(10-11-2021, 01:35 AM)Mav link Wrote:Thryleon, that’s 1 guy’s legal opinion and when cases come to court they are matched by an opposing legal submission which will also be incredibly well written and perhaps even more so. This is the sort of dispute that’s currently being heard by the NSW Supreme Court. When decisions start coming out of superior courts, we’ll have the answer about the legal enforceability of vaccine mandates.
Let’s acknowledge that no one will be physically or even legally forced to take the vaccine. Suggestions to the contrary are pure rhetoric. Like it or not, that’s a pretty major factor in challenging vaccine mandates.
As for blaming a failure of governments to educate, the old saying is apt: “A lie gets halfway around the world before truth puts on its boots”. No government has found a way to counter the firehouse of lies and disinformation through social media. Imagine how hard it would be for a regional government to fund an education campaign that would target its electorate as comprehensively as global anti-vaxxer propaganda. No doubt Government websites throughout Australia would educate anyone who bothers to access them. The media has educated the public via extensive interviews with epidemiologists and doctors. How do you educate someone who doesn't watch those interviews but instead binge-watches antivax propaganda promoted by algorithms whose sole aim is to keep people engaged with its site's content?
Mav, did you read that article?
In its entirety where it talks about the charter of human rights? Not just the quote I outlayed? It is just one element of a very interesting legal minefield we are about to traverse. Sure, its one guys opinion, but he is not just one guy, he is a teacher of future lawyers.
On a seperate topic, the majority of people I know of, who you propose have listened to the anti vax algorithm, are not what you think they are.
You assume far too much about them. I see them all every day, in the front lines, genuinely questioning what we are being told, because they don't know what to believe, what is right, what is right for them, and because we as a liberated society have encouraged questioning what doesnt seem right (and that relies on a lot of people applying their brains with 0 bias, which is very difficult at the moment).
Going to the vic.gov website is extremely informative, but Dan Andrews press conferences are something I elected to turn off very eary on in this pandemic, because I could see the
reaction to his words on the podium, from people who heard the same thing I did, and somehow managed to draw a very different conclusion about all the measures (I concluded framed by their own life experience). It was then that I realised, that the message from the government in isolation, is simply another part of the problem.
Real Problem: It should be a spectrum. We have gone with a Utopian approach to this which is as much in the health services interest, as it is everyone else's and most people who are smart recognise this, and the reality is, that people frame all of whats going on through their life experience and how this has impacted them personally. The hardest part, is that we haven't really had a proper covid journey, and the few elements we have seen, have seen political backlash (last years aged care in vic).
I can show you a multitude of different videos discussing the nuances of all of this (for and against), and conclude, that someone is correct, but that is just people choosing to believe one thing over another, but when those beliefs are linked to a world view, a lifestyle a method of earning a living, and the Utopian response runs contrary to those things, what do you think the outcome is?
Overwhelming acceptance? No. The opposite is true. It becomes harder to accept.
This is Portugal's COVID response:
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-10-05/h.../100514138
Whilst politicians are telling people what to do, in an equation where they don't agree with the pandemic response, because politics, personal situation etc, rather than take the road of mandate (or in their opinion dictate) you open the conversation, and you can actually make more positive change, and win peoples hearts and minds (politicians take note).
You know, in the lead up to getting vaccinated, I did a lot of soul searching (as well as "research") in the end I discovered a few things about why I wouldn't and largely it was about myself. Fear was driving me more than critical thinking. Ego was another. The fear was the fear of what a "experimental" vaccine might do, and the unknown. I recognised early through my arrogance that COVID would likely not hurt me. I feared the vaccine more than covid for various reasons, one being my ego. Once I recognised this, I had a tumultuous time once again, by my ego which then engaged my critical thinking to "research" Covid, and the stats, and all the data, the vaccines, etc. Whilst I battled with this, I went to sleep one night, and realised that I fear was once again in the driving seat (its hard to recognise and this is a super long post, apologies and bear with me) and then I recognised a simple truth. You cant find the answers online, because its an echo chamber. It is literally going to give you what you look for and thats what the majority of people are finding. Ways to discredit a pandemic that they deny exists so they wont have to take a vaccine they are fearful of.
Personally, I think that education is best. If you don't, you can disagree if you like, but the one truth I see coming, is that mandating vaccination is problematic to do with the charter of human rights. We are going to see a lot of people who may lose their job drag a few things through courts, some people who are trying to simply enforce the mandating of the vaccine are going to cop it in the neck as a consequence, and if we do need this to occur again in future, the government has allowed enough mis-trust of them to fester to the point, where things are problematic, and as EB1 says, its also their workforce in the health system we are talking about here.
