.

    My cow-orkers make fun of me because I call any business that requires masks or proof of vaccine “segregationist” and I implore them to not patronize these businesses. They mock me. After all, they want to go to concerts and stage shows and if they have to prove they’re vaxxed and wear a mask, they’re okay with that.

    They don’t realize they’re abetting tyranny, a social credit system, and segregation. Maybe someday they’ll wake up.

    • #9
  10. Henry Racette Contributor
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    I think Stad summarized it pretty well in #8.

    There is a necessary balancing. Becoming an employee can’t mean making yourself entirely subject to the whims of your employer. At the same time, becoming an employer can’t mean that you must tolerate having your life threatened every day by an employee. Deciding where on that very broad spectrum employer-mandated vaccinations for the Wuhan coronavirus falls is, I suppose, up to the courts. (Personally, I wouldn’t mandate vaccinations for my employees, and wouldn’t want to work for a company that did.)

    • #10
  11. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    Unsk (View Comment):

    From National Health Safety Network:

    FAQs About HIPAA Privacy Rule

    Provisions Relevant to Public Health Practice

    Introduction

    Public health officials in state and local health departments, as well as their partners in the health care system, have asked for clarification regarding the Privacy Rule and its impact on public health practice. The attached document, “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)– Privacy Rule: Provisions relevant to public health practice,” contains excerpts from the website of the Office for Civil Rights (OCR)- HIPAAExternal in the United States Department of Health and Human Services. Explanatory text from the OCR website is included, but the majority of the document consists of direct quotes from the Rule itself (with appropriate page references for the Federal Register). This compilation of excerpts highlights major provisions of the Rule that are relevant to public health practice.

    What information is protected?

    All medical records and other individually identifiable health information used or disclosed by a covered entity in any form, whether electronically, on paper, or orally, are covered by the final rule.

    For what disclosures and uses must consent be obtained by a provider?

    The Privacy Rule states that:

    In general, “[a] covered health care provider [with a direct treatment relationship] must obtain the individual’s consent,…prior to using or disclosing protected health information to carry out treatment, payment, or health care operations.” (See section [§] 164.506, 65 Federal Register [F.R.] p. 82810, for complete requirements.)

    IT WOULD SEEM THAT A EMPLOYER CANNOT UNDER HIPAA INQUIRE ABOUT A EMPLOYEES VACCINATION STATUS, AND TO DO SO IS A CRIME.

    THEREFORE IT IS AGAINST THE LAW TO REQUIRE EMPLOYEES TO BE VACCINATED, BECAUSE TO DO SO REQURIES AN INQUIRY REGARDING THEIR VACCINATION STATUS. NO, IT IS NOT THE EMPLOYER’S CHOICE WHETHER TO IMPOSE VACCINATION UPON AN EMPLOYEE.

    With the current Covid panic, all inconvenient rules and regulations are simply ignored by the powers that be.

    • #11
  12. Caryn Thatcher
    Caryn
    @Caryn

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    Kephalithos (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment): I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    It’s worse than that. Here’s a letter to the editor the local newspaper just published:

    I spent a month in France and Italy to visit family. . . . In Toulouse, France, masks were required when walking in the streets. There were heavy fines for violations.

    I did not see acts of defiance except a few anti-vax daily protesters in one of Rome’s piazzas. I felt safe because everyone was vaccinated and wearing masks. We should follow suit. A vocal — and sometimes threatening minority — should not be allowed to impede the rights of the rest of us to move freely and safely. Many people are not partaking in optional activities where there are no COVID requirements to protect them. For young children and those with health issues, the lack of mandates for vaccines and masks robs them of a normal life. In France and Italy, you can choose to be vaccinated or not, but the unvaccinated cannot partake in optional activities. In the U.S., it’s the opposite.

    The unvaccinated and sometimes unmasked can go anywhere, get the virus, spread the virus and burden the health system while the majority who are vaccinated must restrict their activities to be safe. This is wrong.

    Americans want to be tyrannized.

    Ironically, it’s the vaxxed, spreading COVID unaware and without symptoms, who are our most serious public health threat.

    My cow-orkers make fun of me because I call any business that requires masks or proof of vaccine “segregationist” and I implore them to not patronize these businesses. They mock me. After all, they want to go to concerts and stage shows and if they have to prove they’re vaxxed and wear a mask, they’re okay with that.

    They don’t realize they’re abetting tyranny, a social credit system, and segregation. Maybe someday they’ll wake up.

    That is not true.  It is you who are spreading misinformation.  And that is a serious public health threat.  Read thisThis, too.  There is a lot more evidence like it out there.

    • #12
  13. Unsk Member
    Unsk
    @Unsk

    Caryn:

    “That is not true.  It is you who are spreading misinformation.  And that is a serious public health threat.  Read thisThis, too.  There is a lot more evidence like it out there.

    ABSOLUTE BUNK.  THIS CRAP WAS WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DEVELOPED COVID. THE VACCINES ARE KILLING THOUSANDS. THEY ARE NOT SAFE AND THEY ARE HELPING TO SPREAD THE DISEASE.

    • #13
  14. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    Kephalithos (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment): I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    It’s worse than that. Here’s a letter to the editor the local newspaper just published:

    I spent a month in France and Italy to visit family. . . . In Toulouse, France, masks were required when walking in the streets. There were heavy fines for violations.

    I did not see acts of defiance except a few anti-vax daily protesters in one of Rome’s piazzas. I felt safe because everyone was vaccinated and wearing masks. We should follow suit. A vocal — and sometimes threatening minority — should not be allowed to impede the rights of the rest of us to move freely and safely. Many people are not partaking in optional activities where there are no COVID requirements to protect them. For young children and those with health issues, the lack of mandates for vaccines and masks robs them of a normal life. In France and Italy, you can choose to be vaccinated or not, but the unvaccinated cannot partake in optional activities. In the U.S., it’s the opposite.

    The unvaccinated and sometimes unmasked can go anywhere, get the virus, spread the virus and burden the health system while the majority who are vaccinated must restrict their activities to be safe. This is wrong.

    Americans want to be tyrannized.

    The one nice thing about tyranny is I won’t have to listen to people you like moan about how we are doomed.  I might be dead, but you have to look at the bright side.

    Has anyone ever mentioned using you as a method for interrogating people or a replacement for waterboarding?

    • #14
  15. Vince Guerra Member
    Vince Guerra
    @VinceGuerra

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    There are substantive differences between requiring employees to be vaccinated against a highly communicable disease, on the one hand, and insisting that employees have abortions, surgeries, etc., on the other.

    Once you’ve surrendered medical autonomy intellectually you’ve surrendered the right to draw lines in the sand. And they know it, and eventually you will as well. 

    • #15
  16. J Climacus Member
    J Climacus
    @JClimacus

    I’d like to hear more details about this case. The story says she was an 18 year old police cadet. She wasn’t a cop yet, just training to be a cop. So she didn’t have a “job” so much as being paid by the city to undergo training to become a cop. That’s a different situation than an actual working cop taking time off to have a baby.

    These training situations typically have agreements in place that the cadet won’t do something (like getting pregnant) that would prevent completion of the training. Our service academies have requirements that cadets don’t have dependents. So if a cadet becomes pregnant, she can either have an abortion, or take time out to have the baby, give up legal rights to it, and then return to the academy. If you don’t want to face that situation, don’t go to a service academy, or if there, don’t get pregnant. And these are four year institutions.

    The internet tells me that police training is something like 20 weeks. So a pregnant cadet would have to be disenrolled from that class and start over in a later class. Is the city supposed to pay her all that time? At that point she’s no more a cop than you or I. I suspect there is a simple rule that you can’t become pregnant during the police academy or face dismissal. So she’s not being forced to have an abortion. She’s simply being held to the rule that you can’t be pregnant during the training (if there is such a rule). Since abortion is legal, that’s an option (as much as I wish it weren’t.) I’d rather the rule just be that if you get pregnant, you are dismissed from the police academy. You’re welcome to sign up for a later class.

     

    • #16
  17. Judge Mental Member
    Judge Mental
    @JudgeMental

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: [T]o be intellectually consistent, those who espouse the principle that an employer has the right to order an employee to take a vaccine must also support an employer’s right to order an employee to have an abortion.

    I understand why one might believe this, but I don’t think it’s correct. There are all sorts of things that, while they may be similar in principle, are very different in degree and particulars and so are treated differently under the law. There are substantive differences between requiring employees to be vaccinated against a highly communicable disease, on the one hand, and insisting that employees have abortions, surgeries, etc., on the other.

     

    How about simply requiring disclosure?  Give them a form similar to your first visit at a doctor’s office, with a checklist of medical conditions, and require them to answer it, with future or continued employment depending on the answers.

    Abortion, HIV, STDs, mental health… all the things you can’t ask right now, because of HIPAA.

    • #17
  18. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I think Stad summarized it pretty well in #8.

    There is a necessary balancing. Becoming an employee can’t mean making yourself entirely subject to the whims of your employer. At the same time, becoming an employer can’t mean that you must tolerate having your life threatened every day by an employee. Deciding where on that very broad spectrum employer-mandated vaccinations for the Wuhan coronavirus falls is, I suppose, up to the courts. (Personally, I wouldn’t mandate vaccinations for my employees, and wouldn’t want to work for a company that did.)

    If you carry the “employers can require mandates because they’re a private business” to an extreme, then they should be able to require abortions for all their pregnant employees so as to avoid dishing out maternity benefits . . .

    • #18
  19. Henry Racette Contributor
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Vince Guerra (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):
    There are substantive differences between requiring employees to be vaccinated against a highly communicable disease, on the one hand, and insisting that employees have abortions, surgeries, etc., on the other.

    Once you’ve surrendered medical autonomy intellectually you’ve surrendered the right to draw lines in the sand.

    Well, yes, in the sense that, if you’ve surrendered all medical autonomy (as a condition of employment) then you’ve surrendered the right to retain any medical autonomy. But one can surrender some medical autonomy while still retaining some other medical autonomy. We do that kind of thing all the time, draw all kinds of lines in the sand.

    For example, I’m a free man, free to come and go as I please. But if I accept a job then I surrender the right to come and go as I please while I’m at work (and still keep my job). That doesn’t mean I’ve absolutely given up my right to come and go as I please, merely that I’ve drawn a line in the sand: I won’t come and go as I please any time I want while I’m an employee with fixed office hours. I’ve surrendered my independence, but not completely surrendered it.

    • #19
  20. Henry Racette Contributor
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    Stad (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I think Stad summarized it pretty well in #8.

    There is a necessary balancing. Becoming an employee can’t mean making yourself entirely subject to the whims of your employer. At the same time, becoming an employer can’t mean that you must tolerate having your life threatened every day by an employee. Deciding where on that very broad spectrum employer-mandated vaccinations for the Wuhan coronavirus falls is, I suppose, up to the courts. (Personally, I wouldn’t mandate vaccinations for my employees, and wouldn’t want to work for a company that did.)

    If you carry the “employers can require mandates because they’re a private business” to an extreme, then they should be able to require abortions for all their pregnant employees so as to avoid dishing out maternity benefits . . .

    Yes, if you carry it to an extreme, you might conclude that. It would be nuts to carry it to an extreme. Don’t do that.

    • #20
  21. DrewInWisconsin, Oaf Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    The one nice thing about tyranny is I won’t have to listen to people you like moan about how we are doomed. I might be dead, but you have to look at the bright side.

    Has anyone ever mentioned using you as a method for interrogating people or a replacement for waterboarding?

    That escalated quickly.

     

    • #21
  22. Hugh Member
    Hugh
    @Hugh

    DrewInWisconsin, Oaf (View Comment):

    I just read some statistic yesterday that 65% of Americans support these vaccine mandates.

    That’s alarming. It should be 0%. Too many Americans have forgotten what freedom and liberty are supposed to mean.

    On Ben Shapiro’s podcast he had an interesting comment on vaccine mandates.  I’m paraphrasing but basically he said that people who are already vaccinated are probably more likely to be in favor of mandates (or just don’t care) because it doesn’t really affect them and their concerns about the authoritarian mandate is not a priority for them.  For people who are not vaccinated it is number one on their list of things that concern them.

    So to summarize; the opinion of the 65% is lukewarm at best and the opinion of the 35% is a raging fire of disagreement.

    • #22
  23. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Henry Racette (View Comment):

    I think Stad summarized it pretty well in #8.

    There is a necessary balancing. Becoming an employee can’t mean making yourself entirely subject to the whims of your employer. At the same time, becoming an employer can’t mean that you must tolerate having your life threatened every day by an employee. Deciding where on that very broad spectrum employer-mandated vaccinations for the Wuhan coronavirus falls is, I suppose, up to the courts. (Personally, I wouldn’t mandate vaccinations for my employees, and wouldn’t want to work for a company that did.)

    If you carry the “employers can require mandates because they’re a private business” to an extreme, then they should be able to require abortions for all their pregnant employees so as to avoid dishing out maternity benefits . . .

    Yes, if you carry it to an extreme, you might conclude that. It would be nuts to carry it to an extreme. Don’t do that.

    I won’t carry it to an extreme, but woke private businesses are poised and ready with a nod & wink from the Feds . . .

    • #23
  24. Caryn Thatcher
    Caryn
    @Caryn

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Caryn:

    “That is not true. It is you who are spreading misinformation. And that is a serious public health threat. Read this. This, too. There is a lot more evidence like it out there.

    ABSOLUTE BUNK. THIS CRAP WAS WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DEVELOPED COVID. THE VACCINES ARE KILLING THOUSANDS. THEY ARE NOT SAFE AND THEY ARE HELPING TO SPREAD THE DISEASE.

    Saying something louder, ie. in all caps, doesn’t make it any more true.  Did you even read the linked articles?  What you are saying is unsupported by evidence.  What I’m saying is.  It’s pretty simple.

    • #24
  25. Steven Seward Member
    Steven Seward
    @StevenSeward

    Unsk (View Comment):

    Caryn:

    “That is not true. It is you who are spreading misinformation. And that is a serious public health threat. Read this. This, too. There is a lot more evidence like it out there.

    ABSOLUTE BUNK. THIS CRAP WAS WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DEVELOPED COVID. THE VACCINES ARE KILLING THOUSANDS. THEY ARE NOT SAFE AND THEY ARE HELPING TO SPREAD THE DISEASE.

      “THIS CRAP WAS WRITTEN BY THE SAME PEOPLE WHO DEVELOPED COVID.”

    Is this some sort of new conspiracy theory?  That study was released by Yale University.  I didn’t see any Chinese names on the list of authors.

    • #25