All Things CAF and Covid/ Covid Vaccine [merged]

[LittleBlackDevil]

To whom, and would they really care? I doubt that the likes of Trudeau & Co. would give a toss what eventually made its way through the Federal Courts…not like legislation stops them from doing what they want to anyway.

True it would probably scare the lower level people more ... and maybe it would be an empty gesture. Would probably be better as an argument on a lawsuit for battery.

 

[LittleBlackDevil]

What about schools that require kids to have their shots to attend?

Historically the provinces that have mandated vaccines for school children (I believe only Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba do), there have always been exemptions so that would get around the argument of "force" probably. It seems that this is what they are doing now at the government level, plus allowing for testing/screening of unvaccinated individuals rather than terminating them. Which actually seems like a reasonable compromise. People who don't want the jab don't get it, and those who are scared of the unjabbed (notwithstanding their own vaccinated status) have peace of mind that the unjabbed isn't carrying any COVID-19.

 

[CBH99]

Historically the provinces that have mandated vaccines for school children (I believe only Ontario, Quebec, and Manitoba do), there have always been exemptions so that would get around the argument of "force" probably. It seems that this is what they are doing now at the government level, plus allowing for testing/screening of unvaccinated individuals rather than terminating them. Which actually seems like a reasonable compromise. People who don't want the jab don't get it, and those who are scared of the unjabbed (notwithstanding their own vaccinated status) have peace of mind that the unjabbed isn't carrying any COVID-19.

Isn't that going to be awfully expensive though, to have hundreds/thousands/hundreds of thousands of kids tested on a regular basis? School boards are always complaining about funding, I don't see how this is sustainable unless the tests are done & paid for by the families, which I'm not opposed to.

 

[Kirkhill]

Isn't that going to be awfully expensive though, to have hundreds/thousands/hundreds of thousands of kids tested on a regular basis? School boards are always complaining about funding, I don't see how this is sustainable unless the tests are done & paid for by the families, which I'm not opposed to.

So you are going to coerce payment from parents to attend a public facility to which they are already under coercion to send their children?

The state mandates (starting to detest that word - nothing is given), the state requires that children be sent to school under threat of the law.

The state is, by definition, coercive.

 

[Good2Golf]

So you are going to coerce payment from parents to attend a public facility to which they are already under coercion to send their children?

The state mandates (starting to detest that word - nothing is given), the state requires that children be sent to school under threat of the law.

The state is, by definition, coercive.

Why stop at corrosion to pay to just the parents of school kids? Last I checked, I’m still paying municipal school taxes even though my 29-year old son has been out of school for….a while.

 

[CBH99]

So you are going to coerce payment from parents to attend a public facility to which they are already under coercion to send their children?

The state mandates (starting to detest that word - nothing is given), the state requires that children be sent to school under threat of the law.

The state is, by definition, coercive.

I wouldn't go so far as coerce. But practically speaking, I don't see how else this arrangement would work.

Are the school boards going to be expected to provide regular testing for non-vaccinated students? If so, where will the money come from to pay for those tests? Would the school boards have to raise school fees? Do we collectively pay for it, perhaps in the form of property tax increases?

Or will they tell the families of non-vaccinated students that the onus is on them to provide a negative test?



No idea either way. Am just spit-balling scenarios as per the above posts related to schools.

 

[LittleBlackDevil]

So you are going to coerce payment from parents to attend a public facility to which they are already under coercion to send their children?

The state mandates (starting to detest that word - nothing is given), the state requires that children be sent to school under threat of the law.

The state is, by definition, coercive.

Actually, children are not required to be sent to government schools. Homeschooling is completely legal in every province as far as I know.

 

[Kirkhill]

Actually, children are not required to be sent to government schools. Homeschooling is completely legal in every province as far as I know.

Fair enough. I stand corrected. I was familiar with a time of truant officers.

 

[lenaitch]

Isn't that going to be awfully expensive though, to have hundreds/thousands/hundreds of thousands of kids tested on a regular basis? School boards are always complaining about funding, I don't see how this is sustainable unless the tests are done & paid for by the families, which I'm not opposed to.

Agree. Tying up healthcare workers, who have been stretched and frayed for a year and a half, and not particularly overabundant, to administer daily tests, at every school (4844 elementary and high schools in Ontario) seems unsustainable.

*****
Paying school taxes ('educational property taxes' in Ontario), whether or not you have kids in the system, is part of contributing to a civil society, kinda like funding the military regardless of you political or ideological bent. Parents are free to home school or use private schools.

 

[Kilted]

Legally I don't think they can. It would be a very interesting legal battle if they tried.

I think I know they can't, which is why I am seeing lots of releases were the "mandatory" vaccine actually means if you don't get the jab you have to be routinely tested which in my view is very different from "get the jab or we're putting you in jail or taking away your career/livelihood".

The notwithstanding clause allows the government to ignore certain parts of the Charter including "life, liberty, and security of the person." New Brunswick was talking about using it for normal vaccinations before Covid. I don't know why people keep bringing up assault, it's like any other medical procedure.

 

[Eaglelord17]

The notwithstanding clause allows the government to ignore certain parts of the Charter including "life, liberty, and security of the person." New Brunswick was talking about using it for normal vaccinations before Covid. I don't know why people keep bringing up assault, it's like any other medical procedure.

Which if the person is not consenting is assault.

The fact that atrocity the notwithstanding clause (a atrocity in the fact it only exists to give the government the power to violate your rights) is the go to response whenever a government is violating a citizens rights, tells me a lot about what is proposed and how it is morally reprehensible.

 

[LittleBlackDevil]

The notwithstanding clause allows the government to ignore certain parts of the Charter including "life, liberty, and security of the person." New Brunswick was talking about using it for normal vaccinations before Covid.

I think that @Eaglelord17 said it well when he said that the use of s. 33 (which is essentially an admission that "we know this violates the Charter but we're doing it anyway") says a lot about the moral reprehensibility of a proposal. It's true that s. 33 is a thing, it has a 5 year lifespan, and that it was built into the Charter to allow government to opt out of the Charter when it became inconvenient. Up until recently there had been enough respect for Charter values that it was almost never invoked, but rule by imperial fiat seems to be the trend (executive orders in the US, orders-in-council in Canada, and invocation of s. 33).

I don't know why people keep bringing up assault, it's like any other medical procedure.

It is like any other medical procedure, and the reason people keep bringing up assault is because ANY medical procedure is an assault if it happens without the patient's consent. This has always been the case and you can find court decisions of people being awarded damages for having procedures done (often while under anesthetic) when the surgeon noticed something and fixed it which was not discussed beforehand.I

 

[brihard]

Nobody’s gonna be putting a needle in anyone without consent. “Assault” is just histrionics.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Next thing you know, they will want to propose that people need 'passports' to drive, practice medicine, or fly an airplane! Fascists!

Society is based on reasonably restricting freedoms for the common good, welcome to the party. Pretty basic Canadian civics 101.

You can choose not to get a vaccine, but that won't be without consequences, like limiting your options to be able to do things, and possibly where you can work. No one is pinning anyone down to vaccinate them, so give the hyperbole a rest, as it undermines your arguement. Alternately, go straight to accusing people of being Nazis; reductio ad hitlerum for the "win".

"I am hestitant to get the vaccine because .." is valid, and something that actual medical professionals can explain (ie people outside of Facebook).

'Muh Freedums" on the other hand...

 

[FormerHorseGuard]

Health records, needle books, immunization records, or now the term Vax Passport have been around for ages. Some countries require visitors to get certain shots before entering their country.

see the link it listed immunizations you must have to enter some countries. https://www.who.int/ith/2016-ith-county-list.pdf

Schools have required some vaccines for decades, I can remember lining up in public school and in high school to get my needles.
I was applying for my Green Card to live and work legally in the USA and they required some vaccines but since I was Canadian the doctor figured I had gotten most of them as a Child so he was not concerned.

Under the immigration laws of the United States, a foreign national who applies for an immigrant visa abroad, or who seeks to adjust status to a permanent resident while in the United States, is required to receive vaccinations to prevent the following diseases:

• Mumps
• Measles
• Rubella
• Polio
• Tetanus and Diphtheria Toxoids
• Pertussis
• Haemophilus influenzae type B
• Hepatitis B
• Any other vaccine-preventable diseases recommended by the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices

So without a needle book, vaccine record, or vaccine passport, how else would you prove you had these shots before you applied for entry?
I do not think doctors are going to just take your word any more due to rise in diseases that use to be almost unheard of making a come back
Measles is making a come back in some countries , Afghanistan is 7 on the list released from CDC.

Polio cases are high also in Afghanistan.

Vaccine records are important for travel, school, and other places not just because of the issues today,

 

[Kirkhill]

If you want to join the club then you follow the club's rules.
If you don't want to follow the club's rules then don't join the club.

Simple.

Just so long as somebody, including the government, doesn't say you must join the club.
Immigrants get a choice. They don't have to immigrate.
Natural citizens have a different problem.

 

[mariomike]

• So without a needle book, vaccine record, or vaccine passport, how else would you prove you had these shots before you applied for entry?

My family doctor has that.

Also, because my plan was to retire to Arizona, for good measure I got documentation from our Medical Director where I used to work. They had to keep an up to date record on Hep B, (Tetanus, Diphtheria, Pertussis), proof of immunity to Varicella TDP, flu shot, MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) anyway.

If your family doctor, or employee health unit, can't help you, try your local municipal heath unit. They may be able to.

 

[CountDC]

So you are going to coerce payment from parents to attend a public facility to which they are already under coercion to send their children?

The state mandates (starting to detest that word - nothing is given), the state requires that children be sent to school under threat of the law.

The state is, by definition, coercive.

The state requires that children are schooled, not that they be sent to school. Many opt to home school the children.

 

[CountDC]

So we get the vaccine to protect us and others from the virus and then are scared that those without the vaccine will give us the virus so require them to get the vaccine or be punished. hmmmm.

Personally I think let them go without and when they catch it let them treat themselves at home. Vaccine passport to get medical treatment for Covid as the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting it.

 

[Navy_Pete]

Vaccine passport to get medical treatment for Covid as the vaccine doesn't stop you from getting it.

No, but it does massively decrease the rate of serious side effects, requirements for hospitalization, long term effects (like organ damage) and drops the chance of death to near zero.

Also seems to help people with 'long COVID' recover.

So aside from helping with COVID, prevents the health care system from being overrun, so doctors don't need to triage things and let people die for what would normally be recoverable issues because of lack of resources.

for ref: see story below on impact of COVID on cancer treatment;

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/covid-cancer-invasive-surgery-1.6142481

Bigger tumours, delayed diagnoses as cancer patients struggle amid pandemic​

​

Doctors say there's 'no doubt' cancer patients are facing more invasive treatment​