I get what you’re saying, but what you’ve described isn’t really giving people a choice. Even if that choice they’re making in not vaccinating their kids is a bad one.
It’s absolutely a choice. It’s just a choice with consequences.
Anti-vaxxers always seem to want to have their cake and eat it too: they want to enjoy the benefits of herd immunity and participation in society without doing the things that society agrees upon to keep everyone safe and healthy.
Decisions have consequences, and those who would make decisions that put others at risk should be the ones to bear the burden of the consequences of their decisions.
How is it a choice when you can get fired for not having a vaccine? You live in a society that requires people to be employed in order to survive. If you need a vaccine to be employed, then it is not a real a choice at all.
Turn that on its head: how is it fair to every other employee who does get vaccinated, that you’re putting them all at risk with your selfish and uninformed opinion?
It’s still your choice, that’s a possible consequence.
If it really means that much to you, I guess it’d be in your best interests to find an employer that is willing to accommodate that.
The people around you shouldn’t be forced to deal with the consequences of your decisions.
Again, this is just wanting the best of both worlds and feeling entitled to get one’s way.
You could choose to get vaccinated and be able to work there. If you choose to not get vaccinated, having limited employment (etc.) options is a consequence. You can choose to put yourself at risk, but your choice does not grant you the right to put others at risk.
Yes because becoming homeless is totally a valid choice. Jesus christ, I bet you are even one of the haters of capitalism elsewhere, but can’t accept basic economic consequences here.
I get what you’re saying, but what you’ve described isn’t really giving people a choice. Even if that choice they’re making in not vaccinating their kids is a bad one.
Wrong.
It’s absolutely a choice. It’s just a choice with consequences.
Anti-vaxxers always seem to want to have their cake and eat it too: they want to enjoy the benefits of herd immunity and participation in society without doing the things that society agrees upon to keep everyone safe and healthy.
Decisions have consequences, and those who would make decisions that put others at risk should be the ones to bear the burden of the consequences of their decisions.
How is it a choice when you can get fired for not having a vaccine? You live in a society that requires people to be employed in order to survive. If you need a vaccine to be employed, then it is not a real a choice at all.
Turn that on its head: how is it fair to every other employee who does get vaccinated, that you’re putting them all at risk with your selfish and uninformed opinion?
It’s still your choice, that’s a possible consequence.
If it really means that much to you, I guess it’d be in your best interests to find an employer that is willing to accommodate that.
The people around you shouldn’t be forced to deal with the consequences of your decisions.
Again, this is just wanting the best of both worlds and feeling entitled to get one’s way.
Wanting to survive and not end up homeless isn’t about wanting “the best of both worlds”.
I am triple Vaccinated. Stop talking as if I am an antivaxxer just for suggesting people’s livelihoods should be dependent on a medical procedure.
You could choose to get vaccinated and be able to work there. If you choose to not get vaccinated, having limited employment (etc.) options is a consequence. You can choose to put yourself at risk, but your choice does not grant you the right to put others at risk.
Yes because becoming homeless is totally a valid choice. Jesus christ, I bet you are even one of the haters of capitalism elsewhere, but can’t accept basic economic consequences here.