nogerO wrote:What happened to my body, my choice? HIPPA laws?
He has the right not to answer, he has the right to not get the Covid vaccine, if Washington state requires all employees to get the vaccine then the state has the right to fire him. Just as other entities have the right to mandate dress codes, hair codes, drug and alcohol codes, etc…… and they have the right to protect other employees as they deem necessary……. Enter can of worms…..
Well, all the things that you mentioned would directly impact an employee's performance. I don't see his performance dwindling because of getting an experimental therapeutic; more likely the opposite. Additionally none of the things you mentioned would require said individual to put something inside their body.
Both key distinctions.
Of course a vaccine does not effect the coaches ability to coach or be a bad coach. What would require said individual to get vaccinated is a work place requirement. The employee does have a choice wether to get the vaccine or not, they do not have a choice to violate company policy……. In short they have to right to get another job.
Also, WSU, like Oregon schools, require fans 12 and older to show proof of vaccines, or a negative Covid test within x amount of hours. My strong guess since the university and the state of Washington require vaccines, he is vaccinated and exercising his hipa rights.
Quietduck wrote:Alan a few years ago I would of agreed with you but if you watch the courts most of what you said they could fire you for has been stripped away. Dress codes... nope, Political statement pin/clothes... nope, drug or alcohol ( on company time yes on personal time fading fast) Tattoos ... nope, It's getting harder and harder to terminate anyone for any reason even in an "at will" state like Oregon. Even if you make it through the government rule maze you often face a lawsuit anyway. As for the shot, I think the courts will shoot it down quickly regardless of which side anyone is on.
I mostly agree, especially big corporate and government employees will be more inclined to sue. Which is their right and the employee has the right to suspend them with or without pay pending outcome. Other things such as alcohol or drugs can cause firing if it impedes your job performance, including hung over or alcohol smell the next morning. Lots of range for an employer to work with.
nogerO wrote:What happened to my body, my choice? HIPPA laws?
He has the right not to answer, he has the right to not get the Covid vaccine, if Washington state requires all employees to get the vaccine then the state has the right to fire him. Just as other entities have the right to mandate dress codes, hair codes, drug and alcohol codes, etc…… and they have the right to protect other employees as they deem necessary……. Enter can of worms…..
Well, all the things that you mentioned would directly impact an employee's performance. I don't see his performance dwindling because of getting an experimental therapeutic; more likely the opposite. Additionally none of the things you mentioned would require said individual to put something inside their body.
Both key distinctions.
Of course a vaccine does not effect the coaches ability to coach or be a bad coach. What would require said individual to get vaccinated is a work place requirement. The employee does have a choice wether to get the vaccine or not, they do not have a choice to violate company policy……. In short they have to right to get another job.
Also, WSU, like Oregon schools, require fans 12 and older to show proof of vaccines, or a negative Covid test within x amount of hours. My strong guess since the university and the state of Washington require vaccines, he is vaccinated and exercising his hipa rights.
You are looking at it from a narrow legal standpoint and I'm looking at it from a moral standpoint. That's fine.
As an aside, I'm just not seeing much of a difference between the racial segregation of the mid 1900s vs the segregation that we are seeing across the globe right between between medical status. In fact, these businesses and gov't entities that are segregating people based on vax status don't realize that black folk are the least vaccinated race in America. So based on the logic of the people who made a large uproar re: Georgia voting laws, these businesses/gov'ts are racist. Not saying I adhere to that narrative in the least. I am simply applying the same logic.
But really, what is the difference? It is the same sort of narrative that was used in the 1950s. Both public and private entities created an "enemy" (black people / unvax) and now are doing whatever they can to exclude them from society on the basis of hand-selected "science" from their governmental entities.
nogerO wrote:What happened to my body, my choice? HIPPA laws?
He has the right not to answer, he has the right to not get the Covid vaccine, if Washington state requires all employees to get the vaccine then the state has the right to fire him. Just as other entities have the right to mandate dress codes, hair codes, drug and alcohol codes, etc…… and they have the right to protect other employees as they deem necessary……. Enter can of worms…..
Well, all the things that you mentioned would directly impact an employee's performance. I don't see his performance dwindling because of getting an experimental therapeutic; more likely the opposite. Additionally none of the things you mentioned would require said individual to put something inside their body.
Both key distinctions.
Of course a vaccine does not effect the coaches ability to coach or be a bad coach. What would require said individual to get vaccinated is a work place requirement. The employee does have a choice wether to get the vaccine or not, they do not have a choice to violate company policy……. In short they have to right to get another job.
Also, WSU, like Oregon schools, require fans 12 and older to show proof of vaccines, or a negative Covid test within x amount of hours. My strong guess since the university and the state of Washington require vaccines, he is vaccinated and exercising his hipa rights.
You are looking at it from a narrow legal standpoint and I'm looking at it from a moral standpoint. That's fine.
As an aside, I'm just not seeing much of a difference between the racial segregation of the mid 1900s vs the segregation that we are seeing across the globe right between between medical status. In fact, these businesses and gov't entities that are segregating people based on vax status don't realize that black folk are the least vaccinated race in America. So based on the logic of the people who made a large uproar re: Georgia voting laws, these businesses/gov'ts are racist. Not saying I adhere to that narrative in the least. I am simply applying the same logic.
But really, what is the difference? It is the same sort of narrative that was used in the 1950s. Both public and private entities created an "enemy" (black people / unvax) and now are doing whatever they can to exclude them from society on the basis of hand-selected "science" from their governmental entities.
This is extremely immoral.
I am speaking strictly legal, not getting into a moral issue. Legal for the most part is clear cut, moral is opinion. I was required to get vaccinated by mandatory laws to enter public, government funded) schools, measles, mumps, etc. the courts have a long list of laws backing mandatory vaccines, small pox, measles, polio.
Again I highly suspect Rolovich is vaccinated it simply no one’s business except his employer and his teams. He will most likely get fired in the next year or two but it will have little or nothing to do with Covid……. Unless he is not vaccinated.
Lol, I remember the epidemic of racial segregation. When you could catch minority status from being in close proximity with a minority.
Absolutely absurd to try to compare vaccine mandates to segregation. That's some pants on your head stuff right there. And the moral righteousness to boot.... Just a total package.
OregonFan4life -
My source just said Chip is officially back!
It will be announced at Autzen press conference tomorrow afternoon!
karlhungis wrote:Lol, I remember the epidemic of racial segregation. When you could catch minority status from being in close proximity with a minority.
Poor logic. The "minority status" should not be the equivalent to getting the virus. It should be the equivalent to getting the vaccine.
However, ill entertain the thought. I don't want to go down the science route, but you brought it up.
Israel - the model example since they are the highest vaccinated country in the world - is showing data the last 2 months where there are more cases amongst the vaccinated rather than the other way around. Additionally, they are experiencing higher cases/deaths/hospitalization in the summer compared to the same time last year when approximately 0% of the population was vaccinated. Simple science and logic to refute a extremely deceptive narrative. Yes, racial segregation was based on an extremely deceptive narrative.
Absolutely absurd to try to compare vaccine mandates to segregation.
No, it's worse because racial segregation was only in America; not a global issue.
That's some pants on your head stuff right there. And the moral righteousness to boot.... Just a total package.
nogerO wrote:What happened to my body, my choice? HIPPA laws?
He has the right not to answer, he has the right to not get the Covid vaccine, if Washington state requires all employees to get the vaccine then the state has the right to fire him. Just as other entities have the right to mandate dress codes, hair codes, drug and alcohol codes, etc…… and they have the right to protect other employees as they deem necessary……. Enter can of worms…..
Well, all the things that you mentioned would directly impact an employee's performance. I don't see his performance dwindling because of getting an experimental therapeutic; more likely the opposite. Additionally none of the things you mentioned would require said individual to put something inside their body.
Both key distinctions.
Of course a vaccine does not effect the coaches ability to coach or be a bad coach. What would require said individual to get vaccinated is a work place requirement. The employee does have a choice wether to get the vaccine or not, they do not have a choice to violate company policy……. In short they have to right to get another job.
Also, WSU, like Oregon schools, require fans 12 and older to show proof of vaccines, or a negative Covid test within x amount of hours. My strong guess since the university and the state of Washington require vaccines, he is vaccinated and exercising his hipa rights.
You are looking at it from a narrow legal standpoint and I'm looking at it from a moral standpoint. That's fine.
As an aside, I'm just not seeing much of a difference between the racial segregation of the mid 1900s vs the segregation that we are seeing across the globe right between between medical status. In fact, these businesses and gov't entities that are segregating people based on vax status don't realize that black folk are the least vaccinated race in America. So based on the logic of the people who made a large uproar re: Georgia voting laws, these businesses/gov'ts are racist. Not saying I adhere to that narrative in the least. I am simply applying the same logic.
But really, what is the difference? It is the same sort of narrative that was used in the 1950s. Both public and private entities created an "enemy" (black people / unvax) and now are doing whatever they can to exclude them from society on the basis of hand-selected "science" from their governmental entities.
This is extremely immoral.
I am speaking strictly legal, not getting into a moral issue. Legal for the most part is clear cut, moral is opinion. I was required to get vaccinated by mandatory laws to enter public, government funded) schools, measles, mumps, etc. the courts have a long list of laws backing mandatory vaccines, small pox, measles, polio.
Again I highly suspect Rolovich is vaccinated it simply no one’s business except his employer and his teams. He will most likely get fired in the next year or two but it will have little or nothing to do with Covid……. Unless he is not vaccinated.
sure, I agree. however, laws should be changed if they allow for **injustice against certain groups and/or create a disorderly society. While I am generally for allowing the market/society to dictate itself, there are certain instances when society degrades to the point that you need to create laws that restrict society from causing harm to others. Racial segregation / vax status are both good examples of this. Ideally, a good/moral society wouldn't need many - if any - of these types of laws. But laws are for the unrighteous, and we have a lot of that nowadays.
**when I say injustice, I don't mean our society version of this word. I mean injustice that is prevalent, pervasive and demonstrable through studies that take into consideration all direct/indirect factors before labeling something just/injust.
Please whichever side you are on stop using the end's justify the means argument. By doing so you no matter what your opinion are you siding with mass murderers, assassins, genocide, and the worst of human history. The end never justifies the means because if the end goal is to do good most means of power are eliminated from the start as they remove freedom and liberty at the beginning. If you want examples I will provide examples besides WWII Germany.
karlhungis wrote:Lol, I remember the epidemic of racial segregation. When you could catch minority status from being in close proximity with a minority.
Poor logic. The "minority status" should not be the equivalent to getting the virus. It should be the equivalent to getting the vaccine.
However, ill entertain the thought. I don't want to go down the science route, but you brought it up.
Israel - the model example since they are the highest vaccinated country in the world - is showing data the last 2 months where there are more cases amongst the vaccinated rather than the other way around. Additionally, they are experiencing higher cases/deaths/hospitalization in the summer compared to the same time last year when approximately 0% of the population was vaccinated. Simple science and logic to refute a extremely deceptive narrative. Yes, racial segregation was based on an extremely deceptive narrative.
Absolutely absurd to try to compare vaccine mandates to segregation.
No, it's worse because racial segregation was only in America; not a global issue.
That's some pants on your head stuff right there. And the moral righteousness to boot.... Just a total package.
Poor logic = comparing something that is inherent to something that is a choice. There’s good arguments to be made against vaccine mandates but comparing them to racial segregation ain’t it.
I think he's speaking more of the principle. Obviously one is a choice and one isn't. And I don't think he's comparing how grievous one is to the other.
Just the general principle of treating people differently because of decision or how the identify themselves. Which is ironic, because it goes against the very thing that our world is pushing. Allowing people to identify and express themselves freely without consequence apparently only holds true if it goes with the flow.
karlhungis wrote:Lol, I remember the epidemic of racial segregation. When you could catch minority status from being in close proximity with a minority.
Poor logic. The "minority status" should not be the equivalent to getting the virus. It should be the equivalent to getting the vaccine.
However, ill entertain the thought. I don't want to go down the science route, but you brought it up.
Israel - the model example since they are the highest vaccinated country in the world - is showing data the last 2 months where there are more cases amongst the vaccinated rather than the other way around. Additionally, they are experiencing higher cases/deaths/hospitalization in the summer compared to the same time last year when approximately 0% of the population was vaccinated. Simple science and logic to refute a extremely deceptive narrative. Yes, racial segregation was based on an extremely deceptive narrative.
Absolutely absurd to try to compare vaccine mandates to segregation.
No, it's worse because racial segregation was only in America; not a global issue.
That's some pants on your head stuff right there. And the moral righteousness to boot.... Just a total package.
Poor logic = comparing something that is inherent to something that is a choice. There’s good arguments to be made against vaccine mandates but comparing them to racial segregation ain’t it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Racial segregation is the most recent thing in American history that comes close to what we are seeing with the removal of people groups from society.
Just curious, but have you considered the challenges that the unvax are facing in the coming weeks? Fired from jobs, lost pensions, lost retirements, moving locations, filing for exemptions, filing lawsuits etc... This is not progress. It is exactly the same thing that was done in Nazi Germany to desensitize citizens from targeting the jews. The president is saying this is a "pandemic of the vaccinated" and that "our patience is growing thin against the unvaccinated" because they are the ones causing the Delta variant. Not only is this not true, but it is building an violent animosity in society against the unvaccinated that is irreversible.
You think I'm overstating things, fine. But I recommend asking yourself the question of whether you are underplaying the significance of the vaccine mandates. Thoughts?
Historical point. The National Socialist Party didn't just attack and kill the Jews. Yes, they were the biggest and most easy prey for them but they also treated many other groups that had nothing to do with race. Several different religious groups (Himmler dreamed and wrote of destroying the Catholic Church and other denominations and replace them with the SS religion he created), intellectuals, professors, Feminists, homosexuals, and just about anyone who didn't agree with them. So please remember the Nazis were quite even-handed in their murder and destruction and race was only one card in their hand.
karlhungis wrote:Lol, I remember the epidemic of racial segregation. When you could catch minority status from being in close proximity with a minority.
Poor logic. The "minority status" should not be the equivalent to getting the virus. It should be the equivalent to getting the vaccine.
However, ill entertain the thought. I don't want to go down the science route, but you brought it up.
Israel - the model example since they are the highest vaccinated country in the world - is showing data the last 2 months where there are more cases amongst the vaccinated rather than the other way around. Additionally, they are experiencing higher cases/deaths/hospitalization in the summer compared to the same time last year when approximately 0% of the population was vaccinated. Simple science and logic to refute a extremely deceptive narrative. Yes, racial segregation was based on an extremely deceptive narrative.
Absolutely absurd to try to compare vaccine mandates to segregation.
No, it's worse because racial segregation was only in America; not a global issue.
That's some pants on your head stuff right there. And the moral righteousness to boot.... Just a total package.
Poor logic = comparing something that is inherent to something that is a choice. There’s good arguments to be made against vaccine mandates but comparing them to racial segregation ain’t it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Racial segregation is the most recent thing in American history that comes close to what we are seeing with the removal of people groups from society.
Just curious, but have you considered the challenges that the unvax are facing in the coming weeks? Fired from jobs, lost pensions, lost retirements, moving locations, filing for exemptions, filing lawsuits etc... This is not progress. It is exactly the same thing that was done in Nazi Germany to desensitize citizens from targeting the jews. The president is saying this is a "pandemic of the vaccinated" and that "our patience is growing thin against the unvaccinated" because they are the ones causing the Delta variant. Not only is this not true, but it is building an violent animosity in society against the unvaccinated that is irreversible.
You think I'm overstating things, fine. But I recommend asking yourself the question of whether you are underplaying the significance of the vaccine mandates. Thoughts?
I have, and I understand that it would be due to their unwillingness to take a relatively safe vaccine, not due to an inherent trait like race.
Like I already said, there are plenty of great arguments against vaccine mandates, and I understand the parallels you’re trying to draw, but comparing it to racial segregation just weakens your overall point.
