They're Racist and We Know It - A UK Politics Thread

[lessthanluke]

"Its only a nightclub"

Yeah now its only a nightclub. I'm very surprised how many people on here are completely fine with this but I am very sure it'll never come into play. Far too much public backlash will force a backtrack.

[polishgenius]

I mean, I'm completely okay with it more because I see it more like something like a driving license or similar application of sensible rules about health or safety than an impingement on personal freedom. It isn't just a matter of personal freedom, because by not getting a vaccine you're putting other people at risk of serious harm or death so the freedom not to vax is clashing with the freedom to be healthy. So if you want to not vaccine, then feel free, but you don't get to do everything that people who are vaccinated (or cannot for health reasons, because those are one of the key reasons everyone who can should get one) can. Common sense. 

[Fragile Bird]

I just don’t understand the fear over younger people getting vaccinated. In the city of Toronto, the 18-24 group is 92.8% vaccinated with one dose 67% fully vaccinated and the 25-29 group is at 86.2% and 65.9%, so far.  They’re the highest groups, with the under 18s at 72%/48% level, and they just started, when, 8 weeks ago? 10 weeks?

[Zorral]

hoi would be wrong, as usual, at least in my case -- at least prior to pandemic.  Though they might not be what you think of as nightclubs, generally jazz clubs -- the original nightclubs -- and other venues that put on Afro Latin live music played by physical musicians, not generally, though we've been know to attend some of those on occasion, the dj modes that kids these days like.

But then, of course, it's only a car, a tank, earth moving equipment that one has to have shown proof of instruction in operation, and get a license to do so -- that is the slippery slope, all right!  Or to go scuba diving!  Or well, teach even to teach reading and writing and arithmetic primary school kids.  Just look what those have led to -- discussion of keeping people from spreading covid by mandating proof of vaccination.  It's really and truly the end of the world for the Freedum.!

[HoodedCrow]

You need your wits about you to scuba dive! Also it helps that there is a buddy system!( so that someone has another pair of eyes and a second air supply)

I would think the young ones might not think that their at risk? After hearing that only people over 50 need to worry for months, and hoax crappolla from certain politicians and news adjacent companies? 

[The Anti-Targ]

Not exactly an internal citizen's rights, matter, but on a global scale it can still be argued as equivalent. There are countries that won't let you in if you don't have a yellow fever vaccination, maybe your home country won't let you out to go to said country without you having it either(?). And there are countries that won't let you in if you have been to a yellow fever country and you don't have a current vaccination certificate with you until 10(?)-years after you were last in a yellow fever country. People don't seem to be too upset about this arrangement. So there seem to be situations where no vaccine no entry is accepted by the people, even though it is just as freedom limiting for those who want to undertake such journeys. So are the complaints about COVID passports just a numbers game? So many people like to go to enclosed crowded spaces, so now it's an issue where freedom outweighs public health? We already have precedent for vaccine as a condition of entry, so I don't see a reason to kick up a stink about it in this context.

We sure as hell won't be letting visitors in here from COVID infested countries like the UK without a vaccination certificate any time soon, once we open up to visitors. Next year. Hopefully.

No vaccine no school is a different matter, because education and attendance at school is legally mandated in most countries up to a certain age, and is seen as a specific right in most countries as well. So making education conditional on vaccination is a violation of a specific right, whereas there isn't a specific right being violated by denying entry into entertainment and eating establishments without proof of vaccination.

Making it mandatory also levels the playing field, and helps to protect the workers. Some businesses would want to mandate vaccination proof for entry, because the owners are conscientious and care about their customers and staff. But their business perhaps wouldn't survive if every business was free to choose, as the conscientious business could lose customers and potentially be go out of business, for having made the socially responsible decision. And have anti-vaxxers and COVID conspiracists picketing them, perhaps. You could leave it up to the free market, and who knows, maybe the conscientious businesses would gain customers and public respect, and the uncaring ones would go out of business. So it could go either way. But as a conscientious business owner I would prefer not to have to make that choice, as I don't really even think those uncaring business owners should face ruin, and loss of jobs for the staff, just because they ideologically refuse to make the free choice to mandate vaccinations for customers.

It will be curious to see which way our govt jumps with this issue once we inevitably let the disease into the country (a vaccination certificate and proof of a negative test within 72hrs of departure is still no guarantee we'll keep it out). As long as the prevalence remains very low we might not mandate vaccines for crowded spaces. But we may also be unfortunate and a nasty variant gets in and sweeps through the population, albeit hopefully with less death and hospital overload because the vast majority of people are vaccinated.

[DMC]

43 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

No vaccine no school is a different matter, because education and attendance at school is legally mandated in most countries up to a certain age, and is seen as a specific right in most countries as well. So making education conditional on vaccination is a violation of a specific right, whereas there isn't a specific right being violated by denying entry into entertainment and eating establishments without proof of vaccination.

And yet much of the western world has mandatory childhood vaccination policies - including here in the freedom loving US of A.  Even Texas!

[Spockydog]

I guess The Spectator didn't get the memo.

Rashford is a legend. He represents the best of us, and these cunts want to take him down because he dared stand up to them. He made them look like fools.

Honestly, the media in this country just cannot abide successful working class kids. Especially when they're black.

 

 

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

making education conditional on vaccination is a violation of a specific right,

All your other arguments are about the general public has the right not to be exposed to sick people and get sick.  To change that when it comes to education made no sense.

In every case (other than medical reasons) refusal of vaccinations means infringing the rights of people not to get sick so that the refusnik can have his freedum to be sick and infect others. Think of it like the US taking away the right to vote if you are imprisoned.  You committed a crime, They Say, you lost that specific right, They Say.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

And yet much of the western world has mandatory childhood vaccination policies - including here in the freedom loving US of A.  Even Texas!

That actually surprises me. I would not have thought NZ, Aus and UK would be outliers in this situation. And interestingly one place you would think it would be mandatory but is not is China. OMG China loves freedom more than the USA, confirmed...but USA loves children more?

I guess it makes sense in the USA, if there is no right to an education in the constitution. And strict constitutionalists (who are mostly on the right) would be generally against the establishment of rights that are not based in the constitution, and people on the left are generally less worried about mandating things for public good. But it is also perhaps the reason it can only be made mandatory for school entry, and not mandatory for children in general.

[TrueMetis]

9 hours ago, Heartofice said:

If it was mandatory then you might have a point. 

The point of course being that vaccines are indeed mandatory in a lot of places or to travel to certain countries, so this pearl clutching about a practice that's been around for decades is nonsense.

Though in the interest in honesty I should point out that despite thinking otherwise my home province does not in fact require vaccines. Having gotten all my shots and having gotten some at school I had assumed otherwise. It does seem to be moving in that direction though.

But whatever replace mandatory vaccination with any of the other must do X thing to be allowed to do Y thing examples. Might as well bitch that you need to wear pants.

[The Anti-Targ]

22 minutes ago, Zorral said:

All your other arguments are about the general public has the right not to be exposed to sick people and get sick.  To change that when it comes to education made no sense.

In every case (other than medical reasons) refusal of vaccinations means infringing the rights of people not to get sick so that the refusnik can have his freedum to be sick and infect others.

But is that a legal right? I don't think so. It would create all sorts of problems if people had a legal right not to get sick. It means I could seek damages or even prosecution if I caught a cold off someone. To deliberately infect someone with a disease, or to recklessly endanger people, like poor health and safety practices in the workplace, is an offence in most countries, but it's not based on a legal right for people not to be sick. Whereas, in a lot of countries education, to a certain level is a right and even legally mandated. For instance parents can be prosecuted if their child misses more than X number of days of school without a good reason. So on the one had you are bumping a legal right (informed consent to any medical procedure, and a right to refuse any medical procedure provided you are deemed mentally competent) up against a perceived right (for want of a better term) about avoiding disease. On the other hand you have a conflict with (maybe) two legal rights and a legal parental obligation in most (some?) countries. I don't see how you square a vaccine mandate against pre-existing legal rights and obligations, which arguably take precedence when undertaking regulatory impact analysis of any proposed general mandate for vaccines. It is certainly the case here that when we are looking at implementing a coercive regulation or law we have to reconcile it with the Bill of Rights, and if it doesn't reconcile it can't go forward.

Our initial lockdown was technically declared to have violated the Bill of Rights by the courts. But only on the basis of not having undertaken due procedure before putting it in place. So there may be mechanisms by which coercive regulation can be lawfully enacted while still breaching a right. In the lockdown case it would be allowable in part because it is only temporary. A vaccination is permanent, for the individual, so there would be different considerations at play as to whether usurping pre-existing rights and obligations is acceptable. 

Declaring a state of emergency of course ususally comes with the govt having the power to ignore a whole bunch of rights. So that option is on the table if things get really bad (badder than they have been up to now, I suppose).

[The Anti-Targ]

5 minutes ago, TrueMetis said:

The point of course being that vaccines are indeed mandatory in a lot of places or to travel to certain countries, so this pearl clutching about a practice that's been around for decades is nonsense.

Though in the interest in honesty I should point out that despite thinking otherwise my home province does not in fact require vaccines. Having gotten all my shots and having gotten some at school I had assumed otherwise. It does seem to be moving in that direction though.

But whatever replace mandatory vaccination with any of the other must do X thing to be allowed to do Y thing examples. Might as well bitch that you need to wear pants.

Well...

[DMC]

14 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I would not have thought NZ, Aus and UK would be outliers in this situation.

Thought it was interesting Scandinavia too.  The link does note that Australia, Canada and India have some mandatory policies at the subnational level.

17 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

I guess it makes sense in the USA, if there is no right to an education in the constitution.

It may not be in the constitution but a right to education is thoroughly codified throughout US law.  Every state has compulsory school attendance laws.

[The Anti-Targ]

6 minutes ago, DMC said:

Thought it was interesting Scandinavia too.  The link does note that Australia, Canada and India have some mandatory policies at the subnational level.

It may not be in the constitution but a right to education is thoroughly codified throughout US law.  Every state has compulsory school attendance laws.

So is the school entry vaccination mandate only for public schools then? Since there are anti-vax private schools I assume they are allowed to operate because they are private and don't receive any state funding? Sorry to hijack the thread with US question.

Something something UK private schools, something.

I'm actually quite curious now about the legal status of education in countries. Is it (in law) a right, a legal obligation on parents, a legal obligation on the state, some, all or none of the above? Not sure if it's worth its own thread though.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So is the school entry vaccination mandate only for public schools then?

I don't know about every state but in most states private schools are subject to the same requirements (it's usually required for child care facilities as well).  If anything, in practice, private schools are less likely to accept non-medical exemptions, such as for conscientious/religious reasons, than the state law directs public schools to allow.

[Zorral]

19 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

But is that a legal right?

Yes, when it is so easily preventable, it costs nothing and the consequences to the whole population of massive numbers being sick, puts the entire society in danger.  You might as well say that atomic bombs are legal so we have no right to protest them, that dirty water polluted by industry is legal so we have to drink the water and die.  You are not making sense.  Certainly not any of what is commonly known as common sense.

[Fragile Bird]

51 minutes ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So is the school entry vaccination mandate only for public schools then? 

In Canada health care is in the constitutional authority of provinces, so there are no national requirements. In my province, Ontario, children have to be vaccinated for diphtheria, tetanus, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, meningitis, whooping cough and chicken pox. There’s another list of recommended vaccinations. There are exemptions for medical reasons or due to conscience or religious belief. Those wanting to use the latter two reasons have to attend an education session, get a certificate of attendance, fill out a form and get it sworn by a commissioner for taking affidavits. Unfortunately the anti-vaxxers are willing to do all that.

[Heartofice]

Firstly, is this coercion? Well it’s definitely stick and not carrot. It’s not ‘take your medicine and I’ll give you a sweet’ it’s ‘take your medicine or you are grounded’ and that should make people a little uncomfortable that the government  is doing that.

Secondly what is also uncomfortable about it is that it’s threatening people to get the jab, not so much so that they themselves can be protected, but to protect others… to protect people who are already protected via their own vaccinations. I made sure to vaccinate my kids against measles and mumps because I don’t want them getting it. 
 

Then there is also the issue that this is a brand new vaccine and while there is a lot of good research that it is safe , we’ve all taken the risk that we aren’t going to start growing extra limbs 10 years down the line . So that is another reason to feel uncomfortable about this when you force young people to take that risk.

 

Also, we have been told repeatedly in this country that Vaccine passports would never happen, they are against everything this country stands for and would never be introduced. But here we are. And it might just be for large venues and nightclubs for now but we are opening to the door to having to show your medical status to people before accessing a lot of other services in the future and yes the thought of that makes me feel uncomfortable too.

[DaveSumm]

I join @lessthanluke in being really surprised that so few people are even acknowledging there’s an issue here. 

There’s not enough info on how being double vaccinated affects transmissibility; as far as we know you still get it, you still pass it on. So it ultimately doesn’t matter who does the initial spreading in a nightclub; you leave that club, and you pass it on to people and eventually, Covid will have the same effect on the population as it always does. 

Which makes this a punishment. It’s a penalty for not doing what the government wants. Is that the business we’re in? All of the discussed examples miss this point - a driving license is needed because you need to be able to drive safely, or it directly affects you and others. That just isn’t the case with this.