Here's kind of a shit article:
https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/tasha-kheiriddin-the-unvaccinated-must-be-deterred-from-harming-others/ar-AASFX34?ocid=msedgntp
The unvaccinated must be deterred
from harming others
Looks like Postmedia is competing with the
CBC to bring us junk Op-Eds. I was going
to avoid any more CoHIV blog entries, but like everyone else, I'm getting tired of
the lack of thinking, or any kind of logic, from the current governments on
their handling of this pandemic. Or
reading puff-pieces like the one we’re going to go through. I do want to get something out of the way
that might make things easier to take (not make things better): smart people
don't go into politics. They're too
smart for that. Wanna-be celebrities without any talents get
into politics and that's why we're at where we're at. This one’s a long one so on to the article (in italics):
What to do about the unvaccinated? As
Omicron tears through Canadian society, this public health question has become
a political wedge issue. The Liberals and Conservatives have chosen sides,
ramped up the rhetoric, and polarized the debate, each playing to the base they
think is most likely to support their point of view.
Not really.
The Conservatives are just as dumb as the Liberals; there's not a lot of
difference between the two but if there is a side that's ramping up the
rhetoric, it's the "Liberals".
I use quotes because they're not very liberal minded at all; must be a Merriam-Webster definition. They're
actually more like a Federal Quebecois party, and that's not a compliment. Anyways, the rest of this Op-Ed is like this;
kinda dumb since she agrees with trying to bully a group of people into getting
a shot, the same group that has every good reason to be skeptical about getting
it.
With 88 per cent of Canadians over the
age of 12 fully vaccinated, the Liberals figure they’re pretty safe siding with
the crowd that favours the jab. Regrettably, they have chosen the strategy of
demonization. On Friday, Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos speculated provincial
governments would make vaccination mandatory, which he said could be needed to
get “rid” of the virus. During the election campaign Prime Minister Justin
Trudeau called the unvaccinated “misogynists and racists.” He dialled that down
a bit last week when he said that Canadians are angry at the unvaccinated who
take up hospital beds, but his remarks caused a furor that has yet to subside.
Has this chick been under a rock? 88% got a needle because they wanted to keep
their job, which is completely shitty and only pieces of shit would propose,
let alone enforce, a vaccine mandate.
When I got mine, I didn't see anyone gleefully skipping out of the Vax
centre. I find it hard to believe that
88% of the population favoured getting a relatively untested shot; that's
wishful thinking at best. Oh, and the
PM insulted the wrong group of people last week too, not just during his
campaign.
The Health Minister obviously doesn't read
anything about pandemics and vaccines.
If he knew what was going on, he'd know that you can't vax your way out
of this pandemic. At least that's what
the guy who holds the patents on the mNRA technology says. I'll take his word over a greasy politician
who's on the take. And the Health
Minister thinks you can get rid of the virus.
Dumbass. We're all going to get
it, vaxxed or not. St Fauci of the Sand
Flies came out Thursday and said the same.
I read another story yesterday morning (I started drafting this Blog
entry 3 days ago and new things just keep popping up) about a family who did
everything the government asked/mandated (3 shots, masks, distancing, etc) and
were wondering why the caught CoHIV. So
for you vaxxed people out there, you might want to be a little nicer to the
unvaxxed because they're not a group of misogynists and racists. They're probably more informed than you'd
think.
If you're going to be this bad at your job,
at least be a cool person. His new
bobblehead has more personality.
This is not accidental. The sad reality
is that there is a subset of the unvaccinated who fit Trudeau’s description;
since September, for example, some have been using the hashtag “Pureblood” on
social media to self-identify as unvaccinated. You don’t have to scroll far to
find tagged images peppered with shots of white supremacy gestures or MAGA
hats. The Liberals’ dogwhistle is designed to conflate these people with
mainstream Conservatives — and turn people off Conservative Leader Erin
O’Toole’s call for “reasonable accommodation.”
Now, the creator of this piece, Tasha
Kheiriddin, is throwing in her two cents (that's 1.6 cents Cdn). I'm not sure what she was trying to
accomplish but somehow all MAGA hat wearers are all white supremacists? Maybe if you're in Grade 3 and your parents
are sheep, you might have learned to think like that. Or maybe Tasha was homeschooled. Quite honestly, I've never seen a MAGA hat
north of the border since 2016 but I've seen plenty of MAGA hats south of the
boarder and it ain't all whites wearing them.
And what exactly is a white supremacy gesture? Tasha should remember that her government of
choice was caught fabricating the existence of White Supremacists about a year
ago. I'm not exactly sure if this was before or after we found out that the Canadian Government admitted to secretly surveilling its population’s movements during the lockdown by tracking 33 million phones. Also, if she her homework, she’d
find out that isn’t exactly that demographic that's hesitant; quite the
opposite. I'm trying to be polite here
because I don't think your exterior shade means much but it's not the lighter
shade of skin that's been shown to be the most hesitant to get a shot.
O’Toole is asking for “acceptance” of
the fact that up to 15 per cent of the population will not get vaccinated. He
favours using rapid tests to keep unvaccinated workers on the job, as opposed
to shutting down to stop the spread of the virus. “In a population that is now
largely fully vaccinated, in fact the action and inaction by the Trudeau government
is normalizing lockdowns and restrictions as the primary tool to fight the
latest COVID-19 variant.
But this approach is also wrong. First,
it relies on unreliable technology. Rapid tests are not good at detecting
Omicron infections, particularly in the early stage when a person is infectious
but shows no symptoms. Second, it sends a double message. On the one hand, the
Tories encourage people to “get vaccinated.” On the other, they make allowances
for those who eschew the jab.
There's no double message; that’s not an
on-the-one-hand kind of comparison. The
message is: the virus is real, we recommend you take at least one shot but if
you refuse, we can't make you take it.
Look, I summed it up in one sentence for Tasha. The only unreliable technology that anyone
should worry about is the vaccines themselves, since they certainly don’t stop
anyone from catching (and spreading) the CoHIV.
The good thing you can say about the Conservatives is they're not
beating on particular, almost non-existent demographic.
But it's all a burden on the hospital
staff, is the excuse. Governments were
the ones who single-handily understaffed the hospitals. It's their fault, not the unvaxxed.
It’s like saying “wear your seatbelt,
but if you don’t, that’s OK.” Well guess what — it’s not. If you get in an
accident, it will cost up to three times more to treat you in hospital than if
you were buckled up. Sound familiar?
While I don't mind the seatbelt analogy,
it's too simple to be accurate. People
wearing their seatbelts can wind up in the hospital and/or get killed too and
not every car accident sends people to the hospital. I'm sure that there have been times where the
person wearing the seatbelt goes to the hospital, and the person that didn't
wear a seatbelt didn't. That would mean
the seatbelt wearer would be costing the hospital 3 times as much. A blanket statement like everyone who doesn't
wear a seatbelt at the time of an accident automatically cost 3 times more to
treat is naive at best. Sound familiar?
The reality is that we restrict plenty
of behaviours where we judge the harm to others, including economic harm,
outweighs the limits to individual liberty. We don’t allow people to smoke in
workplaces or public buildings. We forbid drinking and driving. And we mandate
vaccination for contagious diseases such as measles if children are to attend
public school.
Why? Because otherwise your actions, or
inaction, present a real risk of harm to someone else. They can cause
quantifiable loss, in the form of sickness, suffering, even death (yes, last
year 200,000 people worldwide died of measles , mostly children under five).
If that were true, going back to the
seatbelt analogy, then cars would be banned.
Also, comparing the measles vaccine with the Pfizer shot is a bad
comparison. Two measles shots and you'll
never get measles again, compared to three shots (so far) that are ineffective
after a year: Tasha, one shot actually immunizes, the other wishes, so let's keep things
honest. Also, 200,000 out of almost 8
billion people dying of measles, as terrible as that is in third world
countries, is still 0% rounded up.
0%. That's the same percentage as
online hate speech.
People don’t live in a vacuum. A liberal
would cite Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Social Contract, which called for government
by popular consent; a conservative would point to Edmund Burke, who rightly
observed, “Men are never in a state of total independence of each other.” In
other words, there is no freedom without responsibility, no liberty without
duty.
Ironic since a mandate would be
antithetical to liberty, but sure.
Rousseau's "collective need of all to provide for the common good
of all" didn't mention anything about government mandates.
The current mandates aren't for the common
good and they weren't developed by the people.
When it comes to vaccination, we should
protect those who understand this truth from those who disdain it. Vaccine
passports, restrictions on interaction and withdrawal of privileges are
preferable to calling people names, forcing them to get the shot, or conversely
accommodating a choice that puts others in harm’s way. Obliging those who opt
out of vaccination to pay a penalty, such as the Quebec government is suggesting,
is also a possibility. Such measures are not about cajoling or compelling,
though if they do result in more vaccinations, that’s a good thing. They are
meant to protect all of us who just want to move on from this once-in-a-century
public emergency and get back to living our lives.
Actually, all of these measures are about cajoling
and forcing people to do something they really shouldn't have to do. I think it’s called Bullying. If she doesn't understand why there's a
pushback, she would fit in great at the Federal Parliament level.
I found over the years, if you want someone's help, you don't insult
them, because if you do, they'll probably tell you to go fuck yourself and not
help. It’s been like that for
centuries. It's just how people
are. Shaming works but that's usually to
get a better performance out of people. A withdrawal of privileges is not preferable to forcing people to get the shot. It's pretty much the same thing.
Things are going to be changing rapidly
though. The CBC, in an attempt to look neutral, put
out a natural immunity article, except the more you read, it's another pro
vaccine article, praising the Federal Government's handling of the pandemic but
I was surprised to see the CBC said the booster is outdated: "Right now,
the boosters that we have are matched to a strain long gone".
That's why me, and millions more, are
asking, what's a booster good for, and why do you want to force me to take
something that clearly isn’t going to help?
I'm at the point where two shots were enough.
Once it gets out that we didn't really have
to go through what we went through over the last two years, there's going to be
a lot of angrier people out there. I
can't wait for another empty apology from the empty PM.
