• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Disobeying an unlawful/unethical order - Mandatory Vaccinations

KevinB

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
1,014
Points
910
A British woman wrote about her experiences as the daughter of an anti Vaxx mom in the 60s. Basically she said she spent a lot of her pre teen and teen years sick in bed.

I know its an anecdotal piece and not real evidence but if you choose not to get vaccinated and by chance contract COVID who will care for you? A Rhetorical question of course but people may want to think about that.
Unfortunately a lot of people don't think about the tertiary issues.

With rights come responsibilities - quite often people forget the responsibilities we all bare.
 

mariomike

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
378
Points
1,130
I could understand the reasoning, IF mandatory vaccinations had not been common in the past.
Small Pox - I still have my arm scar
Polio, Measles, Mumps, Rubella etc - all common and mandatory at certain points in ones life - IF one wants to interact with society.
I had to annually provide my employer a valid certificate signed by my doctor "or a delegate" stating I was vaccinated against influenza "to continue to be considered employable."
 

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
341
Points
980
Yep.

"I HAVE RIGHTS!"

"Yes, but you also have responsibilities."
I’d worry more about COVID-19 if two things were true:

1. the virus killed more people every year in Canada than medical errors; and
2. the average age of those killed with/by COVID-19 was far less than the average life expectancy in Canada.

Neither of those is true.

Add the ever changing goal posts and re-writing of science and scientific definitions (such as herd immunity), censorship (bill C-10, and cancel culture), untrustworthy political leadership, institutions losing public trust, vaccine effectiveness waning, complete ignore of recovered naturally immune or antibody level checks, privileged parts of society exempt the vax (parliament!, judiciary?) etc, you could go on and on. Because of all that I believe this mandate is not justified (particularly with the majority pop. already willingly vaccinated). There were things we could have done early in the pandemic, we did the opposite.

For the roughly 75% here pro mandate what’s the goal, 90%, 98%, 100%? Is it done then, or boosters every six months... for ever? Where does this end?
 

Navy_Pete

Army.ca Veteran
Subscriber
Reaction score
578
Points
1,040
I’d worry more about COVID-19 if two things were true:

1. the virus killed more people every year in Canada than medical errors; and
2. the average age of those killed with/by COVID-19 was far less than the average life expectancy in Canada.

Neither of those is true.

Add the ever changing goal posts and re-writing of science and scientific definitions (such as herd immunity), censorship (bill C-10, and cancel culture), untrustworthy political leadership, institutions losing public trust, vaccine effectiveness waning, complete ignore of recovered naturally immune or antibody level checks, privileged parts of society exempt the vax (parliament!, judiciary?) etc, you could go on and on. Because of all that I believe this mandate is not justified (particularly with the majority pop. already willingly vaccinated). There were things we could have done early in the pandemic, we did the opposite.

For the roughly 75% here pro mandate what’s the goal, 90%, 98%, 100%? Is it done then, or boosters every six months... for ever? Where does this end?
Huh, that's the stupidest thing I've read today. Both are avoidable, and the new variants a lot of younger, healthier non-vaccinated people are dying and otherwise ending up with permanent after effects. At what point are you going to decide that COVID is 'bad enough' to get vaccinated? When you're on a ventilator?

Also, about 25% of people get long term affects, including permanent organ damage. So that's a few hundred thousand Canadians who have had or still have lingering affects. Sure, they aren't dead, but not being dead isn't a really great metric when you can't get out of bed, or can't breathe, or now have your life shortened because your heart/lungs have been messed up. If you are going to talk about context, consider the full context of COVID other than just dying, and that our death rates are only not higher because of massive efforts of our health care providers, with the whole system now massively overstrained with medical professionals getting burnt out and leaving it all together. That's a generational impact that will drop our general health care quality and have massive 2nd and 3rd order implications.

We wear seatbelts to prevent people going through windshields and dying. We ban talking on phones while driving to reduce avoidable accidents. People have to take gun safety courses so they don't accidentally shoot themselves. Why is this so hard?
 

suffolkowner

Sr. Member
Reaction score
113
Points
430
Specifically I find it hard to see a vaccination mandate for the military being unlawful/unethical. With respect to the rest it comes down to what everyone has already mentioned, people don't have to get vaccinated but they can expect that some activities and opportunities will be restricted or unavailable to them. This particular coronavirus and its various mutations has been a particularly effective agent as it is highly transmissable. It is wrong in my opinion to judge the danger by comparing the results without taking into understanding the public health measures enacted, which have drastically reduced infection rates and deaths. Why anyone would want to risk acquiring natural immunity over the choice of vaccination we have been given is beyond me
 

Misses muffett

New Member
Reaction score
-3
Points
110
I was wondering and I'm not a lawyer. If you were unvaccinated because you refused to do so, you were an asymptomatic carrier (like Typhoid Mary) and you inflected someone and who died because of you, can you be charged under civil law?
Theyde have to prove it was you who infected them, beyond a reasonable doubt...this is not AIDS were talking about here
 

Misses muffett

New Member
Reaction score
-3
Points
110
"So eloquent"

Why thank you, but I get the sense that I have been 'damned with faint praise'.

There is no "absolute freedom" in Canada or, I suspect any other functioning democracy. People that like to quote the Charter often conveniently forget the very first Section:

1. Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.

While I'm not aware of any element of the Covid response has been put to this test, at any level, the broad consensus holds that they would survive. Believe the expert opinions or not.

It is true that they are "mandates", but they have been issued within the general legal authorities given to employers to manage the health and safety of their workplaces and other labour laws. There will be underlying 'enabling' legislation. I'm not aware that Parliament has passed legislation surrounding the workplace use of cannabis, but employers have invoked mandates specific to the various workplaces. Like them or not.

Out of simple practicality, not every action of the State has to flow from an individual Act of Parliament (proposed Bill, three readings, committee, etc.). For example, if you want to eat in a restaurant in Ontario, the requirement to show proof of vaccination are laid out in Regulation 364/20 under the 'Reopening Ontario Act. Regulations are approved by Cabinet, not the Legislature and, by their nature, can be more responsive and dynamic.

I get it; your employer has, or is about to, impose a new workplace rule that you're not particularly thrilled with. It seems you have three choices; comply, don't comply and leave, don't comply and fight it. Your call - good luck with whichever path you choose. I'm sure you could find civilian employment that is absolutely free of any rules you don't agree with.
Why thanks you Sir, I appreciate your elongated response. You mentioned absolute freedom first, so I figured it must exist. I do plan to fight it: 🦷 and 💅 and am enameled by your overwhelming support 🤗 did I say enameled...🤔
I meant enamoured 😬
 

Remius

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
973
Points
860
Theyde have to prove it was you who infected them, beyond a reasonable doubt...this is not AIDS were talking about here
There are more than enough anti vax freaks out there that spit or cough on people or urinate on restaurant counters because they are special snowflakes that find wearing a mask or getting a needle is hard and lose their minds when they can’t get their garden supplies.
 

SupersonicMax

Army.ca Veteran
Mentor
Reaction score
586
Points
910
Why thanks you Sir, I appreciate your elongated response. You mentioned absolute freedom first, so I figured it must exist. I do plan to fight it: 🦷 and 💅 and am enameled by your overwhelming support 🤗 did I say enameled...🤔
I meant enamoured 😬
Good luck fighting it. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out. Enjoy early retirement.
 

Misses muffett

New Member
Reaction score
-3
Points
110
Yep.

"I HAVE RIGHTS!"

"Yes, but you also have responsibilities."
Yes, we have rights and responsibilities. It is too early to say what is right...all the cards are not on the table. Our responses may be different, each thinking they are being responsible.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
4,338
Points
1,060
In reality it’s pretty easy. LWOP while being processed release under 5f. We were discussing the way forward on this today.

There is zero sympathy for those who wish to remain unvaccinated in the CAF - no grievance authority will support any redress attempts.
Happy Yes It Is GIF
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
645
Points
1,060
In reality it’s pretty easy. LWOP while being processed release under 5f. We were discussing the way forward on this today.
It's not pretty easy. Under what QR&O or CBI can someone be placed against thier will on LWOP? We have people credibility accused of murder and sexual assault who still were paid while the process played out. What legal basis will the CAF have to justify stopping someone's pay who worked in person safely through the pandemic with no vaccine, but magically now is unclean because they don't want it?

The easy part is the Surgeon General/D Med Pol changing the enrollment or continued service vaccination standard so those who don't want COVID19 vaccination now beach UoS. It's quite another to make up a rule to stop someone's pay abruptly, and that's a pretty slippery slope. How many suicides are you willing to accept for a policy like this, which instead of respectfully transitioning someone out of service, forces them to choose feeding thier family over deeply held beliefs?
 

PuckChaser

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Mentor
Reaction score
645
Points
1,060
But they were cool to all the other injectons they've had since joining???
You're making an assumption. There's plenty of reasons folks don't want it. Brow beating them, taking thier pay away and dehumanizing them by labeling them anti-vaxxers seems like it's working though, right?

I guess it's just like our COVID-19 lockdown and mask measures. It hasn't stopped 3 waves but if we just do the same stuff over again but harder it'll totally work this time!
 
Top